The Extraordinary Power of Leader Humility

Season_Five_Image_Stack_MG.jpg

Imagine a world in which all leaders feel and display a deep regard for others’ dignity. This is the world that Marilyn Gist, author of The Extraordinary Power of Leader Humility, is working hard to bring about. Marilyn is a Professor Emerita, Executive Programs and Center of Leadership Formation at Seattle University and also a member of the MG100 coaches...a group of the top 100 leaders in the world, convened by legendary executive coach Marshall Goldsmith. Check out my interviews with other MG100 rockstars like Ayse Birsel, author of Design the Life you love, Dorie Clark, author of *several* books, including the upcoming “Long Game” and most recently, Alisa Cohn, the top startup coach in the world, and the author of the upcoming “From Startup to Grownup”

Marilyn is working to redesign the conversation around leadership. Many folks, when they close their eyes and think “leader” , picture a light-skinned man in a dark suit, exuding alpha energy. Just do a google image search to check in with this out-moded vision of leadership.

Leaders lead. They take charge and show the way.

But leaders also need to listen, learn and understand the people they’re meant to be leading.

Marilyn has been teaching and coaching about leadership for decades and she wrote this book so that the world would stop overlooking what she calls “the one variable at the heart of leadership”

Marilyn and I dig into what Leader Humility is, what it means to have it, practice it, and live it, and practical ways to incorporate it into your work and life.

What’s at stake? In human terms, Marilyn points out the Gallup poll that suggests that only 36% of Employees Are Engaged in the Workplace. While that’s actually the highest it’s been in 20 years, since they started measuring it, it’s still really low. Gallup claims that about 14% percent of folks are actively disengaged (rather than just the 51% that is just regular-old disengaged).

On your next zoom call, look around...it might be possible that only a third of the people on the grid really care. Again, in human terms, that 60-ish percent of folks is a drag on the small percentage of folks who really care.

In financial terms, some estimate $500 billion in total losses in the US. In any one business, estimate 34% of the total salary roll. Yikes.

If you ask the average worker in the US if their leader cares about their culture

31% of leaders don’t think they have the culture they need to succeed. Their workers don’t even think they care! 9%of workers say the leadership in their organizations are very committed to culture initiatives, and 58% of respondents say that their leadership either takes no action regarding culture or are merely reactive instead of being proactive.

Marilyn suggests that workers want answers to three key questions from a leader:

  1. Who are you? (Not your name - who are you really as a person? What do you stand for?)

  2. Where are we going? (What is the bigger vision?)

  3. And do you see me? (Am I just a cog in the wheel or do you see me at all?)

Also listen for a few of Marilyn’s Six Keys to Leadership Humility:

  1. A balanced ego, 

  2. Integrity

  3. A compelling vision

  4. Ethical strategies

  5. Generous inclusion

  6. A developmental focus.

Listen on to the halfway point of our conversation to hear Marilyn tell a powerful story of generous inclusion and the generous question that Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft used to turn the lone dissenter on a team into a supporter of an initiative. While it would be easy and, as Marilyn points out, defensible, to go with the majority sentiment, using the skills of leadership humility can be more powerful and durable than conventional leadership.

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Marilyn's Website (you can find links to her book there!)
Marilyn on Twitter

Reinvention is Building a Conversation with Dorie Clark
Designing the Life You Love with Ayse Birsel
The Art of Coaching with Alisa Cohn

Minute 5

So I'm defining humility, leader humility very specifically, it's not meekness, it's not weakness. So it can seem counterintuitive because a lot of times people associate humility with meekness. I'm talking about a different aspect of it, which is feeling and displaying deep regard for others' dignity, really showing up, showing respect for other people's dignity. And that's what sets people on fire because most leaders don't do that, unfortunately.

Minute 8

People have hearts. They're whole human beings, they come to the work and every single one is different. And this idea of dignity is really that individual sense of self-worth, what is it that goes into their sense that I'm valuable as a human being? And every human being has and needs a sense of self worth. So if we can honor that, if we can support that in our leadership, then we've got people's attention. If we step all over it, they start to withdraw or resist.

Minute 16

Hypothetically as a woman, I may be more sensitive to looking at an organization that has very few women above me in leadership. Men might not be as sensitive about that. But that can touch on my sense of self-worth in a way that it might not touch on yours or a man's. That doesn't mean I'm political about it or that you can dismiss that as identity politics, it's identity, it's a sense of self-worth. So I think understanding that is the first thing and having the humility to feel and display regard for others' dignity is how we get around it.

Minute 17

When we look at a leader, if I'm getting a new boss or we have a new national leader or a new CEO comes into the organization, immediately we start to think about three things, who are you? Not your name, but who are you really as a person? Where are we going? And do you see me? Am I just a cog in the wheel or do you see me at all?

And the leader's behaviors and the spoken words in a fairly short period of time are going to signal people about who they are, the direction they're setting and how you're being treated. And so there is a set of behaviors that tend to offer positive signals and support others' dignity, and I call them the six keys to leader humility, and I do discuss them in the book.

Minute 27

You ever hear a backlash about nobody asked me about it or why didn't you come and talk to us in advance? We would have told you about this potential impact that's now very serious. So I think that's an example of the kind of thing that happens quite often where leaders in thinking about other people's dignity would realize that I have relationships with all of these different stakeholder groups, and while they might not always be in sync or agree, they all have a sense of dignity that I need to honor, and at the very least, I need to pick up the phone figuratively and have a conversation about it.

Minute 40

And I like your phrase, owning our own dignity because I think we all do it whether we're intentional about it or not and the extent to which we compromise that. I mean, if we compromise our sense of dignity in key ways, it's not good and we end up not feeling good. And I talk about this with leader humility, but it applies to all relationships. Think about being in a partnership or marriage or whatever. If you're with someone and you're compromising your own sense of dignity all the time, that's not going to last well or long, friendships, family relationships.

More About Marilyn

As author of The Extraordinary Power of Leader Humility, Marilyn Gist guides leaders in creating thriving organizations and great results. Imagine a world in which all leaders feel and display a deep regard for others’ dignity. This is what humility means and it helps leaders resolve conflict, increase engagement, and optimize performance. Marilyn has extensively studied why leader humility is the essential foundation of all healthy organizations and validated her work with interviews of prominent CEOs of companies ranging from the Mayo Clinic and Ford to Starbucks and Costco. She adds value through ground-breaking insight: the six keys required for leaders to work together well with all stakeholders. According to Marshall Goldsmith, “Marilyn Gist’s The Extraordinary Power of Leader Humility, is a must-read for every leader.” This bestselling book has been featured in Forbes and Quartz, and Marilyn’s ideas on leader humility have appeared in The Hill, CEOWorld, Sirius SM Wharton Radio, and numerous podcasts.  Ken Blanchard who authored The One-Minute Manager says, “This inspiring book belongs on the desk of every CEO and politician in America.” 

Based on this work, Marilyn consults widely and is a keynote speaker on topics emphasizing NextGen Leadership, Rising out of Crisis, and Get Off the Sidelines and Into the Game (the latter being geared toward female leaders).  A recognized expert, Marilyn brings direct leadership experience along with academic credentials.  As former Associate Dean, Professor of Management, and Executive Director of the Center for Leadership Formation, she led the design and development of Seattle University’s Leadership EMBA degree program from its inception in 2006 to rank as high as #11 in the nation by US News and World Report.  She began her academic career at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She later joined the University of Washington where she held the Boeing Endowed Professorship of Business Management and served as Faculty Director of Executive MBA programs for many years. Her research has been highly cited by others, demonstrating exceptional thought leadership. 

Marilyn earned her BA from Howard University and her MBA and PhD from the Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland, College Park. She is a member of the Academy of Management, American Psychological Association, Marshall Goldsmith 100, and the International Women’s Forum.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

Marilyn Gist, I am going to welcome you to the Conversation Factory. I am super excited that you made the time to talk about this really important virtue, humility.

Marilyn Gist:

Yes, thank you for inviting me. It's a delight to be here, Daniel.

Daniel Stillman:

You're very kind. So okay, let's actually start close in, let's start where we just were because if we're going to change the conversation about leadership, the intention of your book, The Extraordinary Power of Leader Humility, which I thought was a lovely book, the idea is to put humility at the center and it's not right now. How do we-

Marilyn Gist:

Correct.

Daniel Stillman:

How are you... it seems like it's your mission to move humility into the center of the conversation.

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Can you just take us on the journey of how you discovered and came to really value humility?

Marilyn Gist:

So some of it was my own personal trial and error. As a leader when I was younger, I don't think I got it, in fact, I know I didn't. And I watched my intent to motivate people through more of a command control directive approach that stepped on some dignity seemed to go in the wrong direction. So I'm a pretty reflective person. I didn't have an answer, but I watched that and I kind of winced at some of the reactions that I saw.

Marilyn Gist:

And then over the years of working with executives particularly because I've been involved in executive MBA programs for over 25 years in different universities, and I've met some wonderful people and I've heard lots of unsolicited comments about the organizations they work for, the people they work for, some of those were consistently good. I'd hear some of the same things over and over again, for example, about Jim Sinegal at Costco, CEO, co-founder of the company.

Marilyn Gist:

And I won't mention names that were less receiving praise, but I'd hear the same things. And after a while, I really became curious as to why is it that people like Sinegal are always not only praised by people who work for them, but the people are so passionate about the organization they're willing to do just about anything to make it succeed, they put in enormous amounts of effort and time. And the more I looked into this and also looked in some academic research, I realized there's a component of humility that we are not talking about. And Daniel, this goes back a good 20 years to some of Jim Collins work with the book Good to Great.

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Marilyn Gist:

I mean, he, in my view is the, as far as I know, the first person who identified that what separates companies that become great from those that remain merely good is leadership and that the leaders in particular have two qualities. One is a strong drive for success, and that's pretty standard that we select leaders for that. We want driven people, we want goal-oriented people.

Marilyn Gist:

So they certainly had that. But the thing they had that the merely good companies didn't have was a deep, personal humility, which is also what Sinegal has. And so I just really became fascinated and started looking at it more and then as you'll know from the book, began interviewing people who were known for their humility as well as people who worked with them. And I just began to see that's what sets people on fire. So, yeah it's magic.

Daniel Stillman:

So it's such an interesting phrase because the idea that humility sets people on fire, it's not a given.

Marilyn Gist:

No.

Daniel Stillman:

I don't think many people would expect that that's the case. But in this sense, and this is my understanding, is it's respect for others worth and dignity that is a game changer in getting the best out of other people.

Marilyn Gist:

So I'm defining humility, leader humility very specifically, it's not meekness, it's not weakness. So it can seem counterintuitive because a lot of times people associate humility with meekness. I'm talking about a different aspect of it, which is feeling and displaying deep regard for others' dignity, really showing up, showing respect for other people's dignity. And that's what sets people on fire because most leaders don't do that, unfortunately.

Marilyn Gist:

But I'll go back to this idea that we think of leaders as people who are going to drive results and get a lot done. And that's certainly what we're hoping they'll do, that maybe they'll have a vision, they'll set strategy, they'll drive results. All of those things are important but what we miss is that leadership is a relationship. Leaders are not individual contributors just working like crazy, they're doing a lot more work through an organization or with other people.

Marilyn Gist:

And the quality of that relationship with each of their different constituents determines how much people cooperate, how much they give of themselves, whether they phone it in, go through the motions, do the minimum they have to do, or whether they give it everything they possibly can, whether they have your back, whether they're full partner with you in trying to achieve your goals. And the thing that really makes a difference is showing respect for their dignity. When you do that, you've got their attention.

Daniel Stillman:

So you've been involved in a lot of leadership development work, and it sounds like you believe that humility is not at the center right now, it's about results and there's the technical aspects of driving results. How do we start to put humility at the center of the conversation about leadership as we develop leaders in our organizations?

Marilyn Gist:

I think we have to first raise awareness because I don't think people see what they're missing. They don't understand the huge opportunity cost that we are paying because we are not selecting and developing leaders who do this. And that's part of what I'm attempting to do with the book and by interviewing the dozen leaders I selected who were all pretty much from big brand companies so that you can show this isn't a backwater concept that only works for some three person organization over here in a corner that no one knows about, this is working for mega organizations that are producing just great results.

Marilyn Gist:

So I think getting the awareness up that yes, there is a differentiator, yes, it does drive results is the first step. I would hesitate to say it's not being used. I think that there are a number of leaders who are outstanding in their own sense of personal humility and the way they have fired up their own organization and I could run down a list even beyond those that I interviewed. But I would say it's not mainstream. I think in that, it's, yes, it's not the heart of the conversation, but I go back to we're not yet realizing how important the relationship piece is with leaders.

Marilyn Gist:

And I think we've come at relationship more from a compliance standpoint. We're teaching leaders what not to do, how it is that you avoid sexual harassment, how you give performance feedback that is specific to the task and the job at hand and doesn't sort of fall over into some other things. So I think those more compliance oriented approaches have some merit. I'm not saying we can't focus on compliance or that we can just ignore it, but I don't think it gets to the heart of humans. And I wrote the word heart judiciously.

Marilyn Gist:

People have hearts. They're whole human beings, they come to the work and every single one is different. And this idea of dignity is really that individual sense of self worth, what is it that goes into their sense that I'm valuable as a human being? And every human being has and needs a sense of self worth. So if we can honor that, if we can support that in our leadership, then we've got people's attention. If we step all over it, they start to withdraw or resist.

Daniel Stillman:

It really is... so I want to just meditate on this for a second with you, Marilyn, because I think it's so interesting. And my group facilitation work, when I coach groups to transform, I have a personal value that everyone's voice is worthy of being heard and can and should matter. And so I, because of that belief, I create a space for everyone to be heard as much as I can, that's part of my values.

Daniel Stillman:

If they're in the room, they are a person, they have a heart, they have opinions and they have a voice and they can use it. And I think creating that space for other people to express themselves, I agree 100% can be transformative. I guess the thing that I'm struggling with is the people, and I don't know if I'm expressing this correctly and I'll try to work my way and hopefully you'll guide me to the... I don't say that humility is... it's not at the center of people's consideration.

Daniel Stillman:

We're having meetings and we have to go fast, we have to make decisions. And if somebody gets knocked around, so be it, it's about results. Sometimes it seems like humility and making time for humanness takes time and we don't have time to do that. And so I'm wondering how we might encourage people to make the time and space to invest in that time to celebrate and appreciate the dignity and self-worth of other people, because it does take a time investment. You can't just... it's not a box tick, it's not an email that I can send.

Marilyn Gist:

Right, right. So imagine you have a runner and you have two different tracks and they are both running at the same speed. One track is longer than another and so you're on that track and you think that it is going to take you longer to get there. And that is the way we tend to view investing in the human side of things, is like it's long. What we're missing though is the evidence, it says only 34, 35% of employees globally and in the United States, it's about the same, there's some variability across countries, but globally, only 34% of employees are fully engaged in their work, just 34%.

Marilyn Gist:

That 66% who are not, and of that, a chunk of them are actively disengaged, meaning they hate what they're doing, they hate where they're working or who they're working for, they're actively looking for another position. And even more of them are disengaged, but not necessarily actively looking. Maybe they need the job, maybe it's the only job around, they show up, they do what they have to do and that's it. There's a huge opportunity cost.

Marilyn Gist:

Think of how much we're losing on a result standpoint by having what I think of as shell partners, a sea shell, you pick it up, it's empty. There used to be something living and breathing in it, but it's just a shell. Well, a lot of the people who are sitting around the table or sitting in the cubicle or sitting down the hallway are shell employees or shell partners. And it's not only in an employment sets, leaders have many different stakeholder groups. They have suppliers, they have customers, they have senior leadership boards, they have regulators and on and on and on.

Marilyn Gist:

And so they have relationships with each of these different groups, and the question in my mind is how many of those are shells, how many of them are shell workers? They're occupying a certain role, but they're not fully engaged with you. So this idea that it takes time to invest in the humanness and we don't have time is the assumption that that's the longer path, and it really isn't. It doesn't take a ton of time to really respect other's dignity. And in my work, I talk about some very specific ways that we can do that. And not all of them are very time intensive at all, some are.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, let's decompose it a little bit because I think you've done a lot of good thinking on humility for you is not one big thing, it is a set of behaviors. It's a set of questions, it's a set of mindsets.

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

So if somebody is like, how do I get really good at doing this in my work? What are some of the key ways in which we can start embodying proactively the humility and dignity of the people around us? I know it's like on one level, I'm like, "We shouldn't have to ask this question," but we do. I have a feeling people need these concrete ways of doing it as we develop our young leaders.

Marilyn Gist:

Right. So let me start at a macro level and say this idea of dignity of another person's sense of self-worth runs pretty deep. So we have not only this basic sort of sanctity of life thing that we have going in most cultures, but there is more of a personal sense of dignity when I think of who I am and what I feel is worthy about me as a human being. It could include a set of talents I have, it could include the fact that I'm a woman, it could include where I grew up, it can include my education, my job skill set, my family, my family structure, kids, it can include all sorts of things about me as a unique person.

Marilyn Gist:

And some of the things that go... I mean, we're all different with 7 billion people on the planet, no two are alike as far as we know. And every single one of us will have this package of things about ourselves that contribute to how we feel worthy as a human being. So I think the first step is for leaders to realize that in relating to people, we have to put that idea front and center, that I'm talking to you and you have a name, and I see you as a person on the outside, but there's a really deep, rich inside to you and I can't just steamroll over that in my comments to you in the way I act to you.

Marilyn Gist:

I have to be somewhat sensitive to it. So as an example, we have this sort of cultural discussion about identity politics, to me, which is such a... it misses the point. It misses the point in attempting to even politicize the idea that people have differing identities. Of course, we do. And of course, the responsibility needs to be on those who have the power and the authority to be open to the fact that there are these different identities.

Marilyn Gist:

Hypothetically as a woman, I may be more sensitive to looking at an organization that has very few women above me in leadership. Men might not be as sensitive about that. But that can touch on my sense of self-worth in a way that it might not touch on yours or a man's. That doesn't mean I'm political about it or that you can dismiss that as identity politics, it's identity, it's a sense of self-worth. So I think understanding that is the first thing and having the humility to feel and display regard for others' dignity is how we get around it.

Marilyn Gist:

There's three questions people have, and I talk about these in the book. When we look at a leader, if I'm getting a new boss or we have a new national leader or a new CEO comes into the organization, immediately we start to think about three things, who are you? Not your name, but who are you really as a person? Where are we going? And do you see me? Am I just a cog in the wheel or do you see me at all?

Marilyn Gist:

And the leader's behaviors and the spoken words in a fairly short period of time are going to signal people about who they are, the direction they're setting and how you're being treated. And so there is a set of behaviors that tend to offer positive signals and support others' dignity, and I call them the six keys to leader humility, and I do discuss them in the book. I'd be happy to chat more about it if you'd like.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, you hit on one, which is relating to people as full people.

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

And you said there were three key ones. And I was like, "Oh, what are the other two?" So we can-

Marilyn Gist:

There're three key questions, so the who are you, where are we going and do you see me? And then the leader's behavior answers those in kind of a mirroring way. So who I am as a person gets conveyed to you, the direction I set and how I treat you. And then within each of those, there's a couple of specifics. So in terms of who I am, what really moves the needle positively or negatively is what I call ego ballots: Am I arrogant, or am I merely confident? Or am I too meek?

Marilyn Gist:

So you want kind of a vital confidence in leaders where they know their strengths and their weaknesses. If they can't admit their weaknesses, then they put the organization at risk. And let's face it, Daniel, everybody else sees our weaknesses. Why can't we admit that we have them? It's no secret. Does its wrong for people to realize, what I'm good at, what I might not be so good at. So the ego balance is really important to really supporting other people's dignity because if I'm super arrogant, then people will know that they can't really let me know when I've made a mistake or they'll find that I'm taking credit for other people's work, that I might be blaming people, I'm very self-centered, I'm boasting.

Marilyn Gist:

So those types of behaviors work against this idea of supporting others' dignity, where someone who's confident, who knows that they're able to lead people but also knows their strengths and weaknesses is much more supportive of others' dignity. Another piece of the who I am that's really important is what I call robust integrity. Does a leader walk the talk, can they be counted on to follow through with what they commit to? Are they fundamentally honest in the way they communicate and fairly transparent?

Marilyn Gist:

So the integrity piece matters a lot to others' dignity. If a leader is dishonest or can't be counted on, it has a negative effect on other people's dignity as well. So with each of those three questions, I walk through a couple of the really powerful behaviors we mentioned including people, so I'll piggyback on that when I get to the part about how you treat people. Generous inclusion is a really important part of it. But you were saying if someone's in the room, they should be able to speak, voice their view.

Marilyn Gist:

But I take it beyond that because I'm thinking of including all of your stakeholders and drawing the boundary broadly enough that all of your stakeholders are included in key decisions you're making or actions that are going to affect them. So it doesn't mean you have a huge town hall and invite thousands of your customers and your suppliers in, but it means when you're making decisions that you think are going to have an impact on this group, particularly if you think they're not going like it, it's going to be negative, figuratively pick up the phone and invite their input and listen.

Marilyn Gist:

Is there a way that you can moderate what you're doing to bring that in? If I can share a little story here, I think it illustrates generous inclusion, and I was doing a workshop recently and I actually heard this story. So it's secondhand, but it was so powerful. And it was a woman who worked at Microsoft and had been involved in a proposal for a policy that had to go before Satya Nadella, the CEO for recommendation and approval. And there was a committee that was working on it and there were 10 people, nine of whom were very strongly in favor of, let's call it option A, and one who was adamantly opposed to option A and very in favor of option B. And they had not been able to reach agreement beyond that nine in favor of one, and one opposed.

Daniel Stillman:

They were apparently agreeing to disagree, as we say.

Marilyn Gist:

They were agreeing to disagree. So when it came time to meet with Satya and to share their recommendations, they explained that this was where they were, nine wanting option A and one voting for option B. Most people would say, "Well, tell me a little more," they'll listen and they'll say, "Well, it looks like we've got a majority. Let's go with option A." That would be very common, and in some ways defensible approach because the majority rules, nine people, that's pretty compelling. He did not do that.

Marilyn Gist:

What he did was to turn to the person who favored option B and say, "What three things would need to be true in order for you to support option A? What three things would need to change and be true in order for you to support option A?" And it was powerful when I heard this because it puts the responsibility on that person to do more than complain or oppose or resist. They've got to come up with suggestions but it also really was generously including that person in the problem solving.

Marilyn Gist:

So the person said, "Well, I think if we did this, it would help." And then he would turn to the majority and say, "What do you think about that?" And they'd go, "Well, I guess we could tweak it this way and we could do some of that." And then he went back to option B person, got the next thing, went through the same process, got the third thing, went through the same process and then said, "Now that those three things are out there, if those three things are true, could you support option A?" And that person said, "Well, yeah."

Marilyn Gist:

And then he turned to the majority group and said, "Can you support it now with these changes?" And they said, "Yeah, actually we can." And you ended up with 10 out of 10. It was just a magnificent example to me of generous inclusion where he didn't do the default taking what the nine wanted, but he listened to that 10th person, and in the process came up with a stronger alternative than what they had started with.

Marilyn Gist:

Now, it's possible that they wouldn't have gotten to agreement at the end of this, which is also okay because then what happens is everybody's been heard and they've been even heard by the person at the top. And then the person who didn't get their way, say the minority opinion, at least has been part of a more rounded discussion. So I think that it was just a really great example of generously including all of your stakeholders and a way of solving an impasse.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a beautiful and profound example, Marilyn. Because when I think about designing conversations, I think that's a wonderful example of in that moment, you could say, "Well, majority rules," and that's, as you say, defensible and reasonable, nine to one. Person one, you are basically saying to them, "Shut up."

Marilyn Gist:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Right? And-

Marilyn Gist:

You've been overruled.

Daniel Stillman:

You're overruled. And they might respect the fact that majority rules that's, as you say, generally defensible position, it is hard to turn a no into a yes. If that person really needs to support that decision, does nine people saying we want it actually get them to support it?

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Does that actually get the best out of them?

Marilyn Gist:

Not necessarily, it doesn't. And particularly if they had some expertise or some real awareness that what they were resisting or suggesting was accurate and important, I mean, how many times do we watch this in organizations where we know better about something but we're not necessarily being heard. So that to me was really the brilliance in his effort to realize that, "Let's see if we could draw out of this person what the essentials are of their opposition to this other approach and find a way to blend the two so that we come up with a win-win." And just really amazing example to me, of generous inclusion.

Marilyn Gist:

You could think of it in terms of, you've got an organizational policy that you're about to implement, maybe it's a change that's going to affect your customers and perhaps your suppliers, but the people who are going to have to do the work are your employee group, maybe some other managers. And so typically, we work those issues on the inside and we come up with our new policy and then we send out the announcement.

Marilyn Gist:

You ever hear a backlash about nobody asked me about it or why didn't you come and talk to us in advance? We would have told you about this potential impact that's now very serious. So I think that's an example of the kind of thing that happens quite often where leaders in thinking about other people's dignity would realize that I have relationships with all of these different stakeholder groups, and while they might not always be in sync or agree, they all have a sense of dignity that I need to honor, and at the very least, I need to pick up the phone figuratively and have a conversation about it.

Marilyn Gist:

And it can be we have a policy issue, we've got some concerns, I'm going to have to make a decision, but I want your input. Can you tell me what your thoughts are? How is this going to affect you? And at least allow people to feel that they have been seriously included in the process. Now you do have to listen. You're not going to get away for long with faking your way through that, and then constantly ignoring the input that you get. So that is the other side of it.

Daniel Stillman:

It seems like a rigorous and thoughtful approach to what I would call stakeholder mapping is absolutely essential. And I think one of the things that people would probably... that I've seen leaders struggle with is where does it end? Because when I looked at your quote on LinkedIn about how putting humility at the center of a leadership conversation can transform the health and progress of civilization. It took me aback for a moment. And when I'm sitting here in this conversation with you, if I'm willing to acknowledge the dignity of people outside of my organization or outside of my community, outside of my nation, it really can be transformative to respect the humanness, the human dignity of all of the people who might be affected by my decisions.

Marilyn Gist:

Right. And that's a big order, but I think it's where we need-

Daniel Stillman:

It is.

Marilyn Gist:

It's where we need to go. We're such an interdependent set of nations and our interests are so intertwined we will never go back to living within national boundaries. I mean, take COVID, the pandemic situation, you can't contain that based on some geographic boundary. Take climate, you can't contain that within some geographic boundary. So we have a number of issues that are really human wide global and I think we have differing approaches to it, different politics around it. But if we could approach the discussion from the standpoint of really supporting and respecting other people's dignity, then we look for a win-win, we'd have a different level of discussion about what we need to do to work together to resolve some of the larger problems.

Daniel Stillman:

Game-changing. So I want to ask you a very-

Marilyn Gist:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I want you to share your unique expertise as an educator, and as you said, a group coach and trainer of leaders. Now showing people as you do exemplars of excellent leadership in some of the top organizations in the world is one way to inspire people to model themselves in this way. I'm wondering in some of the programs that you run, what are some other ways to concretize this approach? Because I have this idea that an experience is worth a thousand slides. We can show people all the slides in the world we want about how humility is important and it's good, and here are the six questions, but how do you get people to really experience and change their perspective on that to wake up to this truth?

Marilyn Gist:

So there's a couple of... I mean, there's multiple ways of doing it. Certainly as we were saying earlier, there's one-on-one coaching. I think humility can be taught in most cases, I'd say probably for 85% of the leaders, they either already are displaying it to a great extent and might benefit from knowing the one or two areas they could strengthen. Or if they're not good at it at all, they can make major improvement.

Marilyn Gist:

There's probably 10, 15% who are so narcissistic, they're not ever going to get it. But what I believe is that it takes self-awareness as well as a desire to do it. And I influence the desire in my coursework by helping people understand the opportunity cost, by providing the conceptual framework around what is dignity and the fact that it's universal. What's in it for each person is different, but we all have and need this sense of dignity. How do we feel when someone steps all over our dignity?

Daniel Stillman:

You have the cat, you said there was a cat. If you're playing at home and you can't see the video, but you can circle on your Zoom BINGO Card. It's a lovely, is it Persian?

Marilyn Gist:

This is my-

Daniel Stillman:

Long hair Persian?

Marilyn Gist:

He's a Siberian. His name is Sebastian. He's my Zoom twin.

Daniel Stillman:

He's got a luxurious coat folks if you can't see him, but he's got a luxurious coat, he's a beautiful cat.

Marilyn Gist:

He does lots of shedding.

Daniel Stillman:

I had Tonkinese-Burmese cats growing up and they have a similar coloration, beautiful cats. Anyway-

Marilyn Gist:

He's a beautiful cat. He's mostly asleep, but that's okay. The blanket was here for a reason, it's his spot.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, that's his desk. I can see that, he's pulling at it.

Marilyn Gist:

So I think presenting them with a conceptual understanding of dignity and often I dial into that by focusing on your own and what are the things that make you feel valuable as a human being and how do you feel when someone steps all over that? What's your reaction? And then getting people to generalize that to how other people feel, and then moving into leading as a relationship and this dance between your humility and someone else's dignity kind of being like a ballroom dance.

Marilyn Gist:

If I step all over your feet, it's not a very elegant tango, right? I have to pay attention to where you are in that process. So there's that piece to sort of dial up the motivation to care about this, coupled with understanding the opportunity cost, the low engagement, the fact that if you violate dignity, you have shell partners, but that's a longer way around than taking the time to support people's dignity and just the magic that starts to happen when you get real partners toward your goals in the organization.

Marilyn Gist:

So that's one phase of it. The other phase then is the skill, set of skills involved, the six keys. And we've designed a couple of assessment tools which are available. One is basic to just the six keys and then there is an advanced version which actually has 10 scales that gets at some of the beliefs that people have that drive the behaviors, and it also gives more assessment of this ego balance in terms of looking at arrogance and humility in addition to the confidence. And so people in our courses will take the test confidentially. And it is a self report so it doesn't have the rigor of getting other people's opinion of whether what you think is what you think.

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Marilyn Gist:

But it's actually because we normed it so carefully on a population of leaders, it's pretty sensitive and it picks up where your strengths and weaknesses are fairly reliably. And then my assumption is that most leaders have some degree of self-awareness and I encourage them then to start checking in with other people to make sure that what they think is valid or to work with an outside coach who might then work with them around, let me talk to some of your peers or some of your employees and get their input on how they see you with this so they can augment that. I do believe the assessment tools are information and what I found is people are very motivated then to up their game. And it's because it's so behavioral, you can make significant change very quickly, it's really not hard.

Daniel Stillman:

It's really interesting. I mean, putting... this shows one of the things I believe, reflection, self-awareness are key skills for leaders to develop themselves and to develop as leaders.

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

And I mean, it's funny you talked about relating to people as full people, the realization that everyone is living a whole life before and after your meeting is an important thing for them, one, to project on others. I guess the thing that I really wanted to ask you and is for the 15%, if my boss, for anybody listening has a boss in that 15% of just somebody who just does not get it, how might we use humility to work with and interact with people who do not understand humility? Because I think there's a temptation to want to use violence against those who... right? I mean, and right? This is an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Marilyn Gist:

I don't think the violence bit works very well.

Daniel Stillman:

No, I know, that's why I'm asking. What can we do instead?

Marilyn Gist:

So I would sort those 15% maybe into a couple of different buckets. There are people who are simply not going to get it, and you're not going to change them. They're almost at a clinical level, so narcissistic that they can't be coached and improve. The remainder of that group though, I assume is operating out of ignorance. And so I think you can lead upward with humility in a couple of ways.

Marilyn Gist:

You can talk about the importance of the relationship that we as an organization, including you, boss, have with this group of people. And the fact that if we support their interests and their dignity to a greater extent, they're going to be more engaged in doing what we need them to do to support our goals. So sometimes by pointing to that opportunity cost benefit, you can help that boss realize, "Okay, well, maybe I don't need to blast them in that way or don't need to exclude them when I'm making decisions." So you can kind of coach upward.

Marilyn Gist:

If it's a personal thing where I'm working for somebody who's just stepping all over my dignity and being rude, you have to evaluate your own courage level in kind of speaking up and saying, "When you talk to me that way or when you do this, this is how I feel and it isn't making me motivated to do better." And that can be a high risk strategy in some organizations or with some leaders so you have to be judicious about that. I'm fairly brave about it. I try to find ways of being pretty direct and yet in a respectful way, letting people know this isn't right, this is how I expect to be treated. And if that isn't forthcoming in a period of time, then we all have to make decisions on what we're going to do, right?

Daniel Stillman:

You're basically talking about owning our own dignity.

Marilyn Gist:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Right?

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

And it is very challenging. I know we've all done this, I've certainly done this, sacrificed my own dignity and well-being for the sake of others, for the sake of the relationship, but really holding our ground and saying, "This is not how I would like to be treated," is an edgy thing.

Marilyn Gist:

Right. It is. And I like your phrase, owning our own dignity because I think we all do it whether we're intentional about it or not and the extent to which we compromise that. I mean, if we compromise our sense of dignity in key ways, it's not good and we end up not feeling good. And I talk about this with leader humility, but it applies to all relationships. Think about being in a partnership of marriage or whatever. If you're with someone and you're compromising your own sense of dignity all the time, that's not going to last well or long, friendships, family relationships.

Daniel Stillman:

I was thinking the same as these are not long-term strategies to sacrifice that.

Marilyn Gist:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

It's not a long-term strategy to extract from people without honoring their dignity and nor is it a long-term strategy to deny our own self-worth in hopes that things will get better.

Marilyn Gist:

Right, right.

Daniel Stillman:

Marilyn, our time together is growing nigh. What have I not asked you that I should ask you? What haven't we talked about that's important to address about this critical topic?

Marilyn Gist:

So I will mention this and I know that some may not agree with me, but I think there's a moral underpinning to this idea of showing deep regard for others' dignity. I think there's a moral underpinning to our idea that life itself is valuable. So we think of the sanctity of life. And what I would suggest is that life isn't just the biological life, it's also the psychological life, the social life that we have, that in thinking of each of us as a different, unique human being, I think there is some sanctity to that larger sense of life.

Marilyn Gist:

And so there's almost a moral underpinning in my view that says, we really need to honor other people's dignity. Now, certainly there's some boundaries on that. You have crime, you have abuse. I'm not saying that all behavior is equally valuable, I'm not saying that. You can have very high standards, you can be very clear about what's acceptable and what's not and still thwart other people's dignity.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a moral imperative and it's a human value, something really, really critical.

Marilyn Gist:

Yes, it is.

Daniel Stillman:

Marilyn, I really appreciate you making the time for this conversation.

Marilyn Gist:

Thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

And to help everyone put humility at the center of their leadership conversations.

Marilyn Gist:

Thank you so much.

Daniel Stillman:

We should all go to where on the internet to learn more about you, to learn more about your book, where ought people-

Marilyn Gist:

So if you need-

Daniel Stillman:

And you also have a course. Is it a public course that's going to be launching soon too?

Marilyn Gist:

Yes, it is, it's occasionally offered. So my website is marilyngist.com, M-A-R-I-L-Y-N-G-I-S-T, one word. And on there, there's a tab for resources which will talk about the book, where you can get it, it talks about the assessment tasks where you can get those, and the course which our current course is sold out, but there's a wait list option you can sign up for and when we get the next set of dates, we'll go to you first. And then there's also a tab that has information about me, my bio, services that we offer, that sort of stuff. So marilyngist.com, it's all there.

Daniel Stillman:

And I will put a link to that in the show notes. And-

Marilyn Gist:

Thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. I'll call scene.

Growing by Giving: Live Coaching Session

Season_Five_Image_Stack_RS.jpg

This episode is a little different than most…Today I do some live-coaching for Rashmi Sharma, a Global HR executive and TedX speaker, on shifting what she wants to be known for, evolving what she wants to offer to the world and how her work can heal others, while she heals herself.

I’m so grateful that Rashmi reached out to me for some coaching after we were both speaking at a virtual conference in Southeast Asia. As Rashmi has evolved as a leader, she wanted to do some deeper thinking about how she can evolve her thought leadership, and offer something to her community from a deeper place in herself. 

I really commend Rashmi’s courage in sharing her process with so much vulnerability. As you’ll hear in the conversation ahead, Rashmi and I talk about (although very indirectly) the ideas of sublimation - healing your own wounds through helping others.

We also dive deep into how she can hold space and create more depth in her conversations, as she interviews her community to understand what wellness and wholeness really means to them. 

Make sure you check out the show notes for Rashmi’s full notes reflecting on her insights from the coaching conversation, but, two that I want to highlight here are:

Using all of yourself to Lead

Joseph Campbell famously said “it’s the privilege of a lifetime to be as you are”...

Finding and highlighting her phrase “use all of me to help people” was a golden nugget in the conversation. This is what Rashmi’s interest and work on wholeness and wellbeing is really about - allowing our whole selves to be accessed in our lives. So, it makes sense that Rashmi wants to do the same for herself.

Creating Depth in Conversations

One powerful way to create more depth is to go there yourself...Rashmi and I talk about asking and listening from a deeper place in herself.

We also highlight the idea that "Slow is smooth and smooth is fast," a motto from the Navy Seals. As she interviews her community to gain insights on her new area of focus, Rashmi realized that slowness and smoothness allows people to get comfortable and to think more deeply in her interviews. 

Slow and Smooth can mean slowing down your own voice, creating a little bit more space between your words, and it also means waiting a little bit between what they've said and your second question, your response. (Extra credit for not thinking about what you’re going to say or ask next while they’re talking!)

Slowing yourself down can help others slow down and connect. Active listening helps me really hear, and also helps my partner hear themselves. Depth in a conversation can be hard at high velocity. 

One piece of advice I shared with Rashmi as she prepared to head into her next round of community interviews was to simply take a deep breath and ask her partner to tell a story. Narratives can pull a conversation from a back-and-forth of questions and answers. Narratives can help you more deeply enter into the world of the person you’re talking to and hoping to get insights from.

I love to work with leaders trying to define their thought leadership, leaders trying to scale their impact and leaders working to transform their organizations. I only work with a handful of high-performing folks each year. If you’d like to reach out about coaching, head over to DanielStillman.com/coaching

Links, Quotes, Notes and Resources

Rashmi on LinkedIn

Rashmi’s TedX talk

Rashmi’s notes: 

“There were several key takeaways for me:

  • Clarified to me why I want to really speak about this. Why does it matter to me so much? "This is a classic and really powerful way of growing and healing, psychologically, giving to others what we wanted and needed for ourselves. It's basically healing our own inner child's children, our own inner child. Time travel, in the present. By helping other people, we are helping ourselves." that I want to "use all of me to help people."

  • So much insight on creating a safe space for the interview and generally the way we should 'research': "If I were to give you advice, the much more effective is, tell me more about that, or can you remember a time when you felt that most acutely? Can you tell me a story about the last time you blanked? Can you take me there? Paint me the picture?" "So there's a couple of points here. One is that this is a great part of the research process when things start to feel repetitive. But that also means that you need to change your approach to find deeper insights."

  • THIS - "Slow yourself down, slow them down. The US Marines say, "Slow is smooth and smooth is fast." And slowness and smoothness allows people to get comfortable, to think, which means slowing down your own voice, which I'm doing now. It means making a little bit more space between your words, it means waiting a little bit between what they've said and your second question, your response."

My interviews have been much more effective after this.”

Minute 1

The second reason why it's important from a more tangible perspective is, I feel like success should not come at a cost of wellbeing. And I think it is possible to thrive, which is to grow, to be happy, without trading off either of those things.

A lot of times people think that, "I can be successful, or I can be a CEO, but I won't have time for my family. I won't have time for taking care of my health. I won't have time to take vacations." And that's the way it is. It's normal. And if you do have that balance, there's clearly something you're not doing right. 

It's almost like that, and I want to dispel that thing and say that it is possible to have your cake and eat it too, when it comes to wellbeing and performance, because wellbeing is a driver of performance, not a trade-off. That's how you create that balance in your life. And you should aspire for that balance, than just aspire for things which tangibly people can see, how high do you go in the corporate ladder and so on and so forth.

Minute 11

I feel like I can do so much more, but I haven't got an opportunity to leverage and push those levers, because I didn't have a cause. It's like feeling you have a voice, but you don't have a song. I want a song which is worthy so that I can use the full variation of my voice to do that.

Minute 29

Rashmi:
So even though I did prepare an interview guide, I feel I need to relook at that, the setup, the questions. How can I immediately share with them where I am without speaking too much, so that they get it? They get it, the kind of conversation this is, immediately.

Daniel:
This is what I would call designing the invitation to the conversation, bringing them into a space that you are creating. It's a conversational space. And being super intentional about the design of that invitation is 100% powerful. You really have to dial it in.

If you over explain, you're going to get just what you're looking for. As you scrunch your nose. And you don't want that, you want to get what's really inside of them. I think okay it's to say, "This topic is really important to me. I really want you to be as honest and open as possible. I'd love to share some of my stories, but it's more important that I get your stories, so that I can use your stories to help inspire other people, that we can live a balanced life and be whole people."


More About Rashmi

On a mission to help people thrive and be anti-fragile by unlocking the powers of leadership, learning & wellbeing.

With 15+ years of experience in catalyzing action, Rashmi has built her expertise learning from some of the best names in global people practices - IBM, Aditya Birla Group, Unilever. As an HR consultant, she has implemented core learning, talent & leadership development initiatives. Have extensive experience straddling global, regional and local leadership roles.

She is a speaker on how to stay fit in the future of work. Apart from her TEDx talk, she has been invited & spoken at 7 countries at prestigious events such as Corporate Innovation Summit, HRM Asia- Singapore, The Fit Summit Singapore, Innovation & Tech Fest, Sydney to share her thoughts & experiences.

Likely one of the fastest learners and multifaceted person you would meet, she derives ideas from diverse places, which she has deliberately exposed herself to. For e.g. after seeing the struggle firsthand on how difficult it is to provide good leadership learning to young managers at scale, she ventured building a tech solution with support of her organization and Entrepreneur First, an incubator backed by Reid Hoffman.

She is equally comfortable with corporate hierarchies as she is with the start-up ecosystem or with creative art forms. She has been a pageant finalist, a theatre actor and a Lindy Hop dancer having danced across 9 international locations. These experiences have helped her be ‘antifragile’ – which she believes is a key skill for a rapidly evolving future.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

So why is wellness, balanced wellness important to you? I want you to, just before you answer, because you're looking up, I want you to look in. Just take a second and say, "Why is wellness important to me?"

Rashmi Sharma:

So, more than wellness, I would say balanced life and wellness is a part of it. It's important to me for three reasons. One reason is that, again, there was a saying that, doing only one thing in life, it's like going to an ice cream shop and having only one flavor. So that's a part of it.

Daniel Stillman:

Who can do that?

Rashmi Sharma:

I feel so much to do. So that's one thing.

Rashmi Sharma:

The second reason why it's important from a more tangible perspective is, I feel like success should not come at a cost of wellbeing. And I think it is possible to thrive, which is to grow, to be happy, without trading off either of those things.

Rashmi Sharma:

A lot of times people think that, "I can be successful, or I can be a CEO, but I won't have time for my family. I won't have time for taking care of my health. I won't have time to take vacations." And that's the way it is. It's normal. And if you do have that balance, there's clearly something you're not doing right.

Rashmi Sharma:

It's almost like that, and I want to dispel that thing and say that it is possible to have your cake and eat it too, when it comes to wellbeing and performance, because wellbeing is a driver of performance, not a trade-off. That's how you create that balance in your life. And you should aspire for that balance, than just aspire for things which tangibly people can see, how high do you go in the corporate ladder and so on and so forth. These are the [crosstalk 00:02:21].

Daniel Stillman:

This is good, this is a lot. Take a deep breath. Let's slow down for a second, if that's okay. I want to know what's important to you about a balanced life, and not having to sacrifice one part of yourself for the benefit of another?

Rashmi Sharma:

Because I feel like I'm very multi-faceted, interested in a lot of things, and I don't think being great at one thing will make me happy, if that means I have to cut out parts of myself and not do those other things. I won't feel fulfilled, I won't feel that I've exercised what God gave me, in terms of interests, talents.

Daniel Stillman:

What's the risk to you, if you have to cut out a part of yourself?

Rashmi Sharma:

I guess fulfillment. Happiness. I don't know, probably a better word for it.

Daniel Stillman:

That phrase really jumped out to me. I'm really curious about, if you felt that experience, if you felt like you needed to or had to cut out parts of yourself.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yeah. I did. You want me to talk about it?

Daniel Stillman:

I want to follow you, but I'm following also my own curiosity, because I think we're talking about finding a pathway and understanding what balanced wellness means to other people. There's the positive aspect. And then this is the painful aspect. This is the dark side. This is what that risk, if we don't-

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes, so I think in a very short way-

Daniel Stillman:

Your background has changed into something very weird.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yeah, because I just realized that, since it's recorded. A neutral one.

Daniel Stillman:

Fair.

Rashmi Sharma:

So it helps me be seen, be understood, and be recognized for the whole self of me. I guess it comes from your childhood and your inner child and all of that thing. And yes, I may have felt some parts of me unseen, in a very loving manner, but unseen. And maybe that's where it's coming from.

Daniel Stillman:

Maybe that's where it's coming from?

Rashmi Sharma:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

What parts of you do you want the world to see, that you feel like the world doesn't get to see?

Rashmi Sharma:

Creative, entrepreneur, fun. I am fun and everybody knows me as fun, but somebody who is successful in terms of what they want to do, whether it's... I'm not saying they don't see me as that, they do see me as that. But I feel like not many people want to be that. They don't want to explore other parts of their personalities, because they've been told that. I was told that to was too, I was, but I did it. I'm like, "You know what, you guys can do it too." But I don't want to force people into it.

Rashmi Sharma:

But I just want to raise their awareness that if they want to, they can.

Daniel Stillman:

This is a classic and really powerful way of growing and healing, psychologically, giving to others what we wanted and needed for ourselves. It's basically healing our own inner child's children, our own inner child. Time travel, in the present. By helping other people, we are helping ourselves.

Daniel Stillman:

It's complex, but if we're clear on what we're doing, it can be really powerful, that we are helping, and that we are also healing ourselves.

Rashmi Sharma:

Oh, my God, you're absolutely right. Because for the last three, four days, I've been going through all my video recordings of the interviews. And while I'm making notes for my synthesis, it's also, the penny is dropping in my head for myself as well. I'm like, I see. So these parts is what I'm happy with, these parts, all of that.

Daniel Stillman:

You're doing some looking at yourself through their eyes. One of the things I'm curious about is, you do keynote speaking, and you said, "I only want to talk about this now." What's important about speaking just about this?

Rashmi Sharma:

Because I want this to be my thing, I want this to be my thing. I want to be seen as somebody who is inspiring people to thrive, who is helping people, helping them expand their consciousness of what success is. Not saying it's not expanded right now, but there will be people who may have questions about it. I can interview people who have done it and shared how they have done it.

Rashmi Sharma:

I feel a lot of times, we don't do what we want to do, because we don't see role models for that. What if there are CEOs role modeling, having a very thriving family life, hobbies, great work, professional success? And then one CEO can see, "You know what..." I have people telling me that. It's like, I looked at my boss, and I'm like, "Why do Europeans get to have all the fun? Why do Indians work 17 hours?"

Rashmi Sharma:

And then the wheels start turning and then you're like, you know what, you can do it. It's just that you don't know how. I want to raise that awareness. Sorry, what was your question? It's not like I don't want to talk about learning or wellbeing and all of the other things I already do.

Rashmi Sharma:

But I feel like if I want to double down on this, I have to leave all, not leave, but I have to put a lot of energy into being let's say the best speaker about this in the world. So obviously, then I'd want to put focus on this.

Daniel Stillman:

So if you do put focus on this, if you really focus on finding out the most powerful way to inspire people to have a balanced life, what becomes possible for you then? If we visualize that future state, what do you see when you look around there? You are there, you are powerfully inspiring people. What do you notice?

Rashmi Sharma:

I notice the whole self of me. I notice myself using whole of me to help people. All of me to help people.

Daniel Stillman:

I just want to stop you there, because that is a wonderful phrase, "Using all of me to help people." I want us both to just sit with that phrase for a second. Because I feel it in my chest [inaudible 00:11:09] that. "I'm using all of me to help people."

Daniel Stillman:

When you think about using all of you to help people, what does that feel like? Where does that sit with you? You don't have to guess, by the way, I want you to sense. I just want you to feel the words [crosstalk 00:11:35].

Rashmi Sharma:

I might get emotional.

Daniel Stillman:

Good. That's okay. Me too.

Rashmi Sharma:

I have tissues. I'm good with it. I feel like I can do so much more, but I haven't got an opportunity to leverage and push those levers, because I didn't have a cause. It's like feeling you have a voice, but you don't have a song. I want a song which is worthy so that I can use the full variation of my voice to do that.

Rashmi Sharma:

And also, because I think amongst many things which I can do, not everything I can do as a master, but amongst many thing I can do, I feel like this is one of my strengths, better strengths, to be able to inspire, connect, in a one-to-many scenario. Because that's what I've been told, that's what I've experienced, whether it was my career as a facilitator, not one-on-one... One-on-one, yes, but what excites me most is one-to-many.

Rashmi Sharma:

I feel like apart from helping people, it gives me an opportunity to do things at a large scale, which is important for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. I want to push back, if I can, on at least one way that you're thinking. Let me know how this sits with you. When you say, "I want to use all of me to help others," one of the ways that I think about an individual, we in fact contain multitudes. You have multiple stakeholders inside of you. I like to joke that I've got a fully functioning simulation of both of my parents.

Daniel Stillman:

And you also have your inner child and teachers, all the little memories along the way of different versions of ourselves. That's the all of you. You have to do that work on yourself to bring those pieces of you to the forefront, so that you can help others while helping yourself. You need to do that work and say, "What is it in me, what parts of me am I not allowing myself to tap into?"

Daniel Stillman:

So it's like using all of you to help others, you are one of the others. You are in that picture as well. Using all of you to help all of your others too.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yeah. I get it. I get it, but what does it mean... I get it at a meta level, but that does mean that I should follow my curiosity.

Daniel Stillman:

Very much so. Which you're doing.

Rashmi Sharma:

Which I'm doing now.

Daniel Stillman:

Look, at some point, I don't know what questions you're asking people as you're trying to understand what they need, what their experiences are with it. But going into your own experiences I think can help you find more impactful questions, to dig more deeply into what it means for them. That's one part of the equation, is trying to understand others, because I know you want to build community as part of this. But the other is, I think, focusing on your own work.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes. But I feel like I am doing that. So then maybe I'll look at the... Right now asking questions, which are non-controversial. But maybe I should go deeper. Are you saying, for example, I felt unseen or whatever, those kind of things saying, "What does it mean for you if you don't attain X?"

Rashmi Sharma:

So first question I asked them, "What do you think of the word thrive? And what does it mean for you?" They say, "Oh, it's growth, it's growth with happiness. It's having courage." All of that. Should I go deeper, saying, "What does it mean then for you to not have it?"

Daniel Stillman:

Why is it important to you, let's say you had the perfect question. What would you get from these interviews with the perfect question? What would that enable for you?

Rashmi Sharma:

A new way of looking at... So the reason I started doing these interviews is because the person whom I'm working with and they said, "You need to find out what people think about it." And what are their challenges? What are the nuances around the topic?

Rashmi Sharma:

So the [inaudible 00:17:53] talking to people is to find what they think of it. I have gotten many definitions of thrive, of course, [inaudible 00:18:00] patterns emerging. But the objective is to find those patterns. And then use my keynote to deepen that, and to look at various contours of that pattern. So that's why I'm having those conversations.

Daniel Stillman:

So this is an interesting question, because you used the word deepen. I was thinking the same thing. It's like how do you take these conversations more deep? How do you really get to insights in those conversations about what thriving and living a balanced life means?

Rashmi Sharma:

Use probing questions. If they say something, I'm like, "Why do you say that? Would you have said that pre-COVID as well? Or has your [inaudible 00:18:45] changed after COVID?" I just use my gut instinct and probing questions.

Rashmi Sharma:

I asked them what advice they would give to themselves 10 years back. So these kind of questions. Is that okay?

Daniel Stillman:

Why is this controversial question in design research circles. Why can put people back on their heels. People don't often know why.

Rashmi Sharma:

Oh, why. Okay, okay.

Daniel Stillman:

If I were to give you advice, the much more effective is, tell me more about that, or can you remember a time when you felt that most acutely? Can you tell me a story about the last time you blanked? Can you take me there? Paint me the picture?

Rashmi Sharma:

I am doing that, and that's my second question, because actually a researcher told me that. So then they said, think of a time when you thought you were thriving according to your definition and then talk about it.

Rashmi Sharma:

So they tell me stories, maybe then I'm not getting the right thing out of that story, because that story is of course many things, story is about kids, story is about so many things. But maybe I'm not able to then understand how to deepen or pick out insights from that story. They are telling stories. But their stories are also very predictable.

Daniel Stillman:

That's something else that's happens-

Rashmi Sharma:

[crosstalk 00:20:36] a lot, and then one day I realized that I should take care of my health. Running in the morning, and now I can't live without my run, which is a great story. But it's also repetitive and it's also something I'm not able to take to another level.

Daniel Stillman:

So there's a couple of points here. One is that this is a great part of the research process when things start to feel repetitive. But that also means that you need to change your approach to find deeper insights.

Rashmi Sharma:

Deeper questions.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, the question of what depth in a conversation means, is an interesting one to me. I've written a little bit about it. But I'm curious what depth means, if you wanted to take people deeper than you have taken them already, or deeper into what? And how would you take them deeper?

Rashmi Sharma:

That for me is holding space, and creating a space where they can share. Sometimes I'm able to do well in the beginning of the conversation to create rapport, and they're generally more conducive, they're more open to sharing.

Rashmi Sharma:

In some conversations, they will answer the question and they'll stop, period. And I felt that I've not been able to have that connect. And maybe they don't want to share, but most likely, they've never thought about it and they don't want to think about it now.

Rashmi Sharma:

Some things, I let it go, but in cases where they are talking, for me, depth is about going into details, stories, and sharing what they feel.

Daniel Stillman:

Details and stories. What was the last one?

Rashmi Sharma:

What they feel.

Daniel Stillman:

So trying to understand more about what they were feeling.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes. And also sharing if they were scared, and things like that, which they may not feel safe otherwise to share there.

Daniel Stillman:

Why scared specifically?

Rashmi Sharma:

No, not scared in the sense... Vulnerable. Because a lot of people I work with are leaders. They're extremely used to talking about the stuff with a very clinical lens. But if they can put that away and talk as people...

Daniel Stillman:

How have you been able to do that, to connect with them person to person? What's helped you to do that?

Rashmi Sharma:

Just general, because I know them through [inaudible 00:23:44], or I'll do a little bit of a intro, get to know. Sometimes our kids are going to the same school, sometimes. They're mostly from all India. I talk a little bit about me, why I'm doing it.

Rashmi Sharma:

I don't do anything specifically, other than the general context setting chitchat.

Daniel Stillman:

I would just invite you to think about how to intentionally set a space for depth. If that's what you want to design the conversation for, for depth, then the question of what would create the depth that I need? What would make it safe for them to go deep?

Rashmi Sharma:

Are there any things which I could explore?

Daniel Stillman:

I believe that creating safety for others requires creating safety in ourselves. And this is what we were talking about earlier is, we can only take people as deep as we are willing to go, as we have gone. And you can ask for and invite depth if you set the stage for it.

Rashmi Sharma:

For example, if I were to begin a conversation instead of saying, "This is what I'm researching," I could also talk about why I'm researching this. I could talk about what I told you in terms of growing up I felt like that. And this is why this [inaudible 00:25:29] really important topic. Is that a good thing to explore then? This is what you mean, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Well, what does it feel like? You imagine, with your own story, there's risks and there's potential benefits.

Rashmi Sharma:

I'm okay with risks. I talk about my story to anybody who cares enough to listen.

Daniel Stillman:

The only thing I would push back is, you obviously need them to be speaking within you, by a factor, 10 to one. So finding a way to say what you want to say, why leading a balanced life has been important to you, without tipping your hand too much. Because you don't want to color their responses over much. You want to find out what resonates with them and what their stories are.

Daniel Stillman:

So there's an edge of over disclosure, so that you then color what they're doing. [crosstalk 00:26:40] correctly, the goal here is you want to find nuggets of insight that you can use in your keynote to really inspire people and attract them to this idea, because you want to be a champion for this ideal.

Daniel Stillman:

What I want to close with, because I want to leave some time for us to check out is, looking at everything we've talked about, what would you want to look at as the most important question for you to ask yourself as you move forward with this project? Everything we've talked about, what's a question you want an answer to for yourself that will help move you forward?

Rashmi Sharma:

So for me to move forward in the sense, do another 10 interviews and have them go better than the last few, what I think I need to ask myself, how can I prepare my initial setup of the... How can I redesign my setup of the conversation, to make it immediately safe for them to talk to me about these things, and also redesign my actual questions?

Rashmi Sharma:

That's the question I would ask myself harder now. Because when I look back at my interview recordings, which I've been doing for the last four days, I feel like sometimes I'm rephrasing questions, sometimes I'm explaining the questions. I'm not coming across as very deliberate.

Rashmi Sharma:

So even though I did prepare an interview guide, I feel I need to relook at that, the setup, the questions. How can I immediately share with them where I am without speaking too much, so that they get it? They get it, the kind of conversation this is, immediately.

Daniel Stillman:

This is what I would call designing the invitation to the conversation, bringing them into a space that you are creating. It's a conversational space. And being super intentional about the design of that invitation is 100% powerful. You really have to dial it in.

Daniel Stillman:

If you over explain, you're going to get just what you're looking for. As you scrunch your nose. And you don't want that, you want to get what's really inside of them. I think okay it's to say, "This topic is really important to me. I really want you to be as honest and open as possible. I'd love to share some of my stories, but it's more important that I get your stories, so that I can use your stories to help inspire other people, that we can live a balanced life and be whole people."

Daniel Stillman:

Because of why you think it's important. You think if we don't do this, we can't have a balanced world. We can't have balanced lives. We can't have balanced families. That's what's at stake.

Rashmi Sharma:

Do you think it's okay for me to share that I'm doing it for a community or a keynote speech? Or do you think that just dilutes, or not dilutes, but that digresses from the main focus? It distracts.

Daniel Stillman:

I think ethically, it's important to let people know what you're planning to do with the information you're getting from them. When I started in 2016, I did four interviews with four people I really respected about conversation design. I was like, "I just want to have a conversation with you. I'm just going to record it for myself to get some insights about this idea." That was it. That was very clear.

Daniel Stillman:

And we had an hour with each of them, and we went really, really deep. I picked those people very, very carefully. I got insights that helped me be inspired to do my podcast, to do other things with the idea to write the book. But those guys framed those conversations very carefully.

Daniel Stillman:

I think it's totally okay to say, "I'm just trying to learn more about this idea from other people's perspectives." If that's all it is, then that's what it is.

Rashmi Sharma:

Is there any resource you've written or your book where I can see more of it?

Daniel Stillman:

I can share some resources about at least one way of thinking about depth from the book. But the key thing is, which I've been trying to do in our conversation, it's what threads you pull at in the conversation. And facts versus feelings, versus insights and potential. These are different things to ask about.

Rashmi Sharma:

I should focus on feelings more, generally.

Daniel Stillman:

I think you should focus on where they are, where they have energy, and follow the energy. And if I were to give you one piece of advice is, slow down.

Rashmi Sharma:

Just in terms of the pace of...

Daniel Stillman:

Slow yourself down, slow them down. The US Marines say, "Slow is smooth and smooth is fast." And slowness and smoothness allows people to get comfortable, to think, that means slowing down your own voice, which I'm doing now. It means making a little bit more space between your words, it means waiting a little bit between what they've said and your second question, your response.

Daniel Stillman:

I've had a couple of people on my podcast to talk about this. We can think, there's a lot of research on this, but people can think really fast, much, much faster than they can speak. We can only speak 125 words per minute. We can think at some people say 400, 900, 4,000 words per minute. There will literally always be more to say than people can say.

Daniel Stillman:

And so while active listening is sometimes derided as mechanical, it's really powerful to allow people to even hear what they said. Because they don't know what they said, and they don't know everything that they think. They can't say all that they think and that they know.

Daniel Stillman:

So one thing that I think can be transformative is just giving people a little bit more space and time to think, and reflecting back what they said. I imagine you're doing a lot of this. It's just about doing it with more-

Rashmi Sharma:

Intention.

Daniel Stillman:

More intention and more inner care. We have to check-out. What are you checking out of this conversation with?

Rashmi Sharma:

I realize that while I want depth from people, I'm not giving them depth. I go into the conversation trying to cover a lot in 60 minutes, because I literally, sometimes they have meetings after that, so I know it can go on. Sometimes I'm not doing active listening, because I know they have veered off and I don't want to interrupt them. But I also know that this is not something which is related to what I want to talk about.

Rashmi Sharma:

I also veer off sometimes because I know I'm recording it and I will go through it again. Even then, I think it's just the energy I could... As you said, I have to give them what I want to get out of them. So that's my biggest takeaway, that you made me realize that I'm not doing that.

Daniel Stillman:

It's work.

Rashmi Sharma:

It's work.

Daniel Stillman:

It's work to set up a space where people feel safe to be real. It's work to find the right amount to disclose to get what we need. I guess what I want you to remember is, why you're doing this. The interviews have a function and the function is insights, and the insights function is to inspire others and to build your keynote.

Daniel Stillman:

I would just suggest that I think, I hope you have, and if you haven't, I think you could write it now. You don't have to wait.

Rashmi Sharma:

Write the keynote or write the intro for the conversation?

Daniel Stillman:

Write the keynote. You don't have to wait.

Rashmi Sharma:

And that's going another down rabbit hole. Because I think somewhere I always have, "Oh, I need more information. I need more information. I need more information." If I do what I have now, people will like, "This is so obvious." And everybody knows that. I feel like, "Oh, maybe I'll do 10 more conversations, and I'll get a new angle through it."

Daniel Stillman:

I don't know.

Rashmi Sharma:

I know cognitively I'm hearing myself and I know what I would advise to my friend if she said that to me.

Daniel Stillman:

What would you say to your friend, if she said that to you?

Rashmi Sharma:

I would say that, I read a book and the book said women always do that, but there'll never be a perfect time and you've got to do it now. And last time you did it, you're better off, even though you're not perfect. So you just have to brace yourself and do it.

Rashmi Sharma:

And if people don't like it, they don't like it, at least you know.

Daniel Stillman:

I would say instead of, you don't have to brace yourself, you can love yourself. It's in you. What you want to say is in you already. The interviews will have a function.

Rashmi Sharma:

I guess I want to hear from more people because I don't trust that what I have in me is relatable for others. And there is no point if nobody else has that problem. You know what I mean? I need to choose a different problem to help people in.

Rashmi Sharma:

Because the idea is not to just share my story. I have other avenues to do that. I only want to share this if people find it helpful. So in a way, I'm [crosstalk 00:39:17].

Daniel Stillman:

[crosstalk 00:39:17] find out if people found it helpful, what would be a prototype and an experiment?

Rashmi Sharma:

So talking to people. Like in a startup thing, I spoke to, when we used to ask our mentor, how many potential consumers we should speak to, his answer was always the same. "More." But I think I've done about 13. I have another five slotted, which I'll redesign based on our chat. I think I'm getting to that place where I feel like, this is what people think about it. This is what people have a scope to go deeper in. And then I am getting that. I'm getting that confidence is what I'm saying.

Daniel Stillman:

If I were to push you, I would say don't wait. I think you could run a workshop on this, you can run a keynote on it. You would learn as much from that prototype, that experiment, as you will... It's not an either/or proposition. It's a both/and, it's an all inclusive, three pronged approach. I think it's really valuable to do the interviews and to try and get those insights and find out if it resonates, and find nuggets of insight.

Daniel Stillman:

And also don't do the thing that you just said women do, which is polish it to be perfect. I can't do this until I have three degrees. And that's not true.

Rashmi Sharma:

It is though, but it always [crosstalk 00:40:59].

Daniel Stillman:

What would your friend say?

Rashmi Sharma:

Obviously, if you're talking about vulnerability, you're not going to be Brené Brown. I would rather listen to Brené Brown than my friend talk on vulnerability.

Daniel Stillman:

Fair.

Rashmi Sharma:

But that doesn't mean she shouldn't do it, that doesn't mean my friend shouldn't do it.

Daniel Stillman:

If you've done one TEDx Talk, and you have, you can do another. You can write a talk about this. If you haven't yet, you can write this talk, and you can practice this talk. I imagine you will learn just as much from the people who come up after the talk, to talk to you.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes, yes, yes. You're right.

Daniel Stillman:

You're right. I have to roll. Rashmii, thank you for this.

Rashmi Sharma:

Thank you. You know it's been a breakthrough for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yay. Thanks for letting me be in service of you.

Rashmi Sharma:

Thank you so much. It was so good to speak to you. And yes, I will be in touch, I will keep you posted.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, you're going to do the experiment.

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes? Maybe?

Rashmi Sharma:

Yes, yes. No, no, I have a conversation tomorrow, 9:15 a.m., and it's 9:00 p.m. I'm just going to have dinner, sit, and I'm really excited to redesign this.

Daniel Stillman:

That's wonderful.

Rashmi Sharma:

I'll drop you a line how it goes through.

Daniel Stillman:

Me too. I'm really excited.

Rashmi Sharma:

Thank you so much, Daniel. Thank you so much.

Daniel Stillman:

I'll share this recording with you.

Rashmi Sharma:

How can I get this recording? Is it easy?

Daniel Stillman:

I'll just put it on the internet. I'll put it on Dropbox and then you'll take a look at it. Let me know if it's good and then we'll [crosstalk 00:42:59].

Rashmi Sharma:

Cool. All righty. Thank you, Daniel. Bye-bye.

Daniel Stillman:

Bye-bye. Take care.

Rashmi Sharma:

Thank you so much.

Rituals for Virtual Teams

Season_Five_Image_Stack_GF.jpg

In this episode, Glenn Fajardo joins me for a conversation about virtual rituals and their power to help us make sense of the virtual waters we are swimming in every day. Glenn co-leads the immersive course Design Across Borders at the Stanford d.school and is the co-author of Rituals for Virtual Meetings: Creative Ways to Engage People and Strengthen Relationships. His thoughts on ritual and using curiosity as a force for connection in virtual collaboration are just some of the must-listen moments.

Glenn is a conversation designer, through and through. I love his simple frame of “Occasion, intention, and action” to think about creating moments of transformation for teams.

Also...as a side note, you should absolutely pair this episode with my conversation with Casper ter Kuile, author of “the power of ritual” and co-founder of the Sacred Design Lab. His work is all about how we can learn about creating meaning by learning from the patterns and principles of religion. It’s like biomimicry, but for religion!

Glenn takes inspiration from storytelling, cinema, and...punctuation! We co-created a new conversation design framework, together, based on commas and ellipses. I kid you not.

Occasion

In my book, Good Talk, I identified a few key components of conversations that, when shifted and changed, can have a profound effect on a conversation. There are nine total in the Conversation OS Canvas and two that Glenn highlights are the interface for the conversation and the cadence of the conversation.

Occasion collapses a few elements of my conversation OS. An occasion usually happens in time and space and a ritual can happen on more than one occasion...giving it a cadence, a pattern of recurrence.

But Glenn has done a tremendous amount of work to design occasions that don’t happen at the same time. What does that mean?

Together and Apart

Glenn has done a lot of experimenting with creating team cohesion, not just when teams are together but apart, in real-time, virtually, but when teams can’t be together but must collaborate - like groups in very disparate time zones. Glenn shares some powerful insights on how to build connection when you can’t be together at the same time.

Creating Expressive Spaces

The medium of a conversation shapes the conversation...it is the interface that enables some types of conversations and makes other modes harder. For example, Zoom’s breakouts were, at one point, a unique innovation that many other platforms lacked, and made having dynamic conversations much easier. Now, video platforms exist that push the boundaries of capability, allowing new interactions to form - like virtual audio spaces that allow people to move around in a virtual space and hear each other differently when they are closer or farther apart. Kumospace is one such tool.

I asked Glenn what was crucial for creating orientation, connection, and productivity in virtual spaces and he pointed out that we must find mediums that capture expressiveness.

A lot of folks feel like synchronous video and audio are the best way to connect remotely..but Glenn suggested that video messages can be amazingly connecting, and even more powerful because they are asynchronous. 

If you work with a larger team, across multiple time zones, you’re going to need to be more intentional and creative in your ritual design - creating rituals and engagement in asynchronous conversational platforms like Slack or WhatsApp.

And that’s the message I want you to take from this conversation. Do an inventory of the meetings and moments for your team. Find ways to shift the intention through thoughtfully designed actions...and the more often you do them, the more they will become rituals, ie, core artifacts of your team’s culture.

I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did...and I hope you take the time to create an inventory of your team’s essential moments and find a pathway to make those moments create the team experiences you intend to create.  It is, as Glenn says, as simple as asking:

“How do we want people to feel in those different moments in a team's lifespan? And then, what are the actions that we could associate with those things?”

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Rituals for Virtual Meetings

Making virtual more human at d.school

Making virtual more human: companion piece

Glenn on LinkedIn

Glenn on Twitter

Kate Quarfordt Episode

Casper ter Kuile Episode

Minute 10

I think there are two things. One is, I think it's important for people's distinct person to come across in that introduction. So, I think if you say I'm Daniel and I like pizza, interesting, but a lot of people like pizza. But once you start to get it, what makes a person unique, or quirky, or that thing that is not common? You start to look at them more as an individual versus a category, if that makes sense.

The second thing is figuring out mediums that capture expressiveness. I'll give you a really simple example, the video message is a very underutilized medium. And being able to hear somebody's voice, and see their facial expression, and do it in a way where they have a little bit more agency over it. I think there's a big difference between a video message and a video call.

Minute 28

Anyway, so Ida is a designer we interviewed for the book, pointed out something really important to me, which was, as she said, something like as much as we know we're not supposed to transfer the physical onto the virtual, most of us are not starting with anything. And so, we had to start with what we have.

And take like, okay, if we're thinking about the virtual commute, and we're talking with folks who are not designers, it's those really simple questions of like, okay, let's talk about what it is that you miss about your commute. What are should likes, and concrete examples of things that you do, and then digging into the why, starting from that concrete.

And then, digging into the reason behind it, and then you start to say like, okay, so the reason why you did this is this. Okay, that's really interesting. And then, if you want to get this, how can you take that, and apply it to this different context? And then, how can we start experimenting with different ways to get at that thing that you enjoyed about your commute? While not trying to recreate the things that you hated about it.

Minute 35

Asking what you want from people, and also making sure that everybody has a chance to put an idea forward, and a chance to be heard. And I think the conductivity that comes from that is really critical. Whether it's done, like where everybody shares in a Zoom chat, or on a billboard, or says it out loud in small groups. It's literally a moment for everyone's voice to enter the conversation. And there's so many meetings that don't have a single moment that have that.

Minute 39

So, linking this back to, thinking about affordances, and how people find each other. There are little tricks I use to basically encourage people to stalk each other in a non-creepy way. And so, for example, in a digital whiteboard like MURAL, and I'll do exercises where people will share what questions they have, or curiosities that they have. And then, after that's done, I'll encourage people to look through, and then right click on it to see who said what.

And then, to see like, right-click on something that you found really interesting too. And then, see who said it, and then send, and then create a moment where it's okay for everybody to message each other about that curiosity. So, you have to create the container in which that curiosity can be expressed. And be like a normalized thing versus feeling weird, and out of context, and creepy later.

Minute 45

So, it's this question of like, why is it hard to watch five minutes of Netflix? And the answer is that darn curiosity stuff, and its curiosity in, and curiosity out. So, at the beginning of the episode, there's enough of curiosity creation, where you're like, "Oh, I want to find out what happens." And then, when Netflix is absolutely deadly at is the curiosity out. It's like the ends of the episodes. This is not new to television, but with Netflix, the fact that you can watch the next thing makes it deadly.

I was just going to say, so we don't think of meetings in that way, though. Maybe we think of curiosity going in. If you're lucky, I think that's true. And then, we rarely do the curiosity out part, which I think is so critical to connecting conversations across different times.

MORE ABOUT GLENN

Glenn Fajardo helps people to be creative together when they are far apart. He has been a student of virtual collaboration since 2008, working with people and organizations across six continents engaged in social impact work. At the Stanford d.school, Glenn co-leads the immersive course Design Across Borders and was the d.school's 2020 Distributed Learning Teaching Fellow. He was formerly the Director of the Global Network Co-Design Practice of TechSoup, an international nonprofit social enterprise, and is trained in nuclear engineering sciences and public policy. Glenn plays electric bass and enjoys cooking in other people's kitchens.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

I will welcome you officially to the Conversation Factory, Glenn Fajardo. I feel like I'm always at a risk of mispronouncing your last name, but I appreciate you writing it up phonetically for me. So, hope I did.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, you did great. And if it helps at all, in terms of remembering it, Fajardo literally translated means meat patty.

Daniel Stillman:

The literal translation of Fajardo is meat patty. It's funny. I feel like that's the opposite of helping me remember how to pronounce your name. But it's a very powerful image that shifts. That's so interesting.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, instead of being the frontal mnemonic, that's the backdoor memorability in a different kind of way mnemonic.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And this is, if you've ever done any research on memory palaces or the people who do memorize random orders of numbers or cards and stuff, they use these unusual associations to remember all the digits of pi. So, this is a very interesting bit of brain hacking you're doing on me. And speaking of brain hacking, I think that's what we're going to be... I feel like we're going to talk a fair amount about brain hacking at some point. Okay. So, I'm so glad you're here.

Daniel Stillman:

You are a deep thinker about this thing we do, gathering people together. And I remember, you've been doing work on getting people connected virtually for a long time. You and Cal have been prototyping stuff at Stanford d.school. I feel like this goes back a couple of years trying to work out digital connection, and virtual collaboration across time zones, and cultures, and things like this. So, can you just, I don't know, tell a little bit about your origin story in this work, and why it's important to you, why you care about it, how you got yourself into this thing?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. It actually goes back even farther than that, all the way to 2008. And so, this is at the scene like this was when George W. Bush was president.

Daniel Stillman:

I remember that. It's not everybody's scene. It's some people's scene. Just as a total side note, George Bush is looking great these days. By comparison, he's aged surprisingly well, because he's painting and doesn't like Donald Trump. So, that's interesting, but anyway, sorry. It's an interesting moment in history for you to take us to.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. And this was even before Obama was elected, Zoom was several years from being invented. I was one of the first people in my organization, using the video feature of Skype, that thing called Skype, if you remember. But the reason why I care about this stuff is I've been working with social change makers around the world for the last 13 years.

Glenn Fajardo:

And I have the great fortune of working with a bunch of different people at TechSoup, which is a nonprofit social enterprise that helps other nonprofits with technology. And so, in working with people, we just work with these awesome leaders, who have these great minds, doing awesome things in the world. And I want to co-create things, and I want to be able to think together.

Glenn Fajardo:

And what would happen is we'd go in with the best intentions for co-creation, but then we'd run into these challenges of how to do that remotely. And then, what would end up happening is the usual command and control where San Francisco would be telling our partners basically what to do. And we ended up with what I remember telling my boss this saying, "We're getting to a point of accidental colonialism with this."

Glenn Fajardo:

And that gets the reaction of like, "I know what you're saying, Glenn, but I don't like your frame." But I said, "But you wouldn't say it's completely untrue." They're like, "No, I understand what you're saying." But I think that struggle of the how, how can we be creative together when we're far apart? That's been my obsession for the last 13 years.

Glenn Fajardo:

And I've been gradually chipping away at it with different ways of approaching it, working with people, doing really deep work with people in places like Kenya, in Argentina, just places where, how can we bring each other fully into the conversation, and create together when we're thousands of kilometers, and are coming from completely different cultural context, as well?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's really important, by the way, and this is just a total side note. Will your partner be done making a sandwich in the kitchen? Whatever is going on back there.

Glenn Fajardo:

I know, I know. This is the flip side of the bike, so to speak.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. It's really interesting, actually, because I miss being in a coffee shop. So, I'm just trying to remind myself, so we're just in a coffee shop with Glenn. And there's somebody clearing plates in the background. So, if you're hearing that, folks, just imagine that Glenn and I are in downtown San Francisco together having this conversation. Like we would be, where we've had versions of this conversation before.

Glenn Fajardo:

And I love that reframe too, where I think, one thing that's interesting about the last year plus is it used to be that something would appear in the background or to be like a noise like, "Oh my God," so unlike it's not the way it should be. Now, we have this thing of like, I feel that the term somebody used the other day about, it's like there's no more borders, in some ways. It's becoming like this. The lines between our work life and personal life are no longer there. And that's life, that's what life looks like and sounds like.

Daniel Stillman:

People have commented, it's not an original thing for me to say, but the guy from the BBC, where his baby, and then his toddler, and then his wife all came in. And it was like this hilarious scandal. When this happens on a meeting that I'm in, I call it out. I say, everyone grab your Zoom bingo cards, and circle cat, if you're playing along at home, and I don't know.

Daniel Stillman:

We were going to talk about theatricality later, but I feel like expecting that everything's going to go well on a virtual meeting is a fool's errand. And I think acting that things are going to go completely awry, and preparing for it, and being laughing at it when it happens, I find is a powerful reframe to make.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, totally. Because I think there's that powerful reframe and I think about how... actually, I think that's you, a fellowship that I was leading in early 2020, where our participants were in 11 different countries. And I remember one participant in particular, I think she was based in Legos. And she'd be embarrassed about like, "Oh, there's background noise. There's this thing like, I'm in the middle of a bunch of different things.

Glenn Fajardo:

Really? No, this is great. First of all, we don't want you to feel embarrassed. If you feel that way, that's what you're feeling, just know that we think it's great that you're here. And as long as we can hear what you're saying, and understand the conversation, and it's not becoming like, I think that's derailing the overall flow of things, that's nice. It's all good."

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like in a way, this connects to in our pre conversation, we were talking about the episode with Alison Coward, where she talked about the luxury of facilitation. And it is a luxury in the sense that having someone who's looking out for everyone, and making it okay, and that's their job does seem luxurious, but it's so critical to have someone setting those norms, welcoming people in, orienting them to the space.

Daniel Stillman:

You said, as you mentioned, you've been thinking about this, I remember when you were prototyping some of your ways to get people to introduce each other, and to know each other better over remote distances. I feel like a lot of what you've learned is in the book you've created. What do you feel is the most important for people to know about creating orientation, and connection, and productivity in this space?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. I think there are two things. One is, I think it's important for people's distinct person to come across in that introduction. So, I think if you say I'm Daniel and I like pizza, interesting, but a lot of people like pizza. But once you start to get it, what makes a person unique, or quirky, or that thing that is not common? You start to look at them more as an individual versus a category, if that makes sense.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, yeah.

Glenn Fajardo:

The second thing is figuring out mediums that capture expressiveness. I'll give you a really simple example, the video message is a very underutilized medium. And being able to hear somebody's voice, and see their facial expression, and do it in a way where they have a little bit more agency over it. I think there's a big difference between a video message and a video call.

Glenn Fajardo:

But then providing people constraints so that they don't feel like they're staring at infinity when you're making an introduction. So, a really simple one is say your name, where you're based? And what's one thing that most of your friends don't know about you? And then, it gets people at the same usual. And to me, that's more unique and personal. And then, that becomes a different layer of getting to know a person, and also one of the first steps of trust building, as well.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, yeah. And this seems important to do in projects where people are coming from diverse places, from diverse organizations. Is it different? I'm wondering about somebody reading your book. And a lot of the people inside of organizations where people might know each other a little bit already, what are some rituals for virtual meetings that you feel are appropriate or helpful for people who might already know each other? They're not starting from zero.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah. For people who are not starting from zero, I think part of what I try to get at is things that are either new, or novel, or things that are likely sticking out getting in their mind. So, I'll give you an example of the first one. One of my favorite rituals is one called last line, where you have people think about what's one awkward thing that's happened to you in the last month or so?

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, you think about, how would you tell the story of that thing? And then, you're not going to tell the full story, but you're going to share the last line of the story and begin with, but it turns out that like. And so, what happens is, just to fast forward to the punchline is, people see that people's curiosity about each other is suddenly activated, and then you're like, "Oh, I want to hear like," but it turns out that the car could only take unleaded plus.

Glenn Fajardo:

And you're like, "Why is that important to me? What is that thing?" And so, what are ways that you can make people who see each other all the time, more curious about each other? And what is going on? Because a lot of times, I think with groups, we get into this mode, where every day becomes the same. And it's like the same old, same old. So, doing things that give that little nudge towards curiosity towards each other, I think is really important.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. So, this is good. This is a good hinge point for us to... I feel like we should zoom out at this point. And say, so you started in 2008 with your curiosity. And then, one day, now we're using narrative, and I'm going to totally butcher Kursat's name, you to met, you wrote a book. I'm curious about the journey of the book and where it is now. What it's changed for you. I remember you posting on LinkedIn, you're like, "It says it's a bestseller. Is that a thing?"

Daniel Stillman:

And I'm like, "Yeah, it's a thing." So, can you talk a little bit about the journey of the book, and I feel like people shouldn't need much of a reason to buy. Once they hear the title of the book, they'll be like, "Oh, I think I need that." If you can also define for us why rituals are important, because I feel like you've just started talking about this idea of making things special. And I was like, "Oh, ritual, thanks."

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah, no, no, it's probably like, so as far as the origin story of the book, Kursat is totally obsessed with rituals. And this is a guy who runs this thing called the Ritual Design Lab. And it's been his thing since I feel like, since he just got out of the womb, basically. I've never met a person more just like... I used to think like, this guy is crazy. I think about people I know who are so obsessed about certain things.

Glenn Fajardo:

And there's only a few people that come to mind, like Kursat is one of them. Actually, Daniel, I'm not saying this because your podcast, but you're also one of them. Where I've listened to, I'm like, I love how Daniel was so into this thing, but oh, my God it's crazy how much he's so into this thing conversations.

Daniel Stillman:

Because the rabbit hole goes so far deep for us. I read his first book, and it's really, it's just called rituals for meetings. And it's, it is an amazing book. And this is a very needed second book to this, which is like, well, now this is where we meet.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah, this is where we meet. And Kursat and I had run into each other at... we both teach at the Stanford d.school. And we would see each other at lunches for instructors. And then, one day, Kursat said I've been wanting to write a second book, I feel like, this is the book that needs to be written right now. And I'm heavily paraphrasing what Kursat said, but it was basically like, I'm ritual guy, your virtual guy, let's write a book.

Daniel Stillman:

Chocolate and peanut butter. But this was before the pandemic.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, this was leading up to the pandemic, and it was teetering at that point. And so, I had thought, sure, why not? I said like, yeah, I love your work with Rituals for Work. And I'm definitely in the virtual stuff. I'm not sure I fully follow the virtual rituals part. But let's go ahead and see where this goes. And I thought it was going to be like this, we would take maybe six to eight months to develop the concept, and shop it around.

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, we would have a book, who knows when, a year and a half, two years from now. And then, we had our first test pitch with [Wiley 00:17:13], and with the publisher that Kursat worked with before. And immediately, the publisher is like, "Okay, here's the contract, sign and live." And then, they said, like, "Okay, can you finish it by..." this was back in April, April 2020. And they said, "Okay, can you finish the manuscript by July 1st?"

Daniel Stillman:

Wow.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah, I had that same reaction. I was like, how about July 31st? You're in a little bit one side of it.

Daniel Stillman:

What's funny is that you said, "Yeah, let's write a book." That's like saying, "Yeah, let's get married." And then, it's like, "Oh, can we go to Vegas tonight?" And then, that's basically what happened is you're like, "And it's happening now." So, you really brought this together quickly. But as you say, both of you had a wealth of knowledge and experience to bring together. So, not to say, and we've talked about this. It's not easy to birth one of these things, but it's a great book.

Glenn Fajardo:

Thanks, thanks. Yeah. No, it's not easy. But in some ways, the constraint of time. We tried to lean into it as much as possible, just to say, "Hey, what's the advantage of having less time on this? What is-"

Daniel Stillman:

How design thinker-ish of you.

Glenn Fajardo:

And as an author yourself, Daniel, you can imagine the pros and cons of how this stuff works. And we were able to try things and pivot really, really quickly. Kursat's first book, Rituals for Work was more of a compilation of different rituals that many different people did. And so, we started off with like, "Oh, let's go find what different people do with virtual rituals."

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, as we looked around, we found that actually, there's not a whole lot. There's not yet. This is back again, back in April 2020. And so, we did find people who did different things, but part of the book, quite frankly, was also me emptying out my own playbook. And just going through every single thing that I've done, and one of the great things about that journey was, I never had a deadline to go through my life.

Glenn Fajardo:

And like, okay, what did I do? What's going on? Why do people like it? What could have been better, and then just go through that in a very rigorous way, and having to write all of that up. It was a really fantastic journey. And I'm really appreciative of that opportunity to do that part of it, and as well as putting the framework around the first few chapters that were around rituals, and the secret science virtual meetings as well.

Daniel Stillman:

I'd love to unpack rituals a bit because I had Casper ter Kuile on the podcast last year. He wrote a wonderful book about ritual, and how important it is. And he was using ritual in this much broader sense. And bringing in design principles, you might say from religion, from faith, which is a way of giving our year and our years special meaning.

Daniel Stillman:

Each days have significance. And you talked about in our... we all know each other, we go to work every day, it all becomes the same. And so, rituals can be a way of marking time and making things different. How do you define ritual? What is and isn't a ritual in this context for you?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, that's a great question. So, I'm going to give you two answers. One is the Kursat answer, and one is the right answer. Because we have different ways of looking at this.

Daniel Stillman:

And you're still friends after writing the book, just checking.

Glenn Fajardo:

And we're still friends after writing the book. Because I think there's just a lot of different ways you look at a ritual, and Kursat has a very thorough definition, being ritual guy. And so, he talks about rituals as actions that a person or a group does repeatedly, following a similar pattern, or a script in which they've imbued symbolism and meaning.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, I agree with that definition. I don't think that's not true. But because my brain just isn't as big, like I think about rituals in a little bit more of a shorthand way. And I think ritual is actually those constraints with purpose, that lead to a meaningful moment. So, again, that's constraints with purpose, that lead to a meaningful moment. I know, very designery, I know.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Constraint with purpose that lead to a meaningful moment.

Glenn Fajardo:

Correct.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What's important? Can we pull that apart? What's important about constraints and purpose for you? These are not accidental constraints.

Glenn Fajardo:

No, no, they're not accidental constraints. And I think they're really around thinking about occasion, intention, and action. So, a ritual has to have like, what's the reason you're doing it? It's because you make people feel a certain way at a certain moment.

Daniel Stillman:

When, why and how. That's this occasion, when does it happen? Intention is why you're doing it. And action is what are you going to actually do? Yeah.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah. So, that is understanding what those things are, I think is really important. But within that simple frame of occasion, intention, and action, I found that to be a helpful frame for helping people come up with their own rituals. And so, when I talk with teams about how they can get into their team rituals, we think about what are the different occasions that your team has?

Glenn Fajardo:

We just kind of brainstorm what are... there's things like starting a meeting or celebrating a thing, there's all these different moments in a team's lifespan. And the more consciously you think about those, and start writing those down, and then you think about, okay, how do we want people to feel up in those different moments in a team's lifespan? And then, what are the actions that we could associate with those things?

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, just get into a spirit of experimentation of trying things out with those three things in mind. I'm not saying that rituals are easy to come up with. But it's not quite as hard. Once you start to have that framework to give you a pointer, a point of departure that you can leap from.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What do you see something that people do? And we're thinking about design and designing of conversations now. What do you feel like is a challenge that people have as they go into designing their own rituals? What's something that they miss when they're designing them?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. This is going to sound like a circular argument. But I think it's missing on those three things in terms of not being clear on why are you doing it? So, let's say something, like a common one is the fake community, that people have been introducing things. And then, just thinking about why, why is it that you're doing to mark a transition from work to non-work, I think is a great starting point.

Glenn Fajardo:

But digging even deeper into the why of what is it that you want to gain from that practice? And then, that understanding helps you hone that ritual in a way that really works for you, versus just mechanically copying like, "Oh, well, I used to take Caltrain for 30 minutes, I'm going to sit on Caltrain for 30 minutes."

Daniel Stillman:

This really highlights for me why I think people should design, have the mindset of that I am designing the system of our conversations. Because you can try to copy somebody else's rituals, copy somebody else's icebreakers or whatever. But you can't necessarily copy their why. There's an article I wrote a couple of years ago, where if you Google what types of meetings are there, you'll find like, oh, so there's information sharing, and information gathering, and making decisions.

Daniel Stillman:

And this one article I read from Atlassian said, and the one type of meeting you should never have is the meeting about meetings. And I was like, "What, that's actually the most important meeting." We should totally have a meeting about our meetings. And that's what you're saying, in a way. It's like almost doing an inventory. This is design thinking. I was like, "Well, let's discover and define, let's develop and deliver." Let's look at the shape of the thing and be more intentional about it. I think it's profound to do that on purpose.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. I think it's doing it on purpose is almost like, how do you create your own movie? How do you create the movie of your life, and thinking about the different scenes, and what are the transitions in it? What's the overall plot of it? Where's it going? And then, how are people, how are characters developing within that story?

Glenn Fajardo:

And I think that's how our brains are wired to make sense of the world in a lot of ways. But if we go through life on autopilot, and we don't think about those things, I think we miss an opportunity to get a little deeper.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I want to talk about narrative and using the science of story. But before we do, I want us to go back one step. Because I have needs in affordances circled several times. The virtual commute is actually a feature now in Microsoft Teams. Well, no, it's interesting. They basically said, "Oh, this is a thing, we can set this, we can set when our virtual commute is." I haven't played with it. So, I don't really know the ins and outs of how it works.

Daniel Stillman:

But people, they understood that this was the thing people were doing, this is a need, and they created an affordance. So, I'm wondering, when you think of needs and affordances, and you want to explain them to somebody who's not a user experience designer, what should we be thinking about when we think about the needs and the affordances in this digital system that we're talking... the virtual meeting system?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, yeah. I was just chuckling a bit. Because I think I used to get annoyed with things where I felt like people copy and paste the familiar onto the virtual. And I don't know, do you know Ida Benedetto? I don't know if you guys have crossed paths before.

Daniel Stillman:

I don't know, maybe.

Glenn Fajardo:

Okay. It's like New York is a big city. Anyway, so Ida is a designer, we interviewed for the book, pointed out something really important to me, which was, as she said, something like as much as we know we're not supposed to transfer the physical onto the virtual, most of us are not starting with anything. And so, we had to start with what we have.

Glenn Fajardo:

And take like, okay, if we're thinking about the virtual commute, and we're talking with folks who are not designers, it's those really simple questions of like, okay, let's talk about what it is that you miss about your commute. What are should likes, and concrete examples of things that you do, and then digging into the why, starting from that concrete.

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, digging into the reason behind it, and then you start to say like, okay, so the reason why you did this is this. Okay, that's really interesting. And then, if you want to get this, how can you take that, and apply it to this different context? And then, how can we start experimenting with different ways to get at that thing that you enjoyed about your commute? While not trying to recreate the things that you hated about it.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Right. Some people may have enjoyed the fact that they were able to read something, and other people like, "Oh, I can actually catch up on work before I got into work. I feel like this is... sorry, go ahead.

Glenn Fajardo:

I was going to say, to read something, and then I think it's also to dig even one level deeper into that. It's like you get placed into a set of constraints where you... it's difficult to do what you do by default. In other words, one of the things I grew to actually love about Caltrain, the Caltrain and it's a rail system in the Bay Area, which I would take from San Francisco to Stanford.

Glenn Fajardo:

And I used to think like, "Oh, I hate the fact that Caltrain doesn't have WiFi." And then, after a while, I realized, "No, no, this is the best thing about it." This is a place where it's actually super inconvenient for me to do the things that I would do otherwise. And then, it's not just that I read a book, but it's like being placed in a different context that forces you to be in a different space.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And so, I think intentionally introducing people into those new spaces can seem risky. You've done all this for a long time. And I think you've had a lot of experience. And so, you have a lot of faith and trust in your ability to try something new, take a risk and experiment. I know that when I coach people, people come through my workshops, and whatnot, there's this... I don't know if I can do that with senior people, or oh, I can't, like, I don't know if people are going to want to do this with me.

Daniel Stillman:

You are a theatrical person. You can bring that energy if you want to. I think for some people, introducing somebody to a new reality, to transport them into a new place can seem hard to do. It takes an infusion of energy. And I just wonder what you found, is there a similarity between the people who are successful at running these types of experiments? What can we learn from them? Those people?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. I think one thing we can learn is one is that I think there are people who are just more theatrical than others. I think to say like, "Oh, no, anyone can be that way," I think there's a little bit disingenuous. But I also think there's also this, where can you start with your experiments? And if you're starting with, "Oh, I can't get senior people to do X, Y, and Z." Maybe it's starting by experimenting with your peers, or even if you have people that report to you, with your subordinates.

Daniel Stillman:

They have to say yes.

Glenn Fajardo:

They have to say yes. But what's the ground on which you can experiment, and get started, and start to get your feet wet in a way that is not going to blow up? Because I think the mistake that can be made is like, "Oh, I need to start with the big impact first." And I'd actually argue the opposite, that you want to start with something that's really small. And then, not only test if it works, but also build your own confidence in being able to facilitate and lead the thing.

Daniel Stillman:

What would be an example of a really small ritual, virtual ritual to bring in? Let's say a micro ritual.

Glenn Fajardo:

Really small micro ritual, and one that I really like from... that I got from a friend, [Murica 00:34:29] at the Acumen Fund, it's just been over I know.

Daniel Stillman:

I love Murica.

Glenn Fajardo:

You know Murica, small world.

Daniel Stillman:

I worked with him years ago.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, Murica has one that Acumen does is almost religious about it. It's just the parting aha. They end every meeting with what's one aha that you got from this meeting. And what I love about it is it's such an ingrained regular practice. It's not just like, "Oh, oh, this time we should do a parting aha." They just do it.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. And I think a lot of people think about this, and we'll look at the book, and people come to workshops I do, and they're like, "Oh, I want to be able to do improv, I want to do warm ups, I want to do games, I want to play, oh, I have to throw out an invisible ball." And that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about having reliable structure that makes sense to people.

Daniel Stillman:

When we were talking about serious rituals, because they don't always have to be silly. What's your aha is a very serious ritual. It's human. Having a regular retrospective is a serious ritual. It's just saying, we will always, every couple of weeks, look back and say what worked, what didn't work? What would we like to change? I think it doesn't have to be a theatrical, high energy experience. It can be like, just asking for what you want out of people.

Glenn Fajardo:

Asking what you want from people, and also making sure that everybody has a chance to put an idea forward, and a chance to be heard. And I think the conductivity that comes from that is really critical. Whether it's done, like where everybody shares in a Zoom chat, or on a billboard, or says it out loud in small groups. It's literally a moment for everyone's voice to enter the conversation. And there's so many meetings that don't have a single moment that have that.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. Yeah. And it's so important. It's funny, my wife, Janet, who you know, went to an actual in-person... she's in the next room. She was like, I had a real sidebar conversation with somebody because they went to a bar outside last Friday, and it was nice enough. And we can do that now legally. And she's like, I had a real sidebar conversation with somebody.

Daniel Stillman:

It is hard to do that virtually. And so, I guess this is leading into the one thing on my arc of the conversation that I really want to make sure we talked about, which was the serendipity engine, the building in of ways for multiple people to interact, which is something which is something that would happen in a team, non-virtually.

Daniel Stillman:

But virtually, it's very hard to create that many-to-many connections. I'm wondering, because you've done some thinking about this, how to create serendipity engines inside of groups. What are some insights that you can share about that?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. I think there's a couple that come to mind. One is a lot of like a serendipity engine to me, is really a curiosity engine.

Daniel Stillman:

I love it. Say more about that. Yes.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, it's like what do you do where people share these almost incomplete thoughts? Where you don't have them share the whole thing, and it ends with a period, you want thoughts that end with a dot, dot, dot, either they have a dot, dot, dot before or after? And so, if we think about in terms of punctuation, I know this is a totally random way to think about it, but because people think, "Oh, we want fully formed..."

Daniel Stillman:

No, you're designing continuation in the conversation. If it's a fully formed thought, it ends, someone has to pick it up. If it's a comma, or a dash, or a hyphen, it's passing an invisible ball.

Glenn Fajardo:

It is passing an invisible ball. I love your framing of it. It actually is about sound ball, Daniel.

Daniel Stillman:

Everything is about sound ball. I can teach anybody anything with sound ball, I'm just saying. How do we start doing that? Because we were talking about the hallway track being the most popular part of conferences in the other episode, which I'll link to in the notes. You're doing some thinking about this, what did that spark in you?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. So, they're like little linking this back to like, thinking about affordances, and how people find each other. There are little tricks I use to basically encourage people to stalk each other in a non-creepy way. And so, for example, in a digital whiteboard like MURAL, and I'll do exercises where will share what questions they have, or curiosities that they have. And then, after that's done, I'll encourage people to look through, and then right click on it to see who said what.

Glenn Fajardo:

And then, to see like, right click on something that you found really interesting too. And then, see who said it, and then send, and then create a moment where it's okay for everybody to message each other about that curiosity. So, you have to create the container in which that curiosity can be expressed. And be like a normalized thing versus feeling like weird, and out of context, and creepy later.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. By the way, to go back to needs and affordances, we talked about how we don't want to make tech the answer, or the thing we worry about. But one thing you're implying there, which I think is really important to highlight is, we have to have a shared channel. And it's ideal if it is persistent.

Daniel Stillman:

From my perspective, Zoom is a shared channel, but it's not persistent, or I think it can be, but it's weird to do it that way. You can message on MURAL, but it's not really where we want to be necessarily. You've done things at Stanford where you have a WhatsApp group, a place where anybody can message anybody else any time, I think is really important for groups to have that hallway track.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. Having that hallway track, and then having a mix of persistent communication that is... have parts that are linear, and have parts that are nonlinear. And so, if we have conversations in... linear is great for certain things, where you have a flow in a direction of where everything is going.

Daniel Stillman:

What's an example of linear?

Glenn Fajardo:

Linear is like a WhatsApp chat. So, it's this continuous flow of things. It also helps to have things that are nonlinear as well, like a digital whiteboard like MURAL, where you can look around, browse in different directions, rearrange things, find patterns. But then, create, I think one of the things that we're still figuring out is how do you facilitate conversations in asynchronous nonlinear media? I know that's very jargony, but like-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's hard because my own experience, people have to be highly motivated, in order for that to work.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yes, yeah, I think that's true. And I think highly motivated is an achievable thing, if you find the right thing to be motivated around.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Glenn, we're getting up to the... I want to be respectful of your time. We're almost at the top of the hour. That went really fast.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, good.

Daniel Stillman:

What haven't we talked about? What's important for us to say that has not been said? There's a lot, but what haven't I asked you that I ought to have asked you?

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah. I think maybe talking just like for a couple of minutes about story.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, that's on my list.

Glenn Fajardo:

Because I think there are a lot of things that didn't make sense to me about a year ago, and in doing a ton of research. And having the opportunity to do a fellowship that gave me a container to focus my time on that. One thing that I learned was that it was about the length of story basically is around how our brains work. And the twin engines of curiosity, and chunking are really critical.

Glenn Fajardo:

Where curiosity, we talked about quite a bit, but I think understanding that memory doesn't work as a continuous run of everything. But that our minds are model makers. We make what cognitive scientists call event models to remember things. And then, as conversation facilitators, I think what we do is we insert little cues and little things that trigger that chunking. And that becomes even more critical, I think, in virtual and hybrid worlds. Is that making sense so far?

Daniel Stillman:

For me, yes. I don't know if you've listened to the episode with Kate Quarfordt from ages ago. But I'll link to it. She uses the Four Seasons as a container for how she chunks the major components of her conversations. And I think that's what was my entry point into this was using design thinking as a way of organizing a single meeting or a single project. It's chunking. We're in this phase or not in this phase, we're discovering.

Daniel Stillman:

We're not defining, and it really orients we're empathizing, we're now are testing and prototyping. I think it really clarifies for people what is supposed to happen in this conversation, as opposed to what isn't supposed to happen, or what has already happened, and what's going to happen next. I think it's profound, but I think this also goes back to the theatricality of creating peak experiences within the conversation. I think you are very, very aware of how you are shaping an engaging story for people, even within one arc of one conversation.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, within one arc of one conversation, and then the analogy that I use to help people get started with us is to think about Netflix. And if you've ever binged on Netflix, I'm guessing that you have Daniel Stillman.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh, I have. Yeah. I love bingeing.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, it's this question of like, why is it hard to watch five minutes of Netflix? And the answer is that darn curiosity stuff, and its curiosity in, and curiosity out. So, at the beginning of the episode, there's enough of curiosity creation, where you're like, "Oh, I want to find out what happens." And then, when Netflix is absolutely deadly at is the curiosity out. It's like the ends of the episodes. This is not new to television, but with Netflix, the fact that you can watch the next thing makes it deadly.

Daniel Stillman:

I know. I used to... yeah, sorry, go ahead.

Glenn Fajardo:

I was just going to say, so we don't think of meetings in that way, though. Maybe we think of curiosity going in. If you're lucky, I think that's true. And then, we rarely do the curiosity out part, which I think is so critical to connecting conversations across different times.

Daniel Stillman:

So powerful. And by the way, what I was going to interject with was how I hacked my brain so I wouldn't watch too many episodes of Game of Thrones at once.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, how did you do it?

Daniel Stillman:

I would watch, because the end is like, "Oh, my God, what's going to happen next?" And then, you want to watch the next episode. So, what I would do is, I would watch from middle to middle.

Glenn Fajardo:

That's a great hack.

Daniel Stillman:

The middle, because you get to watch the beginning of the episode, and you're like, "Oh, that's what happened-ish." And then, in the middle, there's a lull and you're like, "Okay, now I'm going to stop. My blood pressure is lowered. And now, I can go to sleep, before I go to the end of the next episode, and then I'm going to watch the next beginning one." So, middle to middle, was my way of hacking my own brain. And I think maybe if we think about the reverse patterns, most meetings are middle to middle, which is why they're so terrible.

Glenn Fajardo:

Right, right.

Daniel Stillman:

So, I want to check... sorry, go ahead. Please finish that thought.

Glenn Fajardo:

I was going to say I love how you reverse the words, like the middle to middle is what you need for Netflix. And then, the [inaudible 00:47:47] what you need for meeting, but we do the opposite of that right now. That's why our world is broken with boring meetings and Netflix bingeing.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. And because they're hacking our brains on purpose. We should check out, what's your aha? I'm going to use a new ritual. What's your aha from this conversation?

Glenn Fajardo:

Man, quite a few. I think I'm still sticking with the punctuation and sound ball thing. And I'll fully make the punctuation stuff, that was just a co-created moment in our conversation, which I hadn't thought of before.

Daniel Stillman:

I love that we come up with new things, fresh conversations, everyone delivered to you.

Glenn Fajardo:

So, I think the aha was around that specific point. And then, there's like a meta aha around appreciating those moments of co-creation and conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

My aha is actually, because I'm going to connect that to the curiosity engine, curiosity at the beginning, and the end, versus the middle to middle my hack. I often use the five Es of entice, enter, engage, exit and extend, it's a classic, experienced design framework, which maybe you've seen. And when I'm coaching people on their agendas, I'm like, "Well, what's the entice?

Daniel Stillman:

Why do people want to enter and engage? And then, how do you manage the edge of the experience where they are going to exit? And then, how do you extend that energy?" And so, I love the punctuation, and the curiosity to curiosity that gives you the momentum to get to the next thing. And I think the other aha I'm leaving with is when I think about that big question of how do I take a risk and try something new?

Daniel Stillman:

The realization that it can be something very small, and human, like what's your aha from this meeting? And how profound it is just to have an anchor point of this is how we do things. We end with personal interest. What am I getting out of this? I think often, people look at these things, and they're like, "Oh, I have to be able to..." because some of the ones in the first book, I was like, I don't think I could do those.

Daniel Stillman:

In Kursat's first book, I was like, those are all elevated, like the death of a project, which seemed bigger. And this is like, you can start really small. I think that's huge. Thanks for staying on a little longer. Sorry to keep you over. I think I'm really glad you came on to talk about this stuff. Where should people go on the internet to learn about all things, meat patty?

Glenn Fajardo:

All things meat patty, I know. It's funny, I'm literally in the process of creating a website right now. But one place that you can go at the moment is just glenn-fajardo.medium.com. And that has some material. I always say that I'll be writing more, but I really will be writing more.

Daniel Stillman:

You wrote a whole book. Take a break. You're good.

Glenn Fajardo:

But yeah, that's a good place. But yeah, otherwise you can also find me on Twitter and LinkedIn as well.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, you're active in all those places. Glenn, I'm really grateful, if you can stand for just one more second for us to close out. I'm just grateful for the time. These are important things, and we can change the world. If people do this, it will change the world. This is important. So, thank you.

Glenn Fajardo:

Yeah, absolutely.

Daniel Stillman:

All right, end scene.

Unapologetic Eating & Unapologetic Living

Season_Five_Image_Stack_AR.jpg

What on earth would a podcast about designing human conversations, facilitation, leadership and organizational change have to learn from a coach and an expert on Food and Eating? Quite a lot, as it turns out! One of my favorite design thinking principles is to learn from “alternative worlds” - absorbing how other people and communities are solving similar problems in different contexts.

My guest, Alissa Rumsey, is a registered dietitian, nutrition therapist, certified intuitive eating counselor, and the author of Unapologetic Eating: Make Peace With Food and Transform Your Life.  

It’s always interesting to learn from reflective practitioners - people willing to think about how they do what they do. Alissa designs many human conversations in her work and life, from her coaching work to her group programs to her book, and the marketing thereof - a book is a conversation, after all. Alissa’s whole business is a series of conversations designed to shift the larger conversation about food and dieting.

Food and eating can be fraught topics, but Alissa's approach of connecting with and learning to trust your own body is inclusive, empowering, encouraging and wise. She places dieting in a much larger (and longer) conversation about historical racism and gender dynamics. At the core of Alissa’s work is an idea that is of deep interest to me: Interoception.

Interoception

Lately, I’ve been using this word in my coaching calls a lot, and it’s Alissa’s work that put it back at the top of my vocabulary. You might have heard the word proprioception: It’s how you can touch your fingers and toes with your eyes closed: You know where your body is, physically. Proprioception is sometimes described as almost a sixth sense, the sense of self-movement and body position. It’s essential for navigating the world in three dimensions, and survival.

But if proprioception is a sixth sense, there’s a seventh: Interoception: One’s sense of one’s internal state. When we say we feel fine, or feel sad, or angry or hungry, we’re interpreting a multitude of internal sensations and summarizing them into a simple word. It’s how we know what we need and start on the path of getting what we want in response to those needs.

When we feel sad, what are we feeling that lets us know that we are feeling sad? Where is it in your body? Think about that...and feel that!

When we’re hungry, it can be physical hunger (like when I do a 16 hour fast...I know that I’m really hungry at the end!) or “mouth hunger” ...like how it just feels GOOD to eat ALL the popcorn. Or it can be emotional hunger that we soothe through eating.

The challenge is that, unless we are attentive and aware of what’s really going on with ourselves, we can’t take care of ourselves, we can’t give ourselves what we really want and need...and we can’t grow. For example, for me, getting a massage is a much better way for me to soothe my emotional hunger...because I can tell you, no amount of popcorn will do it!

In leadership, facilitation, coaching and transformation work, we need to learn to take deep care of ourselves since we are constantly caring for others. 

It’s only when we give ourselves real nourishment, that we can care for and nourish others.

Like the sign in the airplane says “Put your own oxygen mask on first”.

The Work is in You & The Leader you want to be

If you listen back to my episodes with Alisa Cohn (a different spelling and a very different type of coach!) she talks about how “the work is in you”...the idea that as we grow and develop, we have to find new resources in ourselves: ways to be firm and decisive, to be bigger and the CEO others need us to be...while being and staying true to ourselves. As Amy Jen Su (Author of The Leader You Want to Be) said in our conversation about leadership development coaching, “we need to find our own North Star”.

I truly believe that Interoception is an absolute key to personal growth and transformation from the inside out.

Also..we all eat and try to diet, to control ourselves...so stop! Eat ALL the popcorn and mac-n-cheese if you want to...and listen to your body when it says you have had enough.

The Body Keeps Score

If you can learn to listen to your inner signals,you’ll know when your gut tells you your client is gaslighting you, or if the deck isn’t actually right (versus all the changes everyone wants to make!), or when to say what needs to be said. 

In my coaching work, I have to hear the voices in my head and trust that sometimes, it’s intuition...and sometimes I’m getting ahead of the conversation - that rushing feeling in my stomach could be my excitement to share my insights instead of bringing them out of the person in front of me. It’s a dance.

I like to joke: If we don’t listen to our intuition, it just might pack up and head off to someplace where it’s more appreciated. So, welcome your Interoception, your body wisdom, and give it a place of pride. Honor it!

Alissa’s book, Unapologetic Eating could also be called “Unapologetic Living”...if you want more of that in your life and work, check out her book. I’ve enjoyed it.

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Alissa's Website

Unapologetic Eating

Fearing the Black Body

The Beauty Myth

Minute 2

my goal is to really shift how we talk about food and bodies and health in society as a whole, and so I see it ... That's kind of what I'm doing. I'm more writing and social media work. That's kind of where I'm speaking to, but also I see the one-on-one conversations that I have with my clients translating also into this larger conversation, because the more people that are able to just really connect to their own bodies and embrace their own power, the more that they then go on and sort of change that conversation with the people in their own lives too.

Minute 6

and just to define interoception, I kind of define it as this ability to really notice and connect with the physical sensations that arise in your body and also connect those to the emotions that you're feeling, and in my work, a lot of what we're doing is, at least at the start, is ... Because I work with a lot of people who have spent a lot of time dieting, are just very disconnected from their body cues, are really eating based upon what they kind of, quote, think they should eat or shouldn't eat rather than connect it to their own body. So where we typically start is just starting to feel into the body for the physical sensations of hunger, of satiety, of thirst.

Minute 7

I mean, certainly it's a way of respecting your body, of telling your body "Okay. I trust you to tell me what it is that I need to eat," because so many of us don't, and we've been taught to distrust our body, but really, my work is helping people get back to that place of we're born with this inherent ability to ... Our bodies know what we need. For thousands and thousands of years, our body ... It's a survival mechanism when it comes to food and to eating. So it's a way of respecting our body, which then builds more body trust.

Then what I so love about the work that I do is that it starts with this piece, with the food and the eating, but then it gets to this much bigger piece, because when you trust your body to tell you what you need to eat, how much you need to eat, rather than listening to external people, you then are able to just connect more. Again, interoception connects to even more of that body trust and for everything else. So it's the intuition piece around food, but then this bleeds into everything else, just intuition with things with relationships and work and all these other things. So rather than questioning, it's this trust of like "Okay. I understand what my body is feeling right now. I'm understanding what it's communicating to me," because our bodies communicate so much wisdom to us, but we tend ... Most of us as adults tend to live mostly in our head and aren't integrating that body piece.

Minute 9

It's the judgment, the bullying, and it's really like at the root of that is usually shame, and it can become these shame stories that we tell ourselves of like "Oh, I just have no self control. I can't control myself around this thing," or it just becomes so integrated and ... Yeah. Exactly like what you just said. Shame leaves us no room for growth, and so such a huge part of this is really being able to, A, be aware of that conversation you're having with yourself in your head, bring awareness to that, and then start to notice ... Because all of the thoughts and beliefs we have in that inner dialogue ... That all developed from somewhere.

Minute 10

Usually all that development starts in childhood, and so this inner bully or inner critic, whatever you want to call it, developed usually from when you were a child, and it was trying to help you, because children don't really know what's going on and they're trying to survive and they're relying on all these people around them. So these different voices developed to try to help them survive, but then at some point it becomes more harmful than helpful. Once you're an adult and once you kind of know like "Okay. I am safe. I don't need these bully voices anymore," but for most of us, they just still stay in there because they're so integrated. So it's bringing the awareness to it and then starting to notice like "Okay. How are these not helpful to me right now and maybe even harmful?"

Minute 13

So unapologetic eating means eating what you want, when you want, how you want. In a way, that's honoring that interoception that we just talked about but without feeling like you have to explain yourself, or without feeling those shoulds or shouldn'ts, without feeling guilty, without feeling ashamed. It's being in the moment with food and eating in a way that feels good in your body, eating things that you enjoy, fully inhabiting your body when you're eating, like that audible ... that you let out when something is really good.

Or that look on your face, and you're like "This is ..." Your eyes close, and you're like "This is so good," and it's being in the moment with that and without feeling self conscious, without worrying about like "Oh, what are others might be thinking of me?" and really, the ... This is kind of the arc of the book is it goes from unapologetic eating but really getting people to unapologetic living, because exactly what I said before, where you start to ... This starts with food and eating, but then it bleeds into so many other areas of your live, and so I also just see unapologetic eating as getting back to our roots and who we were before society told us who we should be.

Minute 15

 Well, I think, to just your first point of "Well, I can't eat whatever I want, because then I'll go off the rails," or whatever, that's so, so common, but I always say we feel that way because, well, A, we've been taught by so many different ways in our society that we can't trust what we eat. In the United States, the diet culture, the diet industry, is a 70-billion-dollar-plus industry. So we're taught and told in so many different ways from so many different sources that like "Oh, you can't trust your body. You need to follow X, Y, Z things, or else you're not going to be healthy," and in reality, that couldn't be farther from the truth, and I always tell people to look at babies and small children.

Minute 17

So I see this with my niece and nephew. I was out there a couple months ago visiting them, and at the time, they were three and a half years old, and so I'm making them dinner one night, and so I make Kraft mac and cheese. I had the Trader Joe's steamed lentils. I roasted some vegetables, and I think I put some hummus on the plate or something like that. So two three and a half year olds, right?

The first night, neither one of them touched the Kraft mac and cheese, neither one of them. My nephew ate all the lentils, and then he asked for yogurt. The only yogurt we had in the fridge was the plain Greek yogurt, and I was like "Ooh, I don't think he's going to like this," and I was like "This one? You sure?" and he was like "Yes. That one," and he ate ... I don't know. He just kept asking for more. He probably had a cup of lentils and a cup of yogurt and didn't eat any of the mac and cheese, and my niece ate all her carrots and just kept asking for more carrots, and when they were done, they're just like "I'm done," and I didn't say "Ooh, you sure you don't want this?" and it's really hard to do this. I'm just like "are you sure you're done?" and they were like "Yep. I'm done," and then the next day, we had leftovers, and that day, they both ate some of the macaroni and cheese, but yeah.

So they're not looking at that plate thinking "Oh, mac and cheese. This is bad for me. I shouldn't be having this. I don't know when I'm going to have this next. So I got to eat it all now." They're just like "Here's the plate of food. What sounds good to me?" They're eating based on their body cues

MORE ABOUT ALISSA

Alissa Rumsey, MS, RD, CDN, CSCS is a registered dietitian, nutrition therapist, certified intuitive eating counselor, and the author of Unapologetic Eating: Make Peace With Food and Transform Your Life. Alissa is passionate about advocating for people to reclaim the space to eat and live unapologetically. She is the founder of Alissa Rumsey Nutrition and Wellness, a weight-inclusive nutrition practice that offers virtual counseling and online programs to help people liberate themselves from dieting, cultivate a peaceful relationship to food and their bodies, and live a more authentic, connected life. Her expertise has been featured in hundreds of media outlets and she speaks regularly at events, online trainings, and conferences around the country. She calls New York City home and spends her free time exploring the city’s food scene and searching for patches of green space to sunbathe in.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

So I will then officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory. Alissa, I'm really excited that we get to have this conversation.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. I am too.

Daniel Stillman:

I was thinking about where to start the conversations, and I'm curious. Do you have a sense when I ask you what conversation do you feel like you design in your work? What are the conversations that you feel like you are attending to and designing on purpose?

Alissa Rumsey:

So I would say there's a range. I would say, in the work that I do one on one with my clients, I'm designing conversations with us in session, where it's very similar to a therapy session or coaching session, where I'm really trying to help them connect and make their own meaning and sort of figure out what's going on and connect the dots for themselves, and within that, there's also a big part of the work that I do tends to be around bringing a lot of awareness or helping them bring a lot of awareness to their inner conversation that's in their head, like their inner thoughts. We often call it the inner critic voice or the judgmental voices or the shoulds that are in there, and really working with them to help them change that kind of conversation or tape that is playing in their head.

Alissa Rumsey:

Then I think that also sort of connects to the larger conversation, which my goal is to really shift how we talk about food and bodies and health in society as a whole, and so I see it ... That's kind of what I'm doing. I'm more writing and social media work. That's kind of where I'm speaking to, but also I see the one-on-one conversations that I have with my clients translating also into this larger conversation, because the more people that are able to just really connect to their own bodies and embrace their own power, the more that they then go on and sort of change that conversation with the people in their own lives too.

Daniel Stillman:

I love that this is where we're starting, because when I think about conversations, thinking about the range and what the range is that we're working on or designing in, this size ... Your sort of highlighted there's the one on one and then there's your social media. There's the one to many, and then you also facilitate or gather groups and build community around the work you do, and then there's this larger societal or cultural conversation around food and dieting, which is just like ... I'm glad that we have the whole conversational range from the way we talk to ourselves to the way the whole culture talks about this topic, and they're all there laid out on the table. That's all part of what you do.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

So for me, when we were talking about having you on the podcast, I was like "How does this fit in?" So much of the people who come on the show are talking about organizational change, innovation coaching, or facilitation leadership, and ... Oh. Hey. What's that?

Alissa Rumsey:

Oh. Oh, my gosh. I'm sorry.

Daniel Stillman:

It's okay.

Alissa Rumsey:

That was another call coming in. I don't know why.

Daniel Stillman:

That's totally not a problem.

Alissa Rumsey:

It rang on my computer, which is bizarre. I don't know if it's because my phone. I'm turning off my computer sound just in case. Sorry about that.

Daniel Stillman:

Technology. It's totally fine. We're going to keep this in, because this is all real. So for me, I was like "I don't know. This is kind of off topic," and then Janet and I were reading your book, your book that just came out, because I want to make sure we talk about this. We were at the spa reading this together, and just for anybody listening, we've already had COVID. We got better, and this was an outdoor pool. So it was relatively safe. No COVID shaming. We were reading the book together, and I was like "Oh, my god. This book is a tool to change the larger social conversation about food and dieting and body image," but you spend so much of the book talking about interoception and sensing ourselves and connecting with ourselves, and I love the word, and I've been using it in my coaching calls as well. I say "Well, you know what proprioception is," and they're like "Yeah. Kind of," and I'm like "Yeah. Well, interoception is knowing what you're feeling inside, and that's important." Why is interoception important to you in your work? Can we just unpack that a little bit?

Alissa Rumsey:

Sure. Sure. I love that that was what you pulled out, because that was not what I was expecting you to pull out. So I thought that that was really interesting. So yeah, and just to define interoception, I kind of define it as this ability to really notice and connect with the physical sensations that arise in your body and also connect those to the emotions that you're feeling, and in my work, a lot of what we're doing is, at least at the start, is ... Because I work with a lot of people who have spent a lot of time dieting, are just very disconnected from their body cues, are really eating based upon what they kind of, quote, think they should eat or shouldn't eat rather than connect it to their own body. So where we typically start is just starting to feel into the body for the physical sensations of hunger, of satiety, of thirst.

Daniel Stillman:

Wait. Is that how you pronounce that? [inaudible 00:06:21].

Alissa Rumsey:

Satiety. That's how I pronounce it.

Daniel Stillman:

That's fine. I'll go with yours. So why is it important for us to, instead of eating according to a specific plan or ideal, to eat according to what our bodies are telling us?

Alissa Rumsey:

So I think it's important for many reasons. I mean, certainly it's a way of respecting your body, of telling your body "Okay. I trust you to tell me what it is that I need to eat," because so many of us don't, and we've been taught to distrust our body, but really, my work is helping people get back to that place of we're born with this inherent ability to ... Our bodies know what we need. For thousands and thousands of years, our body ... It's a survival mechanism when it comes to food and to eating. So it's a way of respecting our body, which then builds more body trust.

Alissa Rumsey:

Then what I so love about the work that I do is that it starts with this piece, with the food and the eating, but then it gets to this much bigger piece, because when you trust your body to tell you what you need to eat, how much you need to eat, rather than listening to external people, you then are able to just connect more. Again, interoception connects to even more of that body trust and for everything else. So it's the intuition piece around food, but then this bleeds into everything else, just intuition with things with relationships and work and all these other things. So rather than questioning, it's this trust of like "Okay. I understand what my body is feeling right now. I'm understanding what it's communicating to me," because our bodies communicate so much wisdom to us, but we tend ... Most of us as adults tend to live mostly in our head-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Alissa Rumsey:

... and aren't integrating that body piece.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to unpack this. I want to go one more layer down, because the way I would language this is there's a dialogue. We have internalized these shoulds. There's these internal voices that are saying "Oh, I shouldn't eat this. I should be eating more of that. I should be doing these things," and there's another part of us that's saying "I want ice cream," and then there's this like "No. You're a bad person for wanting ice cream," and shifting that conversation is non trivial. What I say often is forcing people, aggression, bullying really is not super effective change management technique when it comes to other people, and yet we're having these internal bullying conversations with ourselves.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yes. Yes. Yes. Exactly. Exactly. It's the judgment, the bullying, and it's really like at the root of that is usually shame, and it can become these shame stories that we tell ourselves of like "Oh, I just have no self control. I can't control myself around this thing," or it just becomes so integrated and ... Yeah. Exactly like what you just said. Shame leaves us no room for growth, and so such a huge part of this is really being able to, A, be aware of that conversation you're having with yourself in your head, bring awareness to that, and then start to notice ... Because all of the thoughts and beliefs we have in that inner dialogue ... That all developed from somewhere.

Alissa Rumsey:

Usually all that development starts in childhood, and so this inner bully or inner critic, whatever you want to call it, developed usually from when you were a child, and it was trying to help you, because children don't really know what's going on and they're trying to survive and they're relying on all these people around them. So these different voices developed to try to help them survive, but then at some point it becomes more harmful than helpful. Once you're an adult and once you kind of know like "Okay. I am safe. I don't need these bully voices anymore," but for most of us, they just still stay in there because they're so integrated. So it's bringing the awareness to it and then starting to notice like "Okay. How are these not helpful to me right now and maybe even harmful?"

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. We're going to dance around all of these different conversations, because I'm wondering ... The book. I think of books as conversation pieces, really. You're putting a sound out. Has the conversation around the book been what you've hoped it to be? Do you feel like it's creating the conversation around eating that you want to facilitate?

Alissa Rumsey:

That's such a great question, and I would say yeah so far. So the book's only been out for about a month. It's funny. I was just posting on Instagram this morning. It's such a funny thing. You write this book. You spend all this time. You put it out, and just getting the feedback ... I know that, at this point, hundreds, if not maybe thousands, of people have bought the book and are reading it, but you're not hearing from all those people. So I always appreciate when people are giving me feedback, because I'm like "This is so great because it's just out there, and I don't really know," but yes.

Alissa Rumsey:

The feedback I have gotten has been just in the sense of really making people think and really making them kind of uncomfortable in places. I say that right in the introduction like "Look. There are going to be parts of this or maybe many parts of this book that make you feel uncomfortable, and that is okay, and that is part of this process," and yeah. That's the feedback I have been getting is that and also just getting so many messages from people that are like "Oh, my gosh. This resonates so much," or "Oh, this makes so much sense," and so that feels really great as well.

Daniel Stillman:

So the title of the book is Unapologetic Eating, and it's become ... Maybe we're misusing the book at this point in our family. I don't know, but Janet and I can joke now. I am unapologetically eating this ice cream. We can just anchor ourselves on like "I'm eating this," and maybe it's giving us too much license to eat whatever we want, because we're on a mini vacation right now, but what's important, do you think, for people to know about unapologetic eating? Let's just put a flag in the sand there and say for somebody who has no idea. A lot of the people who are listening to this ... This is going to be a very big, new idea for them. This is what my dad used to say. "What? Do you want me to give the 25-word-or-less version?" I'm like "Yes. Yes. I do." For somebody who's new to this conversation, can we give them an invitation into this space?

Alissa Rumsey:

Definitely. So unapologetic eating means eating what you want, when you want, how you want. In a way, that's honoring that interoception that we just talked about but without feeling like you have to explain yourself, or without feeling those shoulds or shouldn'ts, without feeling guilty, without feeling ashamed. It's being in the moment with food and eating in a way that feels good in your body, eating things that you enjoy, fully inhabiting your body when you're eating, like that audible ... that you let out when something is really good.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh, I know.

Alissa Rumsey:

Or that look on your face, and you're like "This is ..." Your eyes close, and you're like "This is so good," and it's being in the moment with that and without feeling self conscious, without worrying about like "Oh, what are others might be thinking of me?" and really, the ... This is kind of the arc of the book is it goes from unapologetic eating but really getting people to unapologetic living, because exactly what I said before, where you start to ... This starts with food and eating, but then it bleeds into so many other areas of your life, and so I also just see unapologetic eating as getting back to our roots and who we were before society told us who we should be.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and that was ... I mean, honestly, that's one of the reasons why interoception comes up in my coaching work is for people to ... I used to joke, years to myself, if you don't listen to your intuition, it may go some place else where it will get love and attention. We just constantly silence our intuition. We're not in the habit of connecting with it. I think some people would ... I definitely have this experience of like "Well, but I can't just eat whatever I want. I'll get fat," and then, well, okay. So then there's this whole larger conversation about what fat is and who gets to say what a good body is, and that's a mine field.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. Well, I think, to just your first point of "Well, I can't eat whatever I want, because then I'll go off the rails," or whatever, that's so, so common, but I always say we feel that way because, well, A, we've been taught by so many different ways in our society that we can't trust what we eat. In the United States, the diet culture, the diet industry, is a 70-billion-dollar-plus industry. So we're taught and told in so many different ways from so many different sources that like "Oh, you can't trust your body. You need to follow X, Y, Z things, or else you're not going to be healthy," and in reality, that couldn't be farther from the truth, and I always tell people to look at babies and small children.

Alissa Rumsey:

Before any of that, which unfortunately does start to get in kids' brains very young, but before any of that kind of cultural messaging gets in, if they're given a variety of foods and they're fed consistently throughout the day, they eat a variety of food, and they naturally balance out on a week-to-week basis the calories they need, the nutrients they need, again, assuming there's enough access to food and enough variety provided without any adult intervention. So I see this with my niece and nephew. I was out there a couple months ago visiting them, and at the time, they were three and a half years old, and so I'm making them dinner one night, and so I make Kraft mac and cheese. I had the Trader Joe's steamed lentils. I roasted some vegetables, and I think I put some hummus on the plate or something like that. So two three and a half year olds, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Alissa Rumsey:

The first night, neither one of them touched the Kraft mac and cheese, neither one of them. My nephew ate all the lentils, and then he asked for yogurt. The only yogurt we had in the fridge was the plain Greek yogurt, and I was like "Ooh, I don't think he's going to like this," and I was like "This one? You sure?" and he was like "Yes. That one," and he ate ... I don't know. He just kept asking for more. He probably had a cup of lentils and a cup of yogurt and didn't eat any of the mac and cheese, and my niece ate all her carrots and just kept asking for more carrots, and when they were done, they're just like "I'm done," and I didn't say "Ooh, you sure you don't want this?" and it's really hard to do this. Even me [inaudible 00:17:51]. I'm just like "are you sure you're done?" and they were like "Yep. I'm done," and then the next day, we had leftovers, and that day, they both ate some of the macaroni and cheese, but yeah.

Alissa Rumsey:

So they're not looking at that plate thinking "Oh, mac and cheese. This is bad for me. I shouldn't be having this. I don't know when I'm going to have this next. So I got to eat it all now." They're just like "Here's the plate of food. What sounds good to me?" They're eating based on their body cues, and then we just get so disconnected from that for a variety of reasons as we get older, and so really that's my hope with the book is helping people get back to that place where they're not questioning their wants and needs. They're like "Okay. Tonight, I ..." I mean, I literally just had mac and cheese for lunch right before we started recording this, and it's like it's fine, right? I had like 20 minutes to eat. I'm like "What do I have in my fridge?" I have leftover mac and cheese that my partner made, so I was like "Great. This is what I'm eating for lunch. It's going to fuel me. It's going to taste good. It's going to get me through the next few hours of my work day."

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It'll get you to satiety.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

What's interesting about this, and I want to just connect this for people who may have listened to ... A couple of weeks ago, I interviewed Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, who's a professor of design thinking, and her work is a lot about decolonizing this idea of innovation, and she actually did the experiment where she was doing a design-thinking innovation project with a bunch of kids, and she was like "Hey. So we just talked to some people about these problems they're having, like what do you want to do now?" They were like "Well, I think we should try to make sense of all of it," and she was like "Yeah. Totally. How could we do that?" and they were like "Well, we could just put it up on the wall, and let's see what's interesting," and like "Yeah. Let's do that, and now what should we do?" Like "Well, it seems like we've got a couple. Maybe we should try some stuff." Like "Oh, yeah. You should totally do that," and meanwhile these kids just invented design thinking by themselves.

Daniel Stillman:

This idea that we have to do it the right way and that there is a right way and that someone else can tell us the right way and that we should be doing it that right way so it's repeatable and perfect every time ... It's a tough balance, because nutrition is a thing. You studied this. You are actually certified. You can tell me, like "Yes. There's ..." But everybody's different in the same way that I would say every organization is different and every team is different. You have to actually pay attention to what's happening, so the idea of how do you get your ...

Daniel Stillman:

I want to flip back around and talk about the change piece, because when clients are coming to you for behavioral change coaching when they are not happy with he way things are, what's the process to get them to start to trust their voice and say "Yeah. I can de-regulate or de-control what I eat and listen and then change from there"? There's the example in the book, which I love, of like "Yes. Let's re-regulate mac and cheese." Mac and cheese seems to come up a lot. It's like "Yeah. I'm going to eat mac and cheese." It sounded almost like when parents are like "Here. Smoke this whole pack of cigarettes." It's like "Yeah. Have mac and cheese as much as you want," and then you're going to be like "You know what? It's lost its power over me, and I'm going to have it when I want to have it or when I need to have it, because it soothes me or because it satisfies me." How do you get them to do those experiments?

Alissa Rumsey:

Well, that's the exact word, experimenting. In our culture, perfectionism is a very common thing, and there's this like "Well, I have to be perfect," or "I have to do it the right way," and it's also very ... There's so much binary thinking, like either I'm doing this right or I'm doing this wrong. That's with everything, but certainly when we think about food and eating, it's like I'm either on the wagon or I'm off the wagon, or I'm either dieting and Monday through Friday everything is super clean and et cetera, et cetera, but then the weekend is just off the rails, and what people don't realize is like-

Daniel Stillman:

Right. So that I can get back to eating celery and kale smoothies-

Alissa Rumsey:

Right. Come Monday morning.

Daniel Stillman:

... Monday through Friday.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah, and what people don't realize is that, when it comes to food and eating, the reason we're off the rails on the weekend is because we're trying to over control so much during the week. So really, I see my work as helping people find that gray area, find that area in between, not shooting for perfection, and experimenting and approaching food and approaching our bodies with curiosity rather than judgment. So we do a lot of work around, I mean, certainly, unpacking where their beliefs around food, about bodies, about weight, about health ... where those beliefs came from, how they learned those things.

Alissa Rumsey:

A lot of that goes back to family of origin and caregivers, but certainly also just society and movies and TV and all these different things, so really unpacking that and unpacking the impact that that's had on them, which usually it's been pretty harmful, like disconnected them from their bodies and themselves and lots of shame, and really ... Yeah. Just, I mean, I ask a ton of questions, and because I might be sitting here and be like "Okay. Well, I know exactly what's going on." It is so much more powerful if I'm able to ask them questions and getting them to connect the dots, and they're like "Oh, I wonder if it's because of this," or like "Oh, yeah. What about this?" So much more powerful than if I'm just telling them.

Alissa Rumsey:

So really, I see my work with my clients like I'm not the expert, like I'm there as an equal partner, and like they're the expert of their body and I'm just there to try to help them get back in touch, that interoception part, the intuition part, and also be a place of support, because experimenting and allowing yourself to eat certain foods when you've been telling yourself for so long "Oh, I can't, because I'll just have too much," or "I can't keep that in the house," ... That can be a really scary thing, especially if and when people are concerned with gaining weight or their body changing. So it's also the support of like "Okay. You can do hard things. This is going to be an experiment. Let's see how it goes, and let's see what you learn," because every eating experience is a learning experience, and so really being there to sort of point out patterns that I'm seeing and really trying to help them connect those dots.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so interesting, the idea of having curiosity and maybe even patience with the process. I know when we started this conversation, we were talking about the range. We were talking about this range of large to small, and in my work in trying to understand what we can shift around a conversation, pace is one of them as well, and I imagine there are some people who are like "I want to have a change and I want to have it fast," and you could maybe download ... Can't I just download Alissa's brain, and she could just tell me all the things, and I could do them? But this kind of change is a slower change, having curiosity about yourself and then doing these experiments. How do you help your clients define what a good experiment looks like and how to judge whether or not that experiment was a success for them personally?

Alissa Rumsey:

Well, I would say that even trying to get out of the binary of like "Was it successful or not?" It's just like every time you eat, every time you try something, you're going to learn something about yourself, and so just continuing to try to find that gray area and getting out of that binary thinking. So a lot of times, what I'll tell them is like "Okay." Again, mindfulness is such a huge part of this, because again, if we're not aware of what the thoughts and beliefs behind those thoughts and feelings about those thoughts are, that's in this case with eating or with how they feel about their body, then we can't do anything with it.

Alissa Rumsey:

So we need to really be aware first. So definitely mindfulness is a practice that we work on together, but yeah. Just noticing like "Okay. When that judgmental thought starts to come up, what is it saying? Where did you learn that? What contributed to the development of that thought or that voice?" Again, unpacking how might it have helped you in the past but also how might it have harmed you or held you back, and then just getting curious about ... Let's just say, for food, it's that judgment of like "Oh, I can't believe I just ate all those cookies. Why did I do that? I wasn't even hungry." Let's just say that's the first judgmental thought. I think you're laughing, because it sounds very familiar, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Oh, totally.

Alissa Rumsey:

We've all had these thoughts. So it's like, okay, let's set aside the judgment for a minute. Let's get curious. What might be going on right now? Maybe it was that I didn't have breakfast this morning. So I was really rushed, and my lunch was really fast, and I had a really stressful day, and I just haven't eaten enough today. Or maybe it was my lunch was like eight hours ago. So by the time I had dinner, I was starving, which then makes it really difficult to stop at this comfortable place of fullness, because your body is sort of like "Well, you haven't fed us all day. We don't know if we can trust you to feed us the next time you're hungry. So let's get it in now." Or maybe it's just I had a really crappy day. I was feeling really emotional. Chocolate chip cookies are my favorite thing. This is like me talking. Chocolate chip cookies are my favorite thing.

Daniel Stillman:

Amen.

Alissa Rumsey:

I had a bunch. I really enjoyed them, and I'm feeling better now. Yes. I'm feeling a little bit uncomfortably full, but you know what? It's fine, because there's some emotional stuff going on, and I really needed that comfort in the moment.

Daniel Stillman:

So there's two things I want to prod out. One, thank you for pushing back on my binary thinking around an experiment either being successful or not and just being like "What did I learn?" So in the sense of just being curious, I can say "What was that like? What was it like to just let myself do blank and not worry about it? What did I learn? How did that feel?" That's very different than saying that was bad or good. I know you talked about this in your book as well, where there's just one number that says whether or not I was a successful person or not, right?

Alissa Rumsey:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

My weight, and this is so interesting because I'm relating this back to people who might be listening who are thinking about agile transformations of organizations and just have this one OKR, this one thing that we're supposed to measure our whole company's success by, and that's fair. Oh, man. There's so many directions I want to take this, because how do you adapt this? I didn't even think I was going to go here now, but how do you adapt these principles to your business? Because obviously you live by your wits. You live by caring for your clients. A business does have one metric, one ultimate metric of validity, right?

Alissa Rumsey:

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Daniel Stillman:

Did people come? Did they show up? Did they support our work with their time and their money? So how do you avoid apologetic businessing?

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. You know, I mean, it's a constant kind of thing of just recognizing when that's showing up and when ... Because I think, again, especially in US culture, but in many Western cultures, there's ... I think a lot of the work I've been doing just in the last few years around the decolonization and unlearning and recognizing where white supremacy is showing up in our lives, and there's this really amazing ... I think the website is Showing Up For Racial Justice, and they have characteristics of white supremacy culture, and perfectionism is one of them, sense of urgency, this binary thinking, quantity over quality, only the one right way.

Alissa Rumsey:

So I try to think about decolonizing just my own mind, and therefor with business, and then I think it's also thinking about the capitalistic capitalism society that we live in, where better is always more, like more money, more clients, et cetera, and it's like "Wait. Is that what my business needs to be?" and what I've realized is no, that's not. I did not go to school to become a dietician to make money. No one goes to school to be a dietician to make money. That's not how you make money. So that's never been my goal, but I totally got sucked up when I started my own business six-plus years ago, got sucked into this, like "Okay. The six-figure mark and then the seven-figure mark," and shooting for these things, and it's like "Wait. Why? Why?" and so whenever I catch myself with that, like [inaudible 00:31:47], looking at the book numbers, it's like "Okay. Well, why?" Yes. I am really proud of this book, and I think it can be really life changing, and I want to get it into people's hands. I also didn't write a book to make money, but at the same time, how does that help me, to get caught up in the numbers?

Alissa Rumsey:

So I think it really, again, comes back to this gray area, and I know so many organizations are set up where it is the black and white and the pass fail, but I think it's thinking about how can we maybe measure in a different way, or how can we ... If we didn't hit the numbers, it's not like the end of the world. It doesn't mean you're bad, but where can we start to just look at these different things? So I think it's getting out of this, because what tends to happen with binary thinking is the good or bad, and then it turns into a judgment on you as a person, like "Okay. Either you were good and you're a good person, or you're bad and you're a bad person, you're failing," and again, this shame spiral, which, as we said before, doesn't help anybody.

Daniel Stillman:

Not so helpful.

Alissa Rumsey:

So again, finding this gray area, and just I know for myself it's just been really coming back to my values. I've been doing a lot of values work and just like "Okay. Why did I start my business to begin with?" Again, I mean, yes. It was to make more money than I was making on a clinical dietician's salary, but it wasn't to make a million dollars. That's not why I started my business. I started my business so that I could help people in the way that I wanted to help people, so that I could have more flexibility in my schedule, all these other different reasons. So just trying to kind of keep it value centered really helps me from when I do start to get caught up in the numbers, which I do sometimes, just coming back to like "Okay. Am I doing the work that I want to do? Am I having the impact that I want to have?" without trying to necessarily measure that impact.

Alissa Rumsey:

I do understand measurable goals and stuff like that and how it can be helpful, but for me ... I consider myself a recovering type A person. So for me, I actually find that it's not helpful for me to have measurable goals, because I get way too caught up in the numbers, and I get so stressed out and so anxious. It's not worth the mental health. So yeah. I have some loose goals, but I just personally have found that I do better if I don't have those kinds of things, or else it just gets just way too much.

Daniel Stillman:

That is so interesting, and I love that. I think sometimes people talk about this idea of strong opinions loosely held, and not holding so tight on this is exactly how everything is supposed to go is a more playful in-and-out approach to your own process, which I personally value.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. I think that's a great way to say it too, and again, it's just like for me, at the end of the day, it's like "Okay. Yes. I want to have enough money so I can live the kind of life I want to live," but that is not as much money as our society tells me I should have or should need. So it's again just questioning why, like "Wait. Why do I think this is right or wrong? Why do I think this is the way?" Should is always a warning sign for me. If there's a should anywhere, I'm like "Wait a second." That's not me. The should isn't me.

Daniel Stillman:

So I want to interrogate this, because this is really ... I want to go back to a point ... I think people who are listening to this for the first time, not knowing as much about this topic as you do, certainly, and me a little ... They might be like "How do you decolonize dieting? This is total bullshit. What does this mean?" and while Janet was reading the book, I'm like "You don't know about Kellogg and masturbation?" and she was like "No." I was like "The history of the ideas of what we're supposed to eat and how we're supposed to look are cultural."

Daniel Stillman:

So I'm wondering maybe from your perspective, because I feel like now we're ... We've talked about a couple of ranges in conversation. One is the sizes of the intimacy of the dialogue, the public to the personal to the interior and the fast versus the slow. We didn't touch on this, but you spoke to transferring power from yourself to your clients, giving them ... You could tell them the answer, maybe. Would it help? Probably not, and so it's about giving them the dialogue to pull it out. There's this other range, which is like just stepping way back and taking an historical view of this thing, like "Well, why do we think these are the shoulds?" and it's weird, the history. You actually have a graph. I'll just say I don't think it went back far enough, all the weirdness of food and how we're supposed to look, and so maybe just unpack that a little bit for people. We're sitting in this moment now. Everything we know and think and believe is based on some history, and the history's not all great.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yes. Yeah. I have a line in the book, I think, where I say something to the effect of like "Everything that you think you know about food, about weight, about health, about body fat is something you were taught at some point and something that was created for a reason." So yeah. I love this. I love the zooming out because I think this is so helpful for people, because it's like "Well, but this is healthier," like you said before, like "Isn't nutrition important?" It's like "Okay. Let's ..." Yeah. If we zoom out a little bit, in our society ... I use the term, in the book, diet culture, which really means that thinness is put on a pedestal and thinness is seen as the epitome of health and happiness and like this is the thing we should all be striving for, and if you're not thin or you're not striving to be thin, then something is wrong with you.

Alissa Rumsey:

So there's a lot of anti-fat beliefs. There's a lot of fat phobia, but this fat phobia and these anti-fat beliefs ... They don't exist in a silo. They didn't just come from nowhere, and so yeah. I wasn't sure if I was going to do this, but I ended up starting the book with this information because I really thought that it's so important to understand this foundation about why we think the way we do about bodies and the roots of that, and so the cultural beliefs about body size and then food as well were specifically created to keep certain people down, mainly black people, people of color, women, fat people, and other people, mainly white people, men, cis gender, heterosexual people, on top. So it was really to keep certain people oppressed and not in their power, and

Alissa Rumsey:

so I reference Sabrina Strings' book Fearing the Black Body, and she really lays it out so well there, the colonist roots of diet culture and how, as a lot of us have been, especially white folks in the last year, been learning a lot about and just really putting these pieces together about how our society and our culture in our country here in the US was built upon the control of black people, indigenous people, people of color, and Sabrina Strings really talks about in this book how, to establish social hierarchies where white people were at the top and where they could justify ... This was several hundred years ago, when the transatlantic slave trade was really going, where they could justify keeping black people enslaved. They created this anti-fat bias, this fat phobia. This racial scientific rhetoric linked fatness to greedy Africans, and there was also the protestant wave going through the US too, and so religious discourse, kind of saying overeating is ungodly-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's greed. It's-

Alissa Rumsey:

... and so fatness became stigmatized because it became a way that white people could separate themselves from black people. So it had nothing to do with health. This was hundreds of years before any research started around health around nutrition, and then at that point, who was doing the research in the early 1900s? White men, and already these biases against fat people and against people of color and their cultural foods were already there. So yeah. This was a huge shifting point for me was just understanding where this diet culture that we know it today came from, and it really is rooted in racism and colonialism as well as sexism.

Alissa Rumsey:

So I reference as well Naomi Wolf's book The Beauty Myth, which was actually first written in the '90s, but it's wild. It's still so relevant if you go back and read it today, and she talks about how when we look back at history, every time women gained power and advancement in society, new and more beauty and body ideals came out, and she has this amazing quote in her book where she says "The cultural fixation on thinness is not an obsession about female beauty, but an obsession about female obedience," and when you think about ... I mean, I just think about all my clients, and I have a past of dieting and body image issues myself.

Alissa Rumsey:

Just think of how much time that takes to try to diet and be thin and meal plan and all of these things. So it's taking so much time, time that you can't use elsewhere, and also, like I said when we started, you're teaching people that they can't trust themselves, and when you look back at societal control, it's easier to control groups of people when they distrust themselves. So again, why? Why do I believe this? Why do I think thin is better? Why do I think fat isn't as good? We just think it's like "Oh, because it is. Because it's unhealthy," or whatever, but no. It actually goes back so much farther, and I do think having that bigger picture view is so helpful.

Daniel Stillman:

It is, and if we're going to connect this back to you and your business ... Excuse me ... this idea of like "Well, why should a business grow exponentially? What does success look like? What does that mean? What does enoughness look like in our own life?" and I think it's so powerful to be able to step back and say "Why do I believe what I believe not a personal basis, but what was taught to me? What's the water that I'm in?" which we don't even see most of the time.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yes. Yes. Exactly. Exactly. It's like we're all swimming in this, and we've been ... Those of us born in the US ... We were born in it, and especially those of us who have a lot of body privilege. So I have a lot of body privilege. I'm white. I'm thin. I'm cis gender, heterosexual, grew up solid middle class, fairly wealth privileged. I didn't see it. I especially didn't see it because it didn't affect me on a day-to-day basis. I wasn't treated differently because of the body I'm in. So I didn't see it, but you talk to fat people ...

Alissa Rumsey:

This great book, just written, What We Don't Talk About When We Talk About Fat, and she just talks about, every single day, the amount of hate she gets just because of her body. She's not doing anything to these people, just walking down the street, and it's just like I didn't see that for so long because I don't experience that. Same thing when black people are like "Hey. We've been dealing with racism for hundreds of years," and white people are like "Wait. What? What? That's still not around anymore," and they're all like "Yes. It is." That's been the whole last year, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Alissa Rumsey:

Is like white people being like "Oh, wait," waking up to this fact, because it's not affecting us. So yeah. It really is taking a look around at this water we've been swimming in and how has it affected how we view ourselves, but also how has it affected how we view other people.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so important, as you said, to step back and to take that wide view. Speaking of taking the wide view, it's almost time for us to say goodbye. This time goes so fast. These are some of my favorite things to talk about, systems change and awareness and wondering why things are the way they are. What haven't we talked about that's important to talk about? What are some closing parting thoughts about, oh, boy, everything that we talked about?

Alissa Rumsey:

I mean, I guess I would say, if I had to sum this up, I would just say ... Because certainly, we all eat, the food piece, but even if the food piece doesn't resonate, that's what I've come to love about the work that I do is that it's so much more than just food. So anything we've talked about today can be extrapolated to all sorts of other areas of life, and I think, really, to me, it comes down to that unlearning and unpacking, like "Okay. What are the things that have been put on me by society that are not mine? This isn't me, and then who is it that I am underneath?"

Alissa Rumsey:

This was a big thing for me the last few years was kind of figuring that out, and that was actually ... I have a couple chapters about that towards the end of the book, and that was what was most fun for me to write. It's like "Okay. If I'm not this, who am I?" So really just doing that work of unlearning and unpacking, asking why, like "Why do I believe this? Why do I think this?" and really just, to me, it's just all about getting back to who you are underneath and being able to be unapologetically yourself no matter what that looks like and especially if that's not something that aligns with what our society tells us we should be or should look like or should do.

Daniel Stillman:

Wow. That's such a powerful idea and such a great place to close out our time. Where can should people are wandering around the internet and want to learn more about these things ... How can we direct them? Where should they go to learn more about all things Alissa Rumsey?

Alissa Rumsey:

So they can go to my website, which is alissarumsey.com. I also hang out a lot over on Instagram. @alissarumseyrd is my handle, and then my book Unapologetic Eating. Everything we spoke about today is in that book. So that's another great place to start as well, and that's available wherever books are sold, so Amazon. You can get it IndieBound, your local book stores, Barnes & Noble, book shop, et cetera.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Thank you so much for this time. I'm really glad we were able to unpack so many important aspects of listening, curiosity, learning, non-binary thinking. There's so much goodness. I'm really grateful that you were able to share just a little bit of your work with us today.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yeah. Of course. Thank you so much for having me on. This was really fun.

Daniel Stillman:

And scene. Oh, man. There we go.

Alissa Rumsey:

Yay.

Daniel Stillman:

That was good. This is such great stuff. Thank you so much. This is super awesome.

Alissa Rumsey:

You're welcome. You're welcome. Yeah. I feel like we got to a lot of different places. That was really cool.

Sand Talk: How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World

Season_Five_Image_Stack_TY.jpg

“Somewhere between action and reaction there is an interaction, and that’s where all the magic and fun lies” So says author Tyson Yunkaporta, in his book Sand Talk: How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World, my guest for this conversation.

Towards the end of the book, Tyson is explaining the meaning of Ngak Lokath, an Aboriginal word for the brackish water that forms in the wet season when freshwater floods into the sea...an example of what the Yolngu Tribe calls Ganma, a phenomenon of dynamic interaction when opposite forces meet and create something new…

...many pages later he picks up this thread saying:

“There are a lot of opportunities for sustainable innovation through the dialogue of Indigenous and non-Indigenous ways of living...the problem with this communication so far has been asymmetry - when power relations are so skewed that most communication is one way, there is not much opportunity for the brackish waters of hybridity to stew up something exciting.”

This is a powerful image, to have a real, two-way conversation, as equals, between modern and indigenous ways of thinking, and to allow something new to emerge from the turbid, brackish waters…

I see all conversations in this way, too: as flowing, tidal forces. We can push and pull the waters, like the moon, to exert force on it, but the conversation still sloshes around with its own inertia. Power can form, transform or deform conversations, and the historical power disparity between so-called mainstream culture and indigenous cultures has prevented a great deal of potential insight and transformation, the opportunity to live and work in accordance with a natural order, rather than against it.

Tyson’s book does an extraordinary job of grounding ideas in physical reality. Tyson offers us a thought experiment: Risk, viewed through an indigenous lens.

If you cross a river once, there’s a risk of being taken by a crocodile. The first time, the risk is minimal, but if you do it twice, the risk is greater.

Non-Aboriginal statistics and risk calculation would take the risk and multiply it - It assumes that the risk is random each time. But it’s not.

As Tyson says “The crocodile is not an abstract factor in an algorithm, but  a sentient being who observed you the first time and will be waiting for you the second time” (emphasis mine). The risk goes up exponentially.

So what? Tyson asks us to think about the global financial crisis of 2007-2009, when non-Aboriginal thinkers insured bets against losses, and then bet on the outcomes of those insurance bets. As he says,

“In a cross-cultural dialogue, we might see that the problem with this model is that every time you create a new layer of derivatives...you double the size of the system, you do not merely double the risk...you multiply it exponentially”

I learned a lot from Tyson’s book, most notably, about Yarning, the Aboriginal approach to group dialogue, knowledge creation, sharing and decision making. Also, the Indigenous notions (or lack thereof!) of safety… Aboriginal Australians don’t have a word for safety. Instead, I learned that protocols of protection are more critical than trusting an abstract system to provide safety.

Also: Yarning about Yarning is fun, informative and oh-so-meta! 

Yarning, in Aboriginal culture, is based on sharing stories and coming to decisions through mutual respect, active listening and humor. There is no talking stick in Australian Aboriginal Yarning (That’s something the Iroquois created), just an organic back-and-forth and the creation of a space without a stage to share experiences, to draw on the ground and sketch ideas out to illustrate a point.

Yarning is a rich and powerful tradition for anyone to transform their gatherings to be more deeply human. Sand Talk, the drawings on the ground that are a natural part of these conversations - roots the dialog in the land and makes the complex clear, if not simple.

Tyson’s book suggests that Indigenous thinking can save the world, and I agree. Our meetings and gatherings could use some more Sand Talk: More listening, more visuals, more mutual respect, more conversation.

In the opening quote, Tyson points to the idea that human cognition is rooted in navigation, spatial thinking and relatedness...all bound up in a place and a story. Modern living and modern work has resulted in a deep sense of disorientation and disconnection...and working online, remotely, has only made this sense even more acute.

Indigenous thinking, grounded in relatedness, rooted in and within a specific landscape, is deeply orientating and connecting. 

I believe it is a leader’s job to create a sense of orientation where there is disorientation, and connection where there is disconnection, always pointing towards the north star, or your southern cross. Especially when leading through a transformation. Change is disorientating. Moving to a new place, a new land is strange and painful. For more on that, it's worth checking out my conversation with Bree Groff about the 6 types of grief and loss in organizational change.

My conversation with Tyson is non-linear and complex...like any good yarn, it wanders a fair bit...so, I hope you’ll take the time to read his book and absorb the fullness of his message directly and understand all of the ways in which a conversation with Indigenous thinking can save the world! In fact, Tyson’s whole approach is to be complexity-conscious. The world and all of its interactions are complex - the alligator sees you coming the next time, and together, a system is formed. There are no simple solutions to complex problems, and Tyson isn’t selling a simple approach...he’s offering an embrace of complexity.

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Sand Talk: How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World

Tyson at Deakin University

Beer with Bella: Tyson Yunkaporta

Tyson Yunkaporta looking at the world through an indigenous lens

Minute 11

Cognitive diversity just means that just the amazing difference between each mind and each web of relations that people has it. It's you meet with someone like we are now and it's two universes coming together. I got annoyed about the term cognitively diverse now, and I forgot the question. You see what happens when you're in an antagonistic relation with the world, your memory doesn't work properly.

Minute 14

We have to have a narrative and spatial framework, that we agree what a door is, what a wall is, what a floor is, just so that we don't fall through the floor in the house and end up being like, I don't know, the EA for a demon in hell or something like that. Although that reality is going to be constructed by story as well. You need that. You need quite a bit of a collective, organic emergent agreement on what the reality is in order for anything to be tangible, and therefore measurable and knowable in that way. And it all starts with a story.

Minute 16

Okay. It's living within a specific landscape. So you're a neuroscientist and you're a cognitive scientist and all this sort of thing, trying to figure out the patterns of how people think. It's just most human cognition is spatial and navigational. Your memory is built on these. But all that is tied together with story. There is something in your mind that is the storyteller, that weaves together all this random information into a narrative of your life. Where you're the character in the story, and you're going through it. It gives it coherence, it gives it some structure. And so it's stories and story maps really, because these are all grounded in a relationship with place, and an awareness of your locatedness in the world. And without that awareness, your cognitive function, well it doesn't function. It's just not there.

Minute 51

It's just yarns are an entanglement. And once you're entangled with somebody, then that's it, you're always entangled. If something happens to you, then I'll feel it on some level over here. It's hard when you end up with like 100,000 people you're entangled with, but hey. But you must get that through the podcast, when you make relationships with people and you can't track them, you feel things coming through you every day, because there is an entanglement and their failures are really bound up with yours. And the things that happened to them, that are cataclysmic enough to affect their energetics. One of them goes through a breakup and bloody nearly kills himself or something like that, that's going to hit you. You're going to have a bad day, and you won't even know why.

Minute 58

But for me, with my infant point of view on that story, infant point of view, there's a lifetime of things to explore in there for me, but particularly around fixed viewpoints, and multiple pluralistic viewpoints. So if you're standing on the beach, and you're seeing that moon, the way the shine of the moon is, that's not there. It's not where you're seeing it. And somebody 20 meters further up the beach is seeing it in a different place. And as you move and walk up and down the beach, it's moving as well in relation to where you are. So you get 1000 people right up and down that coast, all reporting on the location of where the moon reflection is. Every single one of these stories will be wrong and right at the same time. 

But the aggregate story, the big meta story, the big narrative there would be the moon shines on every part of the ocean at once. Which is something that's approximating the truth. It's approximating enough of the truth that you could make some accurate predictions and models based on that.

MORE ABOUT TYSON

Tyson Yunkaporta is an academic, an arts critic, and a researcher who is a member of the Apalech Clan in far north Queensland. He carves traditional tools and weapons and also works as a senior lecturer in Indigenous Knowledges at Deakin University in Melbourne. He lives in Melbourne.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

Well, then I'll officially welcome you to the Conversation Factory. Well just thanks for being here, Tyson. It's awesome to have you.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. It's great to be here.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like we should just say, first of all, your book is electric. It crackles, it's funny, and it's super weird, so I'm really excited.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, that's one conversation didn't come off of production line. It went through the usual supply chains, but it was a very different production line. I'm assuming Conversation Factory is ironic.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Thank you for picking that up. It is tongue and cheek. I mean, it's a double entendre. We are manufacturing them in our lives, but yeah, the first version of the logo for this was like little voice bubbles coming out of a factory. And my friend was like, "So talking is pollution, is that what you're saying?" And I was like, "No." So we changed it. I mean, there's so many places to start the conversation but-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I think most discourse is pollution at the moment. As they say, there's a lot of noise and not a lot of signal in there.

Daniel Stillman:

I agree.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Most discourse is pollution, and I think that's a very apt metaphor.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, yeah. I mean, I guess my thesis is, it's worth being reflective and intentional about the way that we design our conversations.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah, that's it. And the truth isn't your main driving force, is it? Because I mean, you have an understanding that that's the truth about a lot of the discourse in the world right now, and you showed it with smoke coming out of a factory. And it's true. It's a true metaphor, and a good metaphor. But in relation with your friend who didn't like that very much, you respectfully changed it. It's not too hard to do. You're not a bloody like this unfiltered torrent of truth in the world.

Daniel Stillman:

I am not.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Truth needs to be used judiciously and with great discernment, I believe.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, there's a lot of ways to take this, but I feel like I want to set the stage a little bit. And it's traditional in your land, it's much less traditional in my land, to do a land recognition and just to acknowledge the land that you and I are both standing on. I think one of the things that as a "Westerner" that's challenging is this idea of being a custodian. I love the phrase in the land acknowledgments to acknowledge the custodians of the land, past and present. It pulls at something in my heart, and you use this idea of being a custodian of the land in your book. Can you help a non-Aboriginal person, like what it means to be a custodian of the land?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Well, look. I mean, we acknowledge country we call it here, in that way. But that's something that's done around settlers. I find when there's no settlers around, and we're in our own kind of ritual or community context is this, there's no acknowledgement of country, because you're in that. That's your context, that's your lived context, you're embedded in it. It would be weird to say, "Well, before we go and hunt this [inaudible 00:03:55], I'd like to acknowledge that..." But I mean you do that in a way like you're walking into a place where it's a different family member, or clan member or clan group who holds the story for that place. Or maybe even if you're coming in another part of your place, where your ancestors are, you're acknowledging you're calling out, but you're calling out to those ancestors.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

You're like, "Oh, people, oh. I'm just coming in here. I'm just chasing that [inaudible 00:04:31]. We're getting there." Because you call out to let them know you're there, so you don't disturb them. And there's a whole heap of stuff. I don't know. With a lot of places you might put your body smell on any of the kids or any of the children or anything that's around, or people from other groups who are with you, visitors. You put your smell on them so the ancestors know them from the smell, and they don't like... or the spirits of the place don't go, "I used to see you walking through here." Because there's little things even like there's like this little devil things that they'll be there in the long grass, in a story, and they might get a piece of that grass, a stem of grass, and spear you with it. And you'll just be like, "Ow."

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And it's just there's no mark there yet, but it's just like a sore there, and then in a couple of days there's a big ulcer there. And it kind of spreads and you end up with a big infection there, and it's, "That little one got me there." So I mean, there are entities in the landscape that are there, kind of protecting it anyway, or regulating your movement in that place. And you as a custodial species, you're not that spirit in the landscape, although you will graduate to that at the end of your life's journey. You'll be in there, and people will be calling out for you. But what you are in the meantime, is you're an organism, so you're occupying an ecological niche. And a unique ecological niche, which is somebody who looks out for the entire system and has ritual technologies and psychological technologies, and learning technologies that allow you to be able to work holistically with that system, and understand it and care for it, and all the entities of spirit and everything else within that landscape. And that's what it is.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And mostly, it's just about attention and observation, and collective group thought and action within that landscape in both ritual, but then just in how you live your lives, the patterns of your lives. Because your pattern within that landscape should do good things to it. How a lion moves through a grassland doesn't damage the grassland. Although an antelope might have a different idea, but it doesn't damage that... The way he moves through, everything he does is perfect for there.

Daniel Stillman:

It's funny. [crosstalk 00:07:16]. The system looks different according to the relational context of the entity.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah, yeah. Well, here's where perception comes through. You can get too caught up with perception. Sometimes we think we can check [inaudible 00:07:35] economic, social, political, ecological landscape, by changing perceptions, by increasing awareness. "Oh, man. So much energy goes in increasing awareness of things by changing attitudes and stuff like that. But dude, that's not it."

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So it seems like we can get to the first diagram in the book that I thought was worth starting with. I've been telling my wife the stories that I've been learning from your stories, and this idea that our great grandmothers are also our niece, that the cyclicality of time. Time is one of the most fundamental ways that I feel like inside of corporate America, inside of product design innovation. We use time and journeys to orient and to delimit, but here's the beginning of the end of the user journey. And you make it clear that time doesn't go in a straight line, and that we're not living in a closed system. And so I feel like the idea that Aboriginal thinking can change the world and save the world, this is one fundamentally different idea that time is a set of ripples that fall back on itself.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Right. That's sweet. Well, look. I mean, all I can think is my experience there recent. So just a couple of weeks ago, I got a new auntie. A new auntie was born for me, because my niece's daughter had a baby. So my niece's daughter, she's my granddaughter. You know what I mean?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And then, so my granddaughter's daughter who was born the other day, she's my auntie. Because it comes back around where your great grandchildren, that parental line sort of role for you in that kinship way, how it goes around like that.

Daniel Stillman:

And it breaks the brain. This breaks my brain. Because I think when we are talking, we talk about time and we think about linear time.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well it breaks the wheel, I guess in a Game of thrones sense.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, it does. I mean, how does that view of time change how we talk and how we gather? Because it seems like yarning is a place without time.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, I mean, it really just shifts your focus on what's important, and where your attention goes. And really, that's the only... There's so much diverse cognition. There's so much cognitive diversity in the world. And I hate it that cognitively diverse now is the term for a brain damaged person. It's annoying because I already was using that term for something else like, "Fine. Your own term. All right."

Daniel Stillman:

What does it mean to you?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Cognitive diversity just means that just the amazing difference between each mind and each web of relations that people has it. It's you meet with someone like we are now and it's two universes coming together. I got annoyed about the term cognitively diverse now, and I forgot the question. You see what happens when you're in an antagonistic relation with the world, your memory doesn't work properly.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, it connects to embodied cognition, because there's different ways of thinking. There's different ways of thinking about time and there's different ways of... I mean, you have this quote, where you're talking about composing a chapter by carving a club. That's a different way of looking at writing as carving a piece of wood.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

But I mean it's not really. I've met like, I don't know, Latvian quilt makers, and when they start telling you about their practice, it's the same thing. You got, I don't know, Japanese flower arrangers. And you got some people in some cultures who just every single task they perform throughout the day is like that, it's like what I describe in that cultural activity. When they're sweeping the floor, they're doing that. I'm probably doing that when I sweep the floor, my attention hasn't gone to that. That's what I was saying. The cognitive diversity, it's about where your attention is directed.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I mean, if it's where it's supposed to go, then like water it will find its way back, like this little conversational piece has. But I know it's going to get [inaudible 00:12:55]. But it's about where your attention is directed. And that's the only thing that makes the difference between people with their cognition. And that's what's beautiful, because that means that you can really only try to find a semi-accurate idea of what's going on by having many different points of view or many different stories. Because your unique cognition is directing you to focus on certain things. And it's where your attention goes, that that's your part of the story. That's your story that you're contributing to the aggregate of stories.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And once you're doing that together with a collective kind of meta narrative, I guess, all those stories are coming together. If you're doing that, then you're doing that collective sense making, you're... If you're not doing it, you're just in a quantum soup. You know what I mean? Because all this shit is just atoms and such. It's like electrons spinning around, and they don't make any sense.

Daniel Stillman:

Except for the stories we tell.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah, exactly. We have to have a narrative and spatial framework, that we agree what a door is, what a wall is, what a floor is, just so that we don't fall through the floor in the house and end up being like, I don't know, the EA for a demon in hell or something like that. Although that reality is going to be constructed by story as well. You need that. You need quite a bit of a collective, organic emergent agreement on what the reality is in order for anything to be tangible, and therefore measurable and knowable in that way. And it all starts with a story.

Daniel Stillman:

So let's unpack this because I've got a couple of quotes here, which I'm going to read, which I think can spring off our next conversation. Which is because I love these, yarning is a structured cultural activity that is valid, rigorous method for producing transiting and inquiring around knowledge. And there's this other quote you had that said, "All things that last must be a group effort aligned with the patterns of creation discerned from living within a specific landscape." So this idea of people coming together in a time and place to have an intentional conversation, to come to a decision. What ought we to know about ways to do that? To tell stories together, to learn together and to decide together?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, I mean, you could just backwards map from some fairly obvious stuff. That's how that works. What was the last thing you said, again?

Daniel Stillman:

Which one? The quote, or just deciding, yeah.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

The [crosstalk 00:15:55] from the book.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, yeah. All things that last must be a group effort aligned with the patterns of creation discerned from living within a specific landscape.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Okay. It's living within a specific landscape. So you're a neuroscientist and you're a cognitive scientist and all this sort of thing, trying to figure out the patterns of how people think. It's just most human cognition is spatial and navigational. Your memory is built on these. But all that is tied together with story. There is something in your mind that is the storyteller, that weaves together all this random information into a narrative of your life. Where you're the character in the story, and you're going through it. It gives it coherence, it gives it some structure. And so it's stories and story maps really, because these are all grounded in a relationship with place, and an awareness of your locatedness in the world. And without that awareness, your cognitive function, well it doesn't function. It's just not there.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I mean, there's been a lot of science which isn't really science, it's been speculation about imagining what Palaeolithic life must have been like, and it's like, "Well, I wonder what I'd be. Wait. What'd I do if I got thrown back and there was no police, and I was just able to do whatever I wanted roaming across the landscape? Well, I'd probably rape everybody." So therefore, human history has been mostly rape and murder, and at least a third of all human deaths were homicides in the Stone Age. Like, what the hell is getting that from any proper data, proper interpolation, extrapolation, anything? You're not really analyzing things properly. But if you think about what I just told you before, about that spatial and narrative relations forming the core of human cognitive capacity, and everything we think and remember and do, then I mean, it doesn't take much to reverse engineer that back, to understand what kind of lifestyle has led to that, what kind of patterning of human activity and interaction has led to that.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

You throw in the necessary kind of, your brain can't be healthy unless you're in a state of profound relatedness with other people as well, otherwise I mean, there's certain chemical things that just won't happen in your brain. You'll be like the Romanian babies, you just won't function. So you throw those things together, that relationship, that place and space or mappings and that narrative, and then you've got your cornerstones of what it is to be human, and how it is you go about occupying your ecological niche as a custodial species. It's not that hard to find it in there, that big story.

Daniel Stillman:

It seems like, one of the things that sparked me in the book as when I advise people on having better collaborative discourse, embodied cognition and also spatial cognition, like drawing on surfaces, getting the thoughts out of our head and on to other places. I know that it helps. And it seems like this is built into an Aboriginal way of discourse as well, like drawing on the floor, carving on objects. Like that is part of the discourse. It's not just all in our heads and in our voices. It's in the space. It's embedded in the space around us.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Well, you see a lot of research out there that's sort of, I don't know, framing this as kind of supersizing the mind. Almost like this is a hack, like you found a hack in our biology that you can exploit and actually improve the human mind to more than what it's ever been before. Like, "Oh, we can do this embodiment stuff. We can do distributed cognition. This is a technology we're inventing." And it's like, "Really?" I mean, it's not. It's your natural cognition, your actual patterning of thought ancestrally that you've just lost over the last century or so. And it hasn't been long, it's mostly industrial civilization that's done it that's to remove that capacity for embodiment.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I mean, read any diary from a century ago, and the way people, normal people, referring to their tools, in their sewing with a knee, sewing with an O, etc. All of that. Whatever their tools were, the way they refer to that and their relation with the place and with each other, and everything else, you can see it was a very different way of thinking about things, and some very irregular spelling.

Daniel Stillman:

People were a little bit more flexible with their spelling, especially when they got paid by the letter.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. That's it.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, let's talk about stories, because the idea of a meta-yarn. It seems like gathering together with a group of people, where there's no stage or audience, there's no inside or outside of the circle. And what we're doing is we're exchanging stories. And it sounds like in a way, we're using other people's brains to test our stories. It's like I'm telling my story of how I see the universe, and then you tell. And then it sort of bounces off. The idea of including and respecting all points of view, it does not seem like it's not a crazy idea, but but it's rare nevertheless.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Well, look any organic tensions that might exist between those stories and different versions of truth, I mean, they would only serve to strengthen each other, strengthen the stories. The idea is not a rivalrous dynamic, where you're seeking to conquer the other story, or anything like that. You can have competing truths and even contradictions sitting quite comfortably alongside each other. I mean, it's funny, but that particular hack, that particular natural hack and that ability to know things as completely true, that are contradicting each other at the same time, and that has recently been exploited with not just disinformation, but more the kind of cults that have arisen out of disinformation. So there are kind of cultish behaviors that have happened with things like QAnon and things like that. People are able to believe completely like... I mean, the dates past and there's people who still believe in the storm. They still believe the prophecies and all that sort of stuff.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm sketching some... I'm trying to get good at your... When I saw this I first thought this was what my dad used to tell me that you have two ears and one mouth, but it's two people around a space telling stories.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. But that's a good message too from your dad, and that's in there. That's in that one that I've got there. That's the idea of wisdom being about having a big ear. This Aboriginal language is where big ear literally means wise. And most of the words for cognition, for deep understanding, knowledge acquisition, transmission, they all involve phrases about the ear or hearing. Even things like intelligence. The word for a person who would today be referred to as cognitively diverse, I guess is [inaudible 00:24:26] in my family's language. And [inaudible 00:24:32] just means deaf. So there's this idea that you could have such profound brain damage that your inability to have executive function is a direct connection to your incapacity to hear.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

So whether you're mechanically deaf or not, that's not the point. So a really stubborn and narcissistic person, or a sociopath would also be referred to as [inaudible 00:25:02]? It's just that that's a deaf person. That's a person who can't hear. But then it's funny because I mean an actual hearing impaired person who's really astute and has amazing cognitive skills would not be referred to in that way. You'd have to be referred to otherwise, I guess.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm trying to connect this, and this may be wrong. But this drawing of... I mean, what I took from this was the real, the land and the metaphor, maybe the difference between story and practice. Because we're talking about like yeah, there's I have my story, you have your story, QAnon has their story, and then there's the flat earthers have their story. And we're living in a moment where it's terrifying that people can have their own story for some people, and liberating for others.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Really, that's just showing a feedback loop. And I guess that's a meta story, like between heaven and earth kind of thing. It's just basically showing the feedback, the narrative feedback loop between reality and story, and then back into reality again, the way that feeds back in in this sort of endless cycle. It is a feedback loop. And it's damaging to break that loop and just sit in an abstract space. Just to sit in theory, or spirit or something like that. But then it's also bad to just be sitting in a tangible reality and go, "Oh, just thought is real." You can't do that. You got to have that flow going around.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

But also, I mean, that can be hijacked by bad metaphors. You can have feedback loops that, like what I mentioned before, with QAnon, is this amazing, somebody's tinkered that system. Somebody has sort of used that feedback loop that I just mentioned as a hack to create this sort of self-sustaining auto poetic system that just keeps generating new narratives that have an immediate impact in the world. Someone will go and open fire on these people over here or bloody start building gallows. Just like, immediate effect. So that's that feedback loop in motion. It's an amazing thing about creation and part of our role as a custodial species. But I tell you, you got bad actors misusing it and it's more devastating than a nuclear bomb. Story is powerful. And there's good story and bad story. Bad story will kill you, and good story will heal you. And that's it.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, so I want to unpack that because you talk about narcissists in the book a fair bunch which I love. When we're in this, we're trying to create a space for real, mutual respect, silence, multiple overlapping stories. Narcissists can take advantage of that. So what is the way? What is an indigenous way of dealing with assholes? What are we to do with people who use those systems to-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

First of all, to recognize that everyone's an asshole from time to time. I don't know. This is the first time I'm saying this, but I feel like you're worthy of this little Easter egg, this little cheat code. But the way I wrote that bit about the narcissism, it was like I wanted to see how many people would be going, "Yes. Yes, that's true. These fucking narcissists." And when I'm writing it, I'm like, "Okay." So when people talk back to me about this, if they're like punching in the air and high fiving over there, then they are narcissists. So if that gave you like a massive thrill to read, then you're a narcissist. But I only know that because it gave me a massive thrill to write it and expose to me the absolute.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I know I'm a narcissist, but I didn't know how bad it was. It's pretty fucking bad. And the act of writing that and just the dopamine hit I got off saying it, that just made me go, "All right. Okay. There's a lot going on here." And that makes you dig deep into the stories and go, "Okay. Well, there's a reason for this. There's a seed of narcissism in everybody." And this great and revered being, ancestral being of the Emu, this is a revered entity. But in a lot of our stories, it's the harbinger of narcissism coming into creation. But it's a revered entity. So it just means that you have to have an asshole from time to time, otherwise, your institutions, your ways will just keep replicating in the same way over and over. And then entropy will ensue. You need mutations.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And your narcissists help you mutate a little bit, because you've got to really evolve some very adaptive mutations to be able to survive them, and to be able to contain them. And it's just basically you have to have a sustainable system that's in place that can deal with for all eternity when the narcissism arises, in yourself and in others around you. And if you've got that, then you've got something that allows for a bit.

Daniel Stillman:

So this is what's really interesting about this, because I noticed you talk about this a couple of times. You love the outsider narrative. And I think there's a reason. If you look, going back to the first idea of there's no closed system here, this is an infinite system. I want to see if I can loop this back because often people ask me like, "How do I deal with difficult people and challenging stakeholders?" And I say, "Well, they're not difficult people, there's difficult behaviors, or they're just expressing an unmet need. They may be speaking for something that needs to be heard in the system."

Daniel Stillman:

And it seems like there's something fundamental about stepping back and looking at a larger circle and saying, "Well, what's good about this? What are they protecting? What are they standing for?" Rather than just excluding them and being like, "You're being a narcissist. Stop being a narcissist. We all want to have this inclusive conversation, but you're excluded from our inclusive conversation." But this is really hard to do. People have a hard time welcoming dissent and welcoming difficulty. What is it about the yarning perspective that allows that to be included?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I think there's better people than me to answer that question. But what is it about it specifically? I guess, mostly it's about our patterning as people who are embedded within a landscape and within an ecology, and within a lore, which is a living substance in the land, a lore which is running through the land all the time, and is understood. And the pattern of that lore is fractalized from your tiniest, tiniest relationship. And even before that, it's fractalized from the sort of tunis within you, as your first relation almost. And then that pattern is replicated out through all of your relations and webs of relations. So in the same way as the governance of just a pair of people that comes out to groups, and it's always something that demands the balance of autonomy and collectivism over time.

Daniel Stillman:

Is that the tunis? Is that what you mean when you say the tunis of us?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. There is that struggle between the individual and the group, which is just one of those human drama things. I guess in western literature, it's one of those unsolvable, who knows kind of thing. But at least in Australian Aboriginal culture, I can assert that that's something that's been resolved. In that you don't have to come down on one side or the other. There is a lore in the land that makes sure they're balanced, and that both of those two things are happening at once. And that then each collective in itself is an autonomous collective that is syndicated with other collectives. And then they form groups, which are autonomous, which are then syndicated with larger groups. So you see what I mean about the fractal structure?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And that ends up covering the whole continent, that ends up going up into Asia, as you're trading up into Asia there. So it's a governance system that comes down from it. It's exactly the same in the parts as in the hall. And that's how you manage to get a New Guinea that has the richest linguistic and cultural diversity on the planet in quite a small landmass. And so it's just basically, you just reverse engineer that. How the hell would you have a tiny place with more languages than anyone's got on the planet?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And you reverse engineer that, where you know there's no imperialism going on there. You know there's no large scale warfare going on there. You also know there has to be some kind of system whereby women are really honored and have agency and taken care of, because nothing can... No community can survive that doesn't do that. No community can survive longer than 1000 years with mistreating women. So you know there's a whole heap of different stuff that you can not out logically or you can actually go and talk to the people as well.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to roll back to, there's this, I think it was Whitman who said, "I contain multitudes." This idea that you've got parts that you're acknowledging and accepting. I had this quote here, the Aboriginal pronouns. Often in facilitation, we talk about me time and we time and balancing them. And I know that it transforms a conversation to allow some silent thinking time. That it can't all just be talking nonstop, there has to be introspection, and there has to be quiet. And it blew my mind that there was this, I, myself, we too, us too, we but not others, we all together, to acknowledge like a much greater diversity of defining a collective. It seems like that would have... It's a non-binary view of a collective of how we create a collective. I don't even know what my question is there. It seems like in the process of a group dialoguing and trying to come to an agreement, there's a lot of fluidity.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, you can see the structure of that fractal that I was talking about before, you can see it there as you just go through the conjugation. I guess, as you're going through those pronouns, and you're seeing that fractal pattern there. Right there from me to us, to us but not them, all of us, us belonging to him, us belonging to them. It's like all your relations are encoded in how you describe yourself. And that is the focus of the [inaudible 00:37:40] mission. Your language directs you to that. It doesn't direct us to structure our society, not a society, but to structure the relations.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Gender is not one of the broad categories to do that, which is interesting. In my home language anyway, that there's no separate pronouns for he and she, him and her. That's just [inaudible 00:38:09]. So it's like everybody, regardless of gender has the same pronoun to refer to them personally. Which I mean, you think about where the attention goes. And I mean, there are languages like your romance languages, like Spanish, Portuguese, French, all these ones. You can't speak them. You can't say any word without referencing its gender. That is the most important category, relational category. That is the most important division. So much so that it has to go into every single object in the universe, has to be masculine and feminine. It's, "Wow." So speaking that language, where is your cognition directed?

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, maybe this is the wrong question to ask, but I feel like in meeting rooms all across the world, people... And one of my primary concerns is how does a group of people come to a decision? And this me greater than all of you, is often the way that these decisions are made. One person says, "This is the way," and yet at some point, a group of people has to stop yarning and take an action, come out of metaphor and go into the real. I mean, it's like the question of like, "In what ways can you advise the world on making better organic out of that multiverse to the choice?" So I think it puzzles me sometimes.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I don't know. It's usually in the collective mind, it'll direct you to something that you couldn't otherwise see. It's seldom going to be one of the stories coming out on top and being, "No, that one's the most right, or the most likely to give us the best outcome, so we're going to go with that." And it's seldom about a consensus that is a compromise. It's like, "All right. We'll do a little bit of everyone's, and just cobble together just this monstrous, ridiculous, ineffective solution as well." It's in a way there's something a bit more magical about it. It's about all the stories come together, and, "Hmm. Hmm. Yeah, understood. Respected." And then it's like something else comes out of that.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And often, this will need the guidance and authority of elders, who will listen to everybody's input, but they're the ones with experience and with that highly focused skill of observation, to even be able to see the patterns and flows of spirit and knowledge in that situation, and all the rest. And everybody is getting together with a solution for, I don't know, how to rescue an animal that's trapped, maybe. And everybody's got a different story about that. And there's somebody who has that animals, that taught them and they've got a story for that. And there's somebody who has some tools that they reckon they could use to help untrap that animal. There's a whole heap of story goes around.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Everybody would talk about it, but then, I guess the elders job would be to look at, it would be in the aggregate of those stories. Which it can happen without an elder, but I mean, it's really good to have that relational technology of that big mind, sort of helping to arrange your meta narrative. Because they have that cultural authority and a deep time authority, which where it becomes more than just the people in the circle, but every person circle, the ancestors going back time out of memory, that that elder knows. And there's an aggregate of a lot of stories of wisdom and experience.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And the emergent solution might be completely different from any story that elder has, or any story that anybody that has. It might be, "You know what? That animal is supposed to die." And there's a tiny part of everybody's story and everybody's opinion, that ends up contributing to that. There's a clue in everyone's story that leads to the big conclusion that that animal is supposed to die. I think after it's dead, if we cut that animal open, we might find that we find something terrible in its belly, and we'll need to dispose of it carefully. There'll be something like that [inaudible 00:43:22]. That wasn't a very good... I'm usually better at cross-cultural sort of... That's why that makes sense to me [crosstalk 00:43:31].

Daniel Stillman:

No. It makes sense to me too.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

There's still a lot of people here, but-

Daniel Stillman:

Well, it's a crisis moment.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

See, I'm supposed to be... I had an elder the other day tell me my role in the world. As you said that I'm a settler whisperer, that I can come up with good metaphors to translate ideas [crosstalk 00:43:53].

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I'll tell you what. I talk about this is that sometimes something that's an emergency isn't an emergency, something that we're all up in arms about, maybe sometimes inaction is sometimes the best action. And what I heard from this is, in my mental model, there is a whole spectrum of conversations that are happening, potentially at once. There's each person's conversation with what they think, what they see. My conversation with your story, the group listening to all of them and there's much bigger... And what seems the value of respect for an elder's view, the longer time horizon, the cultural story. So all of these are, like the first diagram, the first lore, the ripples of circles coming outward, those are circles of conversation to consider. And the wagon is, we don't know.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

That's it. That's it. I think any knowledge tradition that is not a process, that is not a method of inquiry, it's not going to last. If that makes any sense.

Daniel Stillman:

Say more about that. Let's talk about the method of inquiry.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, this way where you end up with dogma and ideology and things like that, you end up with fixed bodies of knowledge, where there's these principles that are unassailable, and everything in the universe must be made to fit them, then that's ridiculous. Your knowledge system must be more than a collection of content. You can't have that. You can't have a Codex. You can't have a biblio. You can't have something that he is the rules. You just can't have it. It has to be a process. Your knowledge system has to be a process-oriented thing rather than a content-oriented thing. Once it becomes fixed content, it can only destroy itself and lots of other things as well. It has to be a method of inquiry not a body of information.

Daniel Stillman:

And I feel like, I'm like, "Where did I put that sticky note?" It's here someplace. Because you talk about discovery and synthesis. I was reading and I was like, "This sounds like design thinking to me." It's a process of digesting complexity but not into simplicity. It's a process of digesting complexity into complexity.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. And there isn't a set of steps that you can follow as an individual to do that. It's something that has to emerge collectively, organically and dramatically.

Daniel Stillman:

Euthydemus. I had to Google that when you used it. It makes perfect sense.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Yeah. I love it because it for me, I think of biotic, the term biotic. People are usually, it's pretty easy to jump from there to understand what emergence is, but they struggle if you say demotic. They know demos means human, but they trouble-

Daniel Stillman:

It sounds too much like demon.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

So think about how you feel about the word biotic. Okay. Now look, demotic there. That one. Our thing is patented on that. It follows the pattern, so that's the same thing. So there's the demotic. Can you see how the emergence would happen there? It's like, "Oh. Yes, I can."

Daniel Stillman:

And it's almost like demotic and biotic, I think in a Western mind, we'd put them in opposition. But maybe they're in conversation, their intention when you're thinking about forming a world.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, I mean, at the very least unified worldview, you have to think of them as being a stack in a stack on the landscape, an evolutionary stack. And I mean, the deeper you go into the layer, the more biotic you're going to get with the membranes closer to the top of the layer around things you can tinker with like economies and value systems. And disruptive innovation would be in this layer up here and all that sort of thing. I don't know. The deeper you go in the stack, you got to protect that though, because once you mess with things at the bottom, the whole Jenga tower falls.

Daniel Stillman:

This is why we have to slow down and pay close attention, and listen.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Yeah. But for me, it's not a stack. For me, it's not a stack. There aren't membranes. It's one thing. For me, there's no separation between the ecology and the economy, the governance system, anything else, culture.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to respect your time, Tyson and I'm really grateful for this. I had a quote here from the beginning of the book, where you talk about what sharing this knowledge has cost you and how it's... I appreciate your time and you holding space to share these ideas because I know they're important.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Well, thanks, man. I don't know if that was a question.

Daniel Stillman:

No, no. That was just a thank you.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Thanks, man.

Daniel Stillman:

The question is like, what haven't I asked you about yarning that I should have asked you? Is there anything that... What's left unsaid?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. I don't know. I don't know. I think if it doesn't come out, then it doesn't come out. That's the other thing, you can't force it. You can't force the yarn. This year, this might be a yarn that takes us 12 years to finish.

Daniel Stillman:

That would be epic.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. I mean, we might find ourself in the same refugee detention facility one day for climate refugees, and we'll sit down and finish it there.

Daniel Stillman:

It's possible.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I might call you next week and go, "Oh. Something else."

Daniel Stillman:

Please do.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

"Tell me about this." You know what I mean? It's just yarns are an entanglement. And once you're entangled with somebody, then that's it, you're always entangled. If something happens to you, then I'll feel it on some level over here. It's hard when you end up with like 100,000 people you're entangled with, but hey. But you must get that through the podcast, when you make relationships with people and you can't track them, you feel things coming through you every day, because there is an entanglement and their failures are really bound up with yours. And the things that happened to them, that are cataclysmic enough to affect their energetics. One of them goes through a breakup and bloody nearly kills himself or something like that, that's going to hit you. You're going to have a bad day, and you won't even know why.

Daniel Stillman:

That is what happens, actually.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Then you could just have that dream, have that dream about, "I need to call that person." Or, "What was the fellow's name? I need to get back and talk to him about aspects."

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I think talking is maybe the most fundamental thing that we have, and that we do. And I guess, it's impossible to summarize it all, but what do you want us to know about how the world ought to be talking differently than we are today?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

What do you want to know? Man, I don't know. You kind of have an agenda. So you kind of have an agenda. If I had like a 10 point plan or something like that, I'm like, "Oh. People need to start doing this and this and this." And then I try and get followers and then [crosstalk 00:53:19].

Daniel Stillman:

But not having the agenda is actually a tremendously profound non-agenda agenda.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

That becomes a thing. And that's in the world. It's like you go, "People don't have an agenda. Agenda item number one, don't have an agenda. Agenda item number two, don't have an agenda. Oh, oh, oh. We're fight clubbing this." And it's just like, everything is branded. Everything's like that. Everything's ruined. So I try and wrestle with that. So like in the book, every now and then, I know there's kind of an Easter egg thing I do in there where I sort of set something up, like it might be a framework.

Daniel Stillman:

And then you destroy it five pages later.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And then like, "No." Then I just sort of undermine it. And then it's like, "Oh. So that's not a thing. What is it? Is it a thing? I don't know. I'm looking for the thing here. Can I have a thing?"

Daniel Stillman:

I was looking for the story about the moon sisters. I have a note about it, about not having a fixed perspective. And I couldn't find it. It's like you changed it. It's not in the book anymore. I looked through it like twice and I couldn't find it. You're playing tricks on me.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Isn't that cool? Look, maybe I didn't mention it in the book, but I've mentioned it in yarn. I think around the place, so you might have heard it somewhere.

Daniel Stillman:

Maybe.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Or maybe it was just coming up between the lines there somehow.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, since we're talking about not having-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

[crosstalk 00:54:53] fixed perspective.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, I mean, I can't remember the story now. I just took a note and I set to ask... It was like my second point.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I was telling a story to my four-year-old daughter for the first time last night. But yes these two sisters who are after a bonefish. A bonefish is a beautiful big fish. And it's weird because it's got a dotted line like where to cut it.

Daniel Stillman:

That's handy.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I guess the best thing is to have the belly and there's a perfect spot where you can cut it, where you get the entire and it just ends up opening out to a plate of meat. You just chuck it on the coals. It's amazing. I love it. But you can only catch him at night. You can't catch him in the daytime, they only feed at night and they're attracted to light. So the moon sisters were having a bark canoe at nighttime, and they had soft tea tree bark torches smashed at the ends, for the fire to bring them up. And they were spearing big bonefish, bringing them in the canoe. And the canoe was full, like really full, and they were about to come back in, but then one of them said, "There's another. There's a really big one out there. Let's go after that."

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And so then, "All right. We'll have to go quick because it's time to go back. We don't want to like..." So they're heading for that big white shape on the water, but it's like, "We nearly had it. We nearly had it." But of course it moves. It keeps moving. And so in chasing that illusion of the full moon shining on the ocean, they fell into that trap of that illusion. And so the Moon Man had them then. Because in the southern hemisphere, the moon is male. I know where you are, it's probably female. A female thing and the sun is a man, a bold god of death kind of thing. But no, it's like the moon is male and the sun is female in the southern hemisphere.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

So anyway, the Moon Man abducted those sisters, and took them up. And so when you look anywhere where you are in the world, you look up there and you'll see two shadows. There's one like that that is on the top half coming down the side and another one is slightly lower. You see the two shadows in the moon, that's the two moon sisters. And that's a story about being careful of illusion of a fixed viewpoint. I mean, that's one interpretation. There's a lot more to that story, but I can't tell it because I'm not one of them older people who can hold that story. I can just kind of report parts of it.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

But for me, with my infant point of view on that story, infant point of view, there's a lifetime of things to explore in there for me, but particularly around fixed viewpoints, and multiple pluralistic viewpoints. So if you're standing on the beach, and you're seeing that moon, the way the shine of the moon is, that's not there. It's not where you're seeing it. And somebody 20 meters further up the beach is seeing it in a different place. And as you move and walk up and down the beach, it's moving as well in relation to where you are. So you get 1000 people right up and down that coast, all reporting on the location of where the moon reflection is. Every single one of these stories will be wrong and right at the same time.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

But the aggregate story, the big meta story, the big narrative there would be the moon shines on every part of the ocean at once. Which is something that's approximating the truth. It's approximating enough of the truth that you could make some accurate predictions and models based on that. And that's good enough for me. There are higher levels of that story that go into much deeper stuff where you could perform a lot more stuff, but I think there's enough on that for me to work on, just that level of the story for a lifetime.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I think that's wonderful. It says so much about what it is to sit in a circle and talk with other people about what is. And to have a point of view of respect for everybody's perspective.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah, exactly. Like, "No. The moon is fricking, the reflection is there. I can see it. Are you insane?" A person 20 meters away, "It's there. This person wants to ruin the world."

Daniel Stillman:

How dare they say the moon is 20 meters to the left? That is scorched earth.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Existential threat, this person's point of view. Anyway. God, things are funny. I'm terrified to talk to Americans at the moment. [inaudible 01:00:06].

Daniel Stillman:

America is the best something. I'm not sure what it is but that's another story for another time.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. You just never know what you're going to get. You never know when someone's just going to lose their fricking mind at you.

Daniel Stillman:

But the deescalation...

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I've had to shut down a couple of things.

Daniel Stillman:

Really?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Weirdos and their real extreme reaction.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, some white people have a hard time imagining that they don't know everything about everything, because it's supposed to be what it's all about.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Well, that's their job.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. And I think what's really challenging is, you're challenging us, all of us to sit with not knowing.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

But without having to worry about the most important thing about that message is that you're evil. You know what I mean? It's got to be a bit funny, and it's got to be establishing relationships. If it's boring or angry, and about establishing barriers and boundaries between people, then I find that's not as productive.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I think those people must not have-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

[crosstalk 01:01:45] be quite unproductive.

Daniel Stillman:

I think those people must not have actually read your book. Because I think-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

It's hard talking to people who haven't. There was one guy in this event. This guy hadn't read it and he just lost his mind. He was so angry. He was traumatized. He wrapped himself in a blanket and was rocking back and forth kind of thing. And just piping in the comments in all caps. And then I'm muting his mic and just screaming. It was full on, man.

Daniel Stillman:

That guy just needs to be held, I'm presuming.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Well, I mean he thought he was helping me I guess with my problematic stuff. And maybe he did help me, who knows? Because I can't get that image out of my mind. I've been rocking back and forth, and it makes me laugh about five times a day and that was months ago.

Daniel Stillman:

What do you do with that?

Tyson Yunkaporta:

He brought a bit of joy into in my life. I just laugh about it. But it's also feedback on like... because you come up with little bits you think are funny, and just about figuring out as autistic spectrum kind of guy how to try and read a context in a room to see if something was going to land.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. From 15,000 miles away. It's tough.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. Yeah. I was just doing this whole sort of joke about how for some reason white women are public enemy number one at the moment, and it's like just as feminism was sort of starting to land and become accepted. Now suddenly it's like, white women are getting the blame for everything and just getting smashed left, right and center. And they're being so patient. And I just said, "You've got to watch it though, because they can get angry." Usually at the moment, I mean all of the white females I know, at the moment when you're mansplaining and criticizing them and telling them everything that's wrong with them, if they go really quiet and they're agreeing with you, that's a bad sign.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

If you're a man who is seeing that signal and going, "Oh, good. She's listening." That's a bad idea. And so I was like, I don't know. And then I went, "Just imagine this whole sort of scene of all these ladies just losing it at the same time." And Greg and I grabbing a Glock and running out of the street. Just telling people, "Call me Karen again. Call me Karen again, motherfucker." Anyway, and I'm just like, I don't know, I'm just running with this ridiculous scenario that's offensive on so many levels. You can edit it out.

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

And just my, I don't know, my riffing on that, "Call me Becky. Say it." I was just, I don't know. I thought I was lightening the mood because it was [inaudible 01:05:21] it just catastrophized these hundreds of people. They were traumatized by it. And so that was good feedback for me. I mean, I could tell they were being nice about it. But I mean, it was you could see it upset them. And then because I was sort of going, it was like only a few days after the storming of the Capitol.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I was saying, "See. That was all ladies. They're at the front. They're the ones who organized. Men are useless. All they did was rub their poo on the wall. The women were in there and they were stealing Nancy Pelosi's computer, and looking for dudes to hang on the gallows they made at the front. They get shot in the face. They're right there. Hold the line, the center must hold." That was all girls doing that. Anyway, so I'm just riffing on that, and I'm just digging myself deeper and deeper. And I'm on Zoom and just not reading the room. But anyway, it just...

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, humor is a really important component of yarning in indigenous cultures, and you were trying to use humor for a purpose. That purpose backfired and I mean, that happens. I found that the easiest thing to make fun of is myself. That's always the safe thing to use humor for. I think you do that plenty.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I think that's great, but I'm running out of material. Only so many times I can accuse myself of having a small penis before people don't want to hear it anymore.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I think that's probably our sign to wrap up.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

You got it there.

Daniel Stillman:

I guess the final thing is, I mean everyone, I think should read your book. Is there any other place you would like to direct people on the internet to learn about more things about you? Because I know you do research and you teach and stuff.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I'm not here to promote anything. I'm just interested in the arts. I'm not really into branding, you probably got that impression. Although I wouldn't mind getting canceled, and so maybe this episode will contribute.

Daniel Stillman:

I'll do what I can, and I'm not that big of a deal so I can't-

Tyson Yunkaporta:

I want to be able to buy a house before I die sometime in the next couple of decades that my kids can live in when they grow up. And I think the quickest way to sell a whole heap of books is to get canceled.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh, because people will hate read your book.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

No, but all the people who hate, people who hate like...

Daniel Stillman:

oh, reverse hate reading your book.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

[crosstalk 01:08:22], they are only 15% of the population. But it seems like most of the people are horrendous dudes who will pretty much just read anything that a terrible person has written, or anything that somebody who is awful. So anyway, [crosstalk 01:08:39].

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, if they read it, they might actually learn something.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

... get canceled and sell 6 million books, and just buy a big mob of my family's land back, and just pretty much settle into a good life down the track, and have somewhere for my kids to go where they're not going to get shot or bulldozed.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I'll see what I can do. I don't think there's enough material in here to get you properly canceled.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

God dammit. All right.

Daniel Stillman:

We'll just have to do another... I don't think you get canceled on purpose. Because people can tell when you don't really mean it.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Because it's all about the intent, isn't it?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

All right. I'm going to have to work on my evil intentions. Thanks for the tip.

Daniel Stillman:

You got it, brother. I'm looking out for you.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

All right, man. I'm going to go and look after these babies.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Thank you so much for the time and for sharing these ideas, Tyson. I really appreciate it.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Yeah. No worries.

Daniel Stillman:

Good on you.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Thank you, man. See you later.

Daniel Stillman:

Take care.

Tyson Yunkaporta:

Bye.

The Leader you want to be

Season_Five_Image_Stack_AJS.jpg

For almost two decades, Amy Jen Su has partnered with investment professionals, CEOs, and executives to sustain and increase their leadership effectiveness as they drive organizational change and transformation. She is the author of the Harvard Business Review Press book, The Leader You Want to Be: Five Essential Principles to Bringing Out Your Best Self – Every Day.

Amy and I dive deep on leadership, and how who you are as a person affects the organization you're leading, for better or worse. This means that self-leadership and mindfulness are essential for leaders, and we unpack Amy’s approaches to these dimensions of leadership. 

This episode is a must-listen for anyone who wants to strengthen their center and be a more balanced, more effective leader. And as Amy says in the opening quote, there is no one way for everyone to lead...we each need to find our own north star and our own thread to follow in the story of our own leadership development.

Cultivating Our Inner Conversation

One insight that I was so glad to have Amy “yes and '' is my feeling about the deep importance of our inner conversation - the parts of ourselves that cheer and check us. As Amy says, 

“some of these voices no longer serve us, and in fact disempower us”

She suggests that we stay updated with our current selves, and know when it's time to let go of voices that no longer serve us.

Cultivating an outer conversation: Finding mentors and supporters

Amy advises us to consider:

“who are (your) cheerleaders and safe harbors (and how can you build) a network of support that can also live life with us and ride alongside us as leaders and as people.”

She suggests that you find and recruit folks like the 

“sausage maker, the accountability buddy, the mirror, the cheerleader, the safe harbor, the helicopter”

People who you feel safe sharing the nitty-gritty with, folks who keep you accountable to your goals, people who help you see yourself as you are, who cheer you on, who can be a safe harbor, and people who can pull you out of the dumps when you are down.

It’s hard to find that all in one person. For many, their spouses serve too many of those roles! Finding a coach like Amy or myself can help you maintain a regular cadence of attention to these modes of reflection and growth and get to your North Star...and find your next star, too.

Mindfulness is Key. But it’s not about feeling good.

Amy and I talk about how mindfulness is very popular right now, but often not considered in its full context. Amy points out that:

“I think one of the misnomers about mindfulness though is that somehow if you start meditating or having a mindfulness practice you're going to feel these wonderful happiness mood states all the time... It's getting to the truth, whether that's a painful emotion or a positive emotion, you're tuning into what reality is... Mindfulness... with razor clarity, (help you) actually come to reality.”

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Amy Jen at Paravis Partners

Amy Jen’s Books:
Own the Room
The Leader You Want to Be

Thich Nhat Hanh: "How do I stay in the present moment when it feels unbearable?"

Mary Oliver’s Wild Geese:

You do not have to be good.
You do not have to walk on your knees
for a hundred miles through the desert repenting.
You only have to let the soft animal of your body
love what it loves.

Mentioned Episodes: 
Cameron Yarbrough on Scaling Leadership Development
Eve Rodsky on A Game Changing Solution to Gender Inequality

Key Quotes:

Minute 4

I think we all underestimate the wisdom that does exist in our experiences to date, within our bodies, within our knowledge base, and certainly there's great wisdom in those who work with us, which is why 360 feedback and other forms of feedback can be powerful and sort of the combination of both things, the willingness to hold up the mirror to ourselves and to ask others to hold up the mirror can be the catalyst for propelling us into greater forms of expansion and growth.

Minute 6

I'm stunned by some of the folks that I work with who are making a phenomenal difference in their organizations, for their families and for their communities, and how hard they are on themselves and that when we start a new role or we find ourselves in change, somehow we assume the clock goes back to zero. It absolutely doesn't. So there's something in Mary Oliver's work and I think that poem in particular that reminds us of the importance of self compassion, and it's amazing how we speak to ourselves in ways we would never speak to a friend or a loved one. So I think that poem reminds us to say, in the way that you would say to your best friend, with kindness, walking them out of a tough day, why don't we speak to ourselves that way?

Minute 8

So in part of all this conversation we're having around how do you stay updated to yourself, it's also knowing when it's time to let go of voices that no longer serve us, and in fact disempower us, and then how do we along the way, in coming to understand who you are today, who are the cheerleaders and safe harbors and the really beautiful network of support that can also live life with us and ride alongside us as leaders and as people.

Minute 12

I think often when we feel that we're in the face of judgment, we hold ourselves back or we don't feel that we can speak freely, so being able to be witness to another person's wonderful process, to sit in the presence of another person's thoughts and brainstorms and creative expression that's flowing through them, I know from myself personally, and I wonder if you feel this way, it just feels like the greatest honor.

Minute 18

So even in Own The Room, as you mentioned, my first book, the inherent paradox we were exploring was how do you have a voice for yourself and voice for others, and that the most effective leaders both have cultivated an ability to bring their own voice, opinion, point of view, decision making, to the table, as much as they've cultivated the ability and the access to know when it's time to listen and to ask questions and to hold multiple perspectives, and that being in the zone is kind of this middle path of that in a conversation we're being fluid to both those things and when we're too anchored in just one, if I was a leader only having a voice for myself, you might experience me as a bull in the china shop, or unwilling to listen or interrupting, as much as if I'm only listening and asking questions, someone might question my leadership ability.

Minute 22

In that case, as a leader, let's say suddenly now your role does demand that you do more all hands, and it's not your favorite thing. So just recognizing, my hope, number one, is that you're in a role that speaks to 80% of what comes natural or to your strengths but there's always going to be 20% of any role, I think, that forces us to oscillate out of our comfort zone, but it's an important part of the mandate. So in the case of the leader who may not love doing an all hands, perhaps we would tap into the values they feel towards making sure that they're transparent with their organization, that they do care about employee engagement, and that their communications from a one to many perspective is really critical. So for that leader, helping them get prepared for that moment so that they can increase their comfort, and then making sure maybe it's after the all hands that they block an hour after the event to make sure they grab a little time back to themselves to recharge the battery.

Minute 24

I think the faulty assumption that we, for high stakes situations or conversations, that winging it is the way to go. I think there's a point where I often will say to a leader, "Hey, your job now requires a different influence where the percentage of time you once spent on the slides versus the percentage of time you are now going to allocate to prepare for delivery has to change. "

Minute 25

I often advise my clients, "Hey at the start of your week, take a look at your Outlook Calendar Monday through Friday, it's not that you're going to be able to prep for every meeting, it's not realistic, but pick the two that really make a difference to priorities, or could really make a difference to employee morale or your team's morale. Or it's a really difficult conversation, perhaps it's a feedback conversation and you want to both get your message across but honor the dignity of the other person, those do require some preparation time and be thoughtful and, to the word you used, Daniel, planful, mindful, intentional.

Minute 26

Mindfulness is important to me, I know it's a popular item and topic these days, for good reason. Everything we're talking about here, the tuning into oneself, the bringing the head and the body back together in any moment, the head heart body, and saying, "Wait, what's actually in front of me and going on?" I think one of the misnomers about mindfulness though is that somehow if you start meditating or having a mindfulness practice you're going to feel these wonderful happiness mood states all the time.

And in fact, I have found it's the opposite. It's getting to the truth, whether that's a painful emotion or a positive emotion, you're tuning into what really reality is so that then you could be making better choices or creating the action plan necessary. So oftentimes we either want to run away from something, or run towards something. Mindfulness I think brings us to, with razor clarity, actually let's come to reality.

Minute 31

We all have results we need to deliver and priorities to make and teams to lead and so in the everyday of what we do of our doing, it's important to say how do I optimize my productivity and my efficiency as much as it is, to your point, around the conversation you just had with that CEO, where does doing and being come together, and again, who we are as people and the motivations that guide our actions can have tremendous impact on our organizations and culture.

Minute 32

In higher orders of leadership, so much of the job becomes you're the person to help paint the picture, to help connect people to why should they care? How does their day to day job connect to something bigger than all of us? And I think the best leaders, especially at the CEO level are able to do that.

Minute 38

I think we don't own ourselves unapologetically, both for what we know and what we don't know. And there's actually, as you were just describing that set of leaders, there's tremendous confidence that telegraphs when we can say, "Hey, you know what, Daniel, that's a great question, but I actually don't know."

MORE ABOUT AMY JEN

For almost two decades, Amy Jen Su has partnered with investment professionals, CEOs, and executives to sustain and increase their leadership effectiveness as they drive organizational change and transformation. She is the author of the Harvard Business Review Press book, The Leader You Want to Be: Five Essential Principles to Bringing Out Your Best Self – Every Day (2019), which draws on her extensive experience serving industries such as private equity, financial services, biotechnology, software, consumer, and media. She is also currently a Board Member of SRS Distribution Inc., a portfolio company of Leonard Green & Partners and Berkshire Partners. Amy has been a frequent contributor to Harvard Business Review online and has written for publications including Huffington Post and Leader to Leader magazine. She is also co-author of the Washington Post bestseller Own the Room: Discover Your Signature Voice to Master Your Leadership Presence (HBR Press, 2013) with Muriel Maignan Wilkins. Her work and thinking have been featured in media outlets including the Wall Street Journal, Fast Company, Inc., Forbes, and Marketwatch. Previously, Amy served as a management consultant for Booz Allen & Hamilton where she advised senior executives of consumer product companies on growth strategies. She was also a strategic planner for Taco Bell Corp helping to launch Taco Bell into non-traditional points of distribution. Amy holds an MBA from Harvard Business School and BA in Psychology from Stanford University, graduating from both with honors and distinctions. Her additional certifications and background in Integral coaching, yoga, and the Eastern philosophies provide for a unique high impact, whole-person approach to executive development.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

All right.

Amy Jen Su:

We'll take our deep breath.

Daniel Stillman:

We'll take a deep breath, get centered.

Amy Jen Su:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Amy Jen Su, I am so grateful that you made this opportunity, this space in your day and your life to have this conversation with me. Thanks for your time.

Amy Jen Su:

Daniel, thanks so much for having me, and I'm so excited to be here with you today.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. So I have not read your first book, but I love the title of it, and I was wondering, just to orient ourselves in your journey, I was wondering if you could connect your first book and your second book, because they seem so connected to me, this idea of owning the room and finding your signature voice and being the leader that you want to be. What's the through line in these two works for you?

Amy Jen Su:

Daniel, wow. Thanks for that question, because there is a through line, and the connection is in some ways, both bodies of work mirror my own journey as a leader, a professional, as a person. So in the years that we were working with leaders and professionals on discovering their signature voice and own the room, those were things that I was sitting in the middle of and exploring myself. And so for the time that we started our firm in 2004, through when Own The Room came out to market in 2013, this idea of, and similar to your work, what are the conversations we're in? What are the many rooms, I guess now virtual rooms we all sit in where owning yourself and connecting to others is important. And then the outflow of that work was realizing that as the world got a little crazier and busier, I would have clients say to me, "I can own the room, but I can't seem to have enough hours in the day to be my best self. So it's hard to do that."

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So The Leader You Want To Be naturally flowed out of the work.

Daniel Stillman:

It's really interesting because there's a quote from your book really early on that effective leadership is about creating the conditions, understanding the conditions that cultivate your highest and your best use. That is a really fundamental challenge for people is literally just, not just finding the hours in the day but finding the leverage points in their day. Those are two different conversations, right? Having enough time and then doing the, quote unquote, the right things.

Amy Jen Su:

Absolutely. I think, as you said there, we're often so busy that we don't have the time, or we forget to take the time to pause and look inward and to say, wait a minute, what were the conditions that made the difference between a day going a little bit more smoothly and for myself to feel connected to myself and to have the impact that I hope to make.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And retrospectively, as we do the introspection, wow what was it about those days which didn't feel as easy, and I felt a lot of resistance. And there's a lot of wisdom to derive from that.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So what I love about your work is this wisdom can be found in ourselves. Some of it can be found in ourselves. I think the question in our last conversation was where am I burning calories? And just that question is like okay where am I spinning my wheels and then what? It's just such a powerful question to be asking oneself.

Amy Jen Su:

Again, I think that as you said, Daniel, the pause point, the check in, the without judgment pausing to reflect and sit in those questions of inquiry for ourselves, I think we all underestimate the wisdom that does exist in our experiences to date, within our bodies, within our knowledge base, and certainly there's great wisdom in those who work with us, which is why 360 feedback and other forms of feedback can be powerful and sort of the combination of both things, the willingness to hold up the mirror to ourselves and to ask others to hold up the mirror can be the catalyst for propelling us into greater forms of expansion and growth.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. There seems to be this idea though that we can find our own way to be the leader that we want to be, that there isn't a single correct right way to do it. Am I reading you right? Or is that, so she's taking a deep breath in, tell me more.

Amy Jen Su:

Yeah. I don't know that I think there's one way for each of us, but I do think, I believe we all have a path, and if we tune into that path and we trust it and we understand what we're made for and we honor that and follow that thread in our lives, it can be a very powerful way of coming to know north star and to see if we're heading in a directionally correct way, but how that shows up in my life may be different than yours.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Amy Jen Su:

So I don't know that I think there's a right way or wrong way beyond how do we each find our way to tune in.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So maybe I misspoke. I agree with that. It is our job to find our way, our approach, our path. And I feel like it's, in the middle of the book I saw you quote Mary Oliver and I immediately just had this wave of relaxation go across myself, because I love this poem, Wild Geese, that says you do not have to be good, you do not have to walk for 100 miles on your knees repenting. You only have to let the soft animal of your body love what it loves. And to me, I mean what does that poem say to you about leadership?

Amy Jen Su:

I love that poem, Daniel, and I am so happy that it resonates for you and that you love Mary Oliver's work too. And I think it says a lot about how hard we are on ourselves as leaders and professionals. I'm stunned by some of the folks that I work with who are making a phenomenal difference in their organizations, for their families and for their communities, and how hard they are on themselves and that when we start a new role or we find ourselves in change, somehow we assume the clock goes back to zero. It absolutely doesn't. So there's something in Mary Oliver's work and I think that poem in particular that reminds us of the importance of self compassion, and it's amazing how we speak to ourselves in ways we would never speak to a friend or a loved one. So I think that poem reminds us to say, in the way that you would say to your best friend, with kindness, walking them out of a tough day, why don't we speak to ourselves that way?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Why don't we? So in the framework from your book, The Leader You Want To Be, there's this idea of the people in the picture. And I think there's two ways to look at that question of people. There's the question of the inner people that we're carrying around. There's definitely somebody who, at least you and me, I don't know if anybody else is like this, there's some inner people that we're carrying around that are not cheerleaders, that aren't necessarily safe harbors, and it seems like it's important work to do, leadership work to do, to look at our own inner stakeholders, for sure.

Amy Jen Su:

For sure, Daniel. That inner committee as you just described often play outdated roles in our life, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So someone in our life that had that kind of impact or that kind of influence on ourselves when we were 10, when we were 20 in a first job, may have served their value. So in part of all this conversation we're having around how do you stay updated to yourself, it's also knowing when it's time to let go of voices that no longer serve us, and in fact disempower us, and then how do we along the way, in coming to understand who you are today, who are the cheerleaders and safe harbors and the really beautiful network of support that can also live life with us and ride alongside us as leaders and as people.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. When I was reading this list of stakeholders one needs to have in one's corner, the sausage maker, the accountability buddy, the mirror, the cheerleader, the safe harbor. I was reading that and I was like those sound a lot like roles that a really great coach does, and I'm wondering what do you feel like, are there hats on that list that aren't on that list that you feel like you do as an executive coach, ways that you're showing up in your conversations with leaders? Ways that you're showing up on purpose to be that person in their dialog?

Amy Jen Su:

Absolutely. I think the list that's in that particular chapter that you just named are many of the roles that a coach will play in a given coaching conversation, whether that's like a helicopter helping to lift somebody out of the weeds and to see the bigger picture, certainly the accountability buddy that if you set priorities and goals for yourself, there's nothing like having somebody to check in with a couple of times a month. But what's not on that list as a coach, I think because we play a unique role as container, we hold a safe container, I hope, for others to do the exploration to safely share what's on their mind, to reveal the vulnerabilities that invariably come with holding a lot of responsibility and accountability.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So that safety and that container we hold I think is an important part of being a coach.

Daniel Stillman:

Can we unpack that a little? Because when I was reading this section about sausage maker, I was like this is such a safe and important, like having someone to, for those of us who think this way, free wheel, but not have it be taken out of context, not have it taken too far, like it is so powerful to have someone you can sausage make with, and to have that safe container around it. What do you do as a coach to build that container for yourself and for your clients? If we're building those four walls, what are those walls in that container?

Amy Jen Su:

I love that visual. I think the walls contain psychological safety, certainly. That when we're sausage making, we're riffing with another person, we're allowing thoughts to flow in stream of consciousness, that there's no judgment.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

I think often when we feel that we're in the face of judgment, we hold ourselves back or we don't feel that we can speak freely, so being able to be witness to another person's wonderful process, to sit in the presence of another person's thoughts and brainstorms and creative expression that's flowing through them, I know from myself personally, and I wonder if you feel this way, it just feels like the greatest honor.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

To be able to serve in that role for another person.

Daniel Stillman:

Absolutely. I think it's pretty hard to coach someone if you don't respect the work that they're doing. At the same time, it's interesting, I imagine, maybe I'm identifying our first paradox of the conversation, the safe container versus mirrors is very like maybe an objective mirror, but then there's somebody who steps forward and says, "Do you see what you're saying?" And that becomes maybe more of what my coach would call tapping somebody's bottle, being like, "Do you see what you're saying?" Which is a little different than saying, "You just said this."

Amy Jen Su:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

So yeah, where do you step forward in that way?

Amy Jen Su:

I think, I love that you're describing the dance, right? So within that container, the fluidity of dialog, I think often begins with the openness of the safety, the inquiry, the curiosity and wonder of what's happening for another person, how they see the world, what assumptions they're making, and then you as a coach, listening in and tuning in to the patterns that are being reflected and what's being shared, and then I think in that moment of safety and trust and after hearing, being able to say back to somebody, "Could I frame for you what I feel like I heard you said?" Or, "Can I reflect back what I feel like maybe I heard, or a pattern that is emerging, and let me check in on how that resonates for you?"

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So if you only spent the entire coaching time listening and in inquiry, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

The balance and wholeness of coaching where then you have an opportunity to reframe or create new distinctions, or to shine light on a different way of seeing something or to help someone uncover historic pattern that they may want to explore, come up with a new set of choices.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Requires you to also be willing to share those observations and make those frames back.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And to really clarify, what I think you did with your, what's the word I'm using? What you were modeling really beautifully in that moment is an invitational pattern. I'd like to mirror this back, I'd also like to check in with you how that resonated, it's stepping, when you talk about the metaphor of advance, it's stepping in with clarity. It's not waiting to strike. Saying, "Okay well I'm seeing this now, do you see this?" It's saying, "Can I share a perspective?" And then checking in with it. So within the coaching there's almost this micro coaching moment. It's a conversation that you invite yourself into and they can say, "No, I don't want anybody's feedback." But then of course this goes toward choosing your clients very well, and only working with people who are open to being challenged, or working with people who are interested in looking at themselves in a mirror.

Amy Jen Su:

I think part of that seeking, checking in on the invitation, is sort of meeting someone where they are.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So in our own work, how do we sit in a space and own fully our own space, while allowing somebody else to fully have their presence and space, where we are neither overbearing nor shrinking our own presence in that moment.

Daniel Stillman:

So one of the things that was really interesting to unpack with you was this idea the various paradox ... I don't know what the plural of paradox is, paradi?

Amy Jen Su:

I'm not sure, yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Paradoxes doesn't sound right, but I think that's what it is. The idea of finding a middle path that is not watering down was such a profound idea in your book, and I feel like the idea of coaching someone through a paradox is a really interesting question, because, and I have a few that I've captured here, this idea of I need solitude time versus I need to be in community, how do I find time for both? Ones that we talked about in your own business, autonomy versus control, being busy versus being still, being reactionary versus passive, honoring myself versus transcending myself. They can seem like double binds sometimes when we're in the problem. So I'm curious about helicoptering I guess is the term you used, right? To pull someone out of that paradox and to see that they have choices, that they have agency.

Amy Jen Su:

Absolutely. And I think, Daniel, what you said there, the helicopter, the how do we broaden the perspective where what is tempting to be seen as an either or proposition is helping ourselves and others really seek the both and. So even in Own The Room, as you mentioned, my first book, the inherent paradox we were exploring was how do you have a voice for yourself and voice for others, and that the most effective leaders both have cultivated an ability to bring their own voice, opinion, point of view, decision making, to the table, as much as they've cultivated the ability and the access to know when it's time to listen and to ask questions and to hold multiple perspectives, and that being in the zone is kind of this middle path of that in a conversation we're being fluid to both those things and when we're too anchored in just one, if I was a leader only having a voice for myself, you might experience me as a bull in the china shop, or unwilling to listen or interrupting, as much as if I'm only listening and asking questions, someone might question my leadership ability.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Amy Jen Su:

So it's the both and of what can seem like a paradox on the surface that in working with others you say, "Wow, how much more effective can you be to multiple situations and audiences by having access to the whole versus just half of the toolbox?

Daniel Stillman:

This goes to the question of as you indicated in your book, what is effective? What is going to get me ultimately what I want? What I see as my best and highest use?

Amy Jen Su:

Absolutely.

Daniel Stillman:

What will help me create what I'm trying to create? I think that I'm struggling with, this is something I've been struggling in with my own something I've been writing right now, so maybe you can coach me on this, because I think there's this tension between how people think they need to be, because I think people want me to be a certain way, I have this other way that I want to be, and then there's, as you're talking about, empathy, tuning into my audience, understanding what is needed, and then finding a way to resolve all of those tensions and to show up as we intend. It's a complex dialog between these different points, to find the mean.

Amy Jen Su:

Yes it is.

Daniel Stillman:

Now I feel like I should read your first book.

Amy Jen Su:

Yeah, I know. It is complex. It's taking that moment, as you just said, to first say who is the audience, what's the impact I hope to have on them, what's my intention, and then coming back to oneself to say well what's the message? And then there is that moment of marrying both mission and message, but recognizing that there's a very specific audience that in honoring and helping the audience to receive your message, it's taking that extra pivot and step.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Or in the case of, as you mentioned, solitude and community, right? This also depends on your own preferences. Some of us need more solitude time to feel our best, some of us need more community time, but in the end, as human beings, we both meed time for quiet and rest, as much as we need belonging and connection to other human beings.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And so, do we have awareness of that and do we have a portfolio of practices that allow us to oscillate to one of the other as needed?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And also to learn how to self manage when we have to do the thing that maybe we don't enjoy doing as much. The idea of oh I'm not so good with crowds, and it's like well guess what, that's something you're going to have to manage, you might have to do an all hands at some point and you just have to find that in yourself. How do you coach somebody to find something in themselves that maybe they don't feel is there?

Amy Jen Su:

In that case, as a leader, let's say suddenly now your role does demand that you do more all hands, and it's not your favorite thing. So just recognizing, my hope, number one, is that you're in a role that speaks to 80% of what comes natural or to your strengths but there's always going to be 20% of any role, I think, that forces us to oscillate out of our comfort zone, but it's an important part of the mandate. So in the case of the leader who may not love doing an all hands, perhaps we would tap into the values they feel towards making sure that they're transparent with their organization, that they do care about employee engagement, and that their communications from a one to many perspective is really critical. So for that leader, helping them get prepared for that moment so that they can increase their comfort, and then making sure maybe it's after the all hands that they block an hour after the event to make sure they grab a little time-

Daniel Stillman:

Recovery.

Amy Jen Su:

Back to themselves to recharge the battery.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So it's really planning for the process, understanding, we talked about what are the conditions that cultivate my highest and best use, it's really about the care and feeding of me, whoever the me is that's looking at that. I think some people look at that and say I shouldn't need an hour to prepare and an hour to recover, and then they judge themselves and say well I'm terrible at blank because I need an hour to chill out and I can't just go into my next thing. And I feel like we abuse ourselves with that idea and it's unfair.

Amy Jen Su:

It's unfair, it's unproductive. I think the faulty assumption that we, for high stakes situations or conversations, that winging it is the way to go. I think there's a point where I often will say to a leader, "Hey, your job now requires a different influence where the percentage of time you once spent on the slides versus the percentage of time you are now going to allocate to prepare for delivery.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Has to change.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Because now a lot of your impact and your contribution is actually how you show up to the broader organization.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And I think spending as much time visualizing how you're going to be and how you want to show up is work.

Amy Jen Su:

It is work.

Daniel Stillman:

And I don't see that as work, it's in our work. It's working on our instrument, ourselves, but it is still work.

Amy Jen Su:

Absolutely. And I think it's time, I often advise my clients, "Hey at the start of your week, take a look at your Outlook Calendar Monday through Friday, it's not that you're going to be able to prep for every meeting, it's not realistic, but pick the two that really make a difference to priorities, or could really make a difference to employee morale or your team's morale. Or it's a really difficult conversation, perhaps it's a feedback conversation and you want to both get your message across but honor the dignity of the other person, those do require some preparation time and be thoughtful and, to the word you used, Daniel, planful, mindful, intentional.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So as a practice, I always say pick the two this week where just that little bit of extra preparation and thoughtfulness could make a big difference.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Can you talk a little bit about mindfulness and what it means for you? You said a couple of times, and I know you did your fair share of work in that direction, to the point that it's one of the five Ps in your framework, can you say a little bit about why that's important to you?

Amy Jen Su:

Mindfulness is important to me, I know it's a popular item and topic these days, for good reason. Everything we're talking about here, the tuning into oneself, the bringing the head and the body back together in any moment, the head heart body, and saying, "Wait, what's actually in front of me and going on?" I think one of the misnomers about mindfulness though is that somehow if you start meditating or having a mindfulness practice you're going to feel these wonderful happiness mood states all the time.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Amy Jen Su:

And in fact, I have found it's the opposite. It's getting to the truth, whether that's a painful emotion or a positive emotion, you're tuning into what really reality is so that then you could be making better choices or creating the action plan necessary. So oftentimes we either want to run away from something, or run towards something. Mindfulness I think brings us to, with razor clarity, actually let's come to reality.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well it's funny, we're talking about the difference between what some people might call spiritual bypassing and Taoism, right? Which is seeing the way and accepting the way and working within the way. And I don't know, that's again a question that's not a question, that's just me summarizing, clarifying for myself. I know that in your book you talk about this, the Eastern thought has become very mainstreamed in a way and it's both good but it's got a little flavor to it that it's like well I'm glad, but let's not misuse it. You have a long tradition, and this is also it's part of your culture. I don't know what my question is in there for you, it feels like there's complexity there for you.

Amy Jen Su:

There is complexity. I did grow up in a household where Eastern thought was always part of our upbringing. My father has always talked about the middle way and not living or playing to the extremes and so it's been something that I've thought about for a long time and what is yin and yang and why are the dots inside each side and a lot of curiosity there. But I love what you said, Daniel, about spiritual bypassing. I think with anything, any trend, we all need to be careful to not have it become our new distraction or our new form of egoic heroism. Rather than saying how do any discipline, from any culture, all cultures had explored for centuries what human performance and potential can be and what can I learn from different ones and which ones speak to me and resonate for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. I mean I think where my mind was going with this was that your book is a very practical feet to the ground guide, and if you're listening to this, I'm looking out the windows, whoever's here listening in on this, I found each chapter full of, and I'm just a lover of frameworks, a good two by two to analyze where my highest and best uses, you take this very lofty ideal of what's my highest and best use and you say well here's a two by two and let's break it down and let's have a really, really clear conversation on that. I think it's so valuable.

Daniel Stillman:

At the same time, at the center of one of your diagrams is purpose and I just had this discussion with a CEO today where he was like, "Well what can we do together?" And I'm like I don't know what your purpose is yet, man. What do you want? We just started to draw the map of what you want. Once we figure it out, we can go there. And that's work that nobody can do for you. That's inner work. And so that's what I love is that you do have that, there's an affability, it's not just a business book without a soul.

Amy Jen Su:

Oh I appreciate that, Daniel, and it warms my heart to hear that you picked up on that because that, I think in terms of just being a business person myself, and serving the corporate world, there is a pragmatism and a practicality that's super important. We all have results we need to deliver and priorities to make and teams to lead and so in the everyday of what we do of our doing, it's important to say how do I optimize my productivity and my efficiency as much as it is, to your point, around the conversation you just had with that CEO, where does doing and being come together, and again, who we are as people and the motivations that guide our actions can have tremendous impact on our organizations and culture.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

So it feels like the conversation has to explore both the what and the how, and the why.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

In terms of purpose, like why even put resources against something or time against something if we fundamentally can't answer that question.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. And who or what or how could we answer that question, right? What would help one do that? And at the end of the day, it's a question that a leader has to define, it seems like they have to define for themselves. Or at least that's the privilege to be able to do that.

Amy Jen Su:

There is a privilege in it in terms of being able to set the why for more people than just yourself.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And in higher orders of leadership so much of the job becomes you're the person to help paint the picture, to help connect people to why should they care? How does their day to day job connect to something bigger than all of us? And I think the best leaders, especially at the CEO level are able to do that.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I want to make sure we have some time talking about some other paradi, because I'm wondering, what I loved in our first conversation was getting a glimpse into you clarifying for yourself your own tensions that you were trying to navigate, and I thought it was such an amazing touchstone. In my work when I think about designing the conversation and designing the conversation with yourself, in a way what I saw was you clarifying here are the extremes that I am navigating. The yin and the yang that I'm trying to work through for yourself. And when I saw it I'm like I think that's something everyone needs to do, is to have a map on the wall of here are the choices I'm working through, having agency around, and I'm just wondering if there's one particular paradox that we can sit with for a minute and talk about how to peel apart the layers.

Amy Jen Su:

I'm happy to. I every year sort of put together a one pager that's my north star, and what is it I'm struggling with as a leader.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And it shows up in the work, because then I'm curious how other people are handling it as well. So probably one of the ones that started off actually a couple years ago in a conversation with a group of leaders was this paradox of leading and learning, but interestingly it's showing up a lot in my life this year and so I think, Daniel, of the four paradi, paradox that I showed you where I had lead, learn, community, solitude, action, stillness, dissatisfaction, gratitude. I did have lead, learn at the top, I think probably for a reason.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What does that mean to you? We talked about it earlier, this idea of as a leader if you're only asking lots of questions, there's a question of who are you in this relationship, where what do you want maybe doesn't show up. What is that tension for you?

Amy Jen Su:

I think the tension as a leader is on the one hand, all of us want to show our value and understand our value and remember who we are. So on the lead side, in the roles we're in, or new roles or opportunities we're given, really thinking about wow, if nothing else this year, what are the three things I hope to do for this organization or for this team or for this body of work? It really calls on the part of ourselves to lead and have a voice and have a point of view and lean in and really help drive something forward. And at the same time, how does that not tilt into somehow I need to prove myself.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And it's a fine line. So I think for me, the paradox of lead, learn, the learn side helps to keep it truly in leadership and learning and not veering into some prove myself space. So as I mentioned earlier, sometimes this faulty assumption of that somehow the clock went back to zero just isn't true. So on the lead side it's always saying, "Gosh, with every new experience I have an opportunity to lead." But there's amazing learning in every new role too.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Amy Jen Su:

So I think even as I help leaders onboard, or I'm helping myself right now, it's both the what are my goals and what do I want to achieve this year as much as what do I want to learn?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

In a new industry or in a network or something else, and holding both of those things in balance somehow has helped navigate tough weeks easier.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so profound, what's coming up for me, I was just working with a group where they were taking on, I was really working with them around facilitative leadership and being better facilitators of complex dialog in the organization and what they realized for themselves was we have to own what we don't know. We have to own that we are holding space, that we are creating the conditions for these conversations to happen, there can be this tendency to want to pretend that we know more than we do, and I think owning what we want, and owning what we want to know more about is so powerful.

Amy Jen Su:

And I love the word you're using, owning, Daniel. Because I think it's how do we own [crosstalk 00:37:39]-

Daniel Stillman:

It's actually yours. Wait that's your phrase.

Amy Jen Su:

Well just as you said it, the word captured me, because I think we don't own ourselves unapologetically, both for what we know and what we don't know. And there's actually, as you were just describing that set of leaders, there's tremendous confidence that telegraphs when we can say, "Hey, you know what, Daniel, that's a great question, but I actually don't know."

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

And I'd love to sit with it or have my team look into it or ask my colleagues around the table if others have a point of view or instinct on it. And I do think that the voice, when we were talking earlier about the voices in our head that can be unkind, that says you must be an expert, your value add is tied to being an expert. Can sometimes really get us into trouble.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Sometimes for sure, I would say. Well for no other reason than it's not authentic, right?

Amy Jen Su:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

To say that-

Amy Jen Su:

You can act like we know everything.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, so this is really interesting, and this is where maybe having a helicopter view of the lead, learn paradox can be so helpful, because I for myself am totally obsessed with knowing and knowing as a survival method in my family system, and as a consultant and as somebody who does learning and development I'm sure all of this resonates with you. People want to know, they want to be told often, they want a solution, and it is much harder to sit with not knowing.

Amy Jen Su:

It is much harder to sit with it. Our society grooms us to acquire knowledge, and then we're graded on that. For anyone who had kind of the good student carry with them forever, you head into our adult life with that same framework and I hope, even writing on a sheet of paper and looking at it everyday, that even as I go through life and acquire more knowledge that I preserve enough humility that there's a lot still left to learn, and that the colleagues I work with are very smart and if someone disagrees with me, it's probably for good reason. So rather than getting defensive which often is easy to happen, how do I maintain enough of a stance of curiosity to at least hear out why they have a different point of view.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So I'll, as we're unpacking this conversation of leading and learning, there's curiosity is a vector in that dialog, and then pulling ourselves out of it and seeing the rationality of we can't possibly know everything. That's self coaching, right?

Amy Jen Su:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

So you can't know everything, so it's okay to pump the breaks on that feeling of danger. I think it's so important to be able to, and this is really sitting in that paradox of we can't know all the things to do and we have to be very specific on what we want, what our goals are, both in accomplishing and also in filling our own gaps really specifically. I'm so desperate to ask, what do you want to learn about this year? If you feel safe to tell us.

Amy Jen Su:

Yes, this year I am continuing to go deeper in my own exploration of mindfulness. So I have been listening to and I'm going to say his name incorrectly, so [inaudible 00:41:35] videos, I was just listening to one this morning around how to stay present even when the moment feels unbearable. So inquiry and listening to other teachers in that modality have been really helpful. And then on the practical side, this is the first year where I'm a board member of a private company, it's a really different, new role for me, and it's one worth sitting in the middle of leading and learning and humility.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Has been really critical because it's completely new. So as we all take on new roles as leaders, it's an exciting time, it's a company I'm very passionate about, and believe in their culture, and very humbly with my fellow board members realize I have so much left to learn. I'm sometimes awestruck by how much there's still left to learn about different businesses and people and organizations.

Daniel Stillman:

That's really wonderful. Thanks for sharing that. And with our tiny amount of time left, what haven't I asked you that I should have asked you? What haven't we talked about that's important to talk about?

Amy Jen Su:

I think as we think about paradox, I did want to shout out to a colleague named Brian Emerson who wrote a book called Navigating Polarities. For anyone who's interested in polarity and paradox work, just kind of who have been the teachers and influencers in my life around that particular subject, Brian and I have been colleagues for a long time and he's a deep thinker on polarity, so I would be remiss to not shout out his book and work as an influence, for sure.

Daniel Stillman:

It's duly noted that you're owning what you still have yet to learn.

Amy Jen Su:

Yes. I still have a lot to go. Total work in progress, all the time.

Daniel Stillman:

Something that I'm really taking away from this conversation is that you talk about it's important for us to realize where we have agency and to make choices, to make effective choices based on what we want, which comes down to knowing ourselves, and that is a path towards resolving paradox, is to ask what we want. And I think what we haven't touched on, and I don't know if we can do it justice, is this idea of wholeness, that even within that choice there is still a view of wholeness.

Amy Jen Su:

I think, thank you Daniel for raising the question of wholeness, because paradox, while we think it's either or, often it's parts of a whole. We are parts of a whole. Leading and learning are parts of a whole life experience, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

Community and solitude are parts of a whole human experience and so I hope as all leaders and professionals and people explore their own development, so many different interesting parts of life and ourselves as human beings and just the more we explore that and discover that the more whole we become. So that's kind of a personal mission for my own life and for others that I work with, that we can access a whole ambitious, full life.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Amy Jen Su:

I don't think it gets better than that.

Daniel Stillman:

So this is, I want to make sure I understand this because I think it's, I don't know if you ever read Zorba The Greek.

Amy Jen Su:

No.

Daniel Stillman:

Well you can just watch the movie, Alec Guinness, it's a classic, it's one of my dad's favorites. There's this line where he talks about life being the full catastrophe. Getting married and having children, the full catastrophe. And in a way, this idea of community and solitude or gratitude versus contentment has choices that I make once and forever is not the truth, the truth is that I have a whole life and I will get to make this choice many times over and that it's potentially even a cyclical set of choices to make, and sitting with that wholeness is that it's, well this is just one time I'm choosing this.

Amy Jen Su:

There's life in many ways is just many, many, many moments that we sit in and that we make choices, the frame of our life, the life condition and situation we find ourselves in drive different choices, and recognizing there is agency and the ability to craft. I mean to use your language, design and create a full life is really exciting.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It is an amazing opportunity to be able to do that. Where, of course, where should we direct people to the internet if they want to learn more about all things Paravis Partners and Amy Su? Where can they go to learn more about you?

Amy Jen Su:

Our firm's website, paravispartners.com is a good place to start, and embedded in there is also theleaderyouwanttobe.com. So for folks interested in potentially finding more information, those are both good places to start.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And your book is a worthwhile read.

Amy Jen Su:

Thanks.

Daniel Stillman:

I really appreciate you making the time to unpack some of the subtler points at the core of this long and deep work, which is becoming ourselves and accomplishing great things. So thank you very much for making the time.

Amy Jen Su:

Thank you so much for having me and for the dialog, I really, really enjoyed it. Thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. And scene.

The Art of Coaching with Alisa Cohn

AC_Web_image.jpg

In this episode, Alisa Cohn and I talk through the Art of Coaching and also one of my favorite ways of looking at Leadership: The Art of Showing up on Purpose. A Coaching mindset is a transformative way to show up for others and yourself, so I’m excited to share these insights from Alisa, since she was named the Top Startup Coach in the World, and she has been coaching startup founders to grow into world-class CEOs for nearly 20 years. If you’re stepping up as a leader, or are thinking about coaching, this interview will help you know what to expect in a coaching relationship and why you might want to bring a coach into your work.

Everyday Coaching

A coaching mindset can be powerfully transformative, so even if you don’t have a startup, even if you’re not a coach... if you’re not even an official leader, or even if you just want to be a good friend, you’ll find lessons in this conversation with Alisa that you can use in your work and life, every day. 

Coaching is a conversational process that works with someone to help them improve, from the inside out. Alisa shares some of her most powerful coaching questions and all about how the most impactful coaching conversation she’s ever had was only 8 minutes long.

Alisa and I got right into the heart of coaching, with her sharing some essential, fundamental conversational approaches to the coaching process like: 

>>firm and gentle inquiry
>>moving from the presenting problem to the context
>>Trusting your curiosity
>>Staying Loose!
>>Trust that they have an answer...that the work is in them. 

As Alisa said:

“All my clients want me to tell them how to do it or what to do. They'll ask me a question and my answer is, "Well, listen, I wouldn't be any kind of a coach if I didn't get a chance to say, 'What do you think?"

>>Alisa will ask “What if you did know?” and push her clients to sit with the question. The act of reflecting is helpful no matter what springs up.

>>The ability to reflect will help with one of the absolute key executive skills: choosing a response versus having a reaction. 

Alisa actually quotes Victor Frankl’s blockbuster thoughts on this capacity:

Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.

A coach isn’t all warm and fuzzy listening though…My coach calls his approach “tapping someone’s bottle”...pointing out the limits to someone’s thinking. When Alisa wants to push back I heard her use the phrase:

"Well, that's how I invite you to think about it." 

Alisa will step in with her perspective but without force. A tap isn’t a shove!

Asking “How is this situation serving you?” is a gentle challenge.

What to Expect in a Coaching Relationship...and why you might need a coach

If you are thinking about coaching, this interview will help you know what to expect in a coaching relationship and why you might want to bring a coach into your work.

Alisa and I talked through one of my favorite ideas: The Art of Showing up on Purpose. One huge challenge of being a leader is that, as she says “You have to grow and learn to communicate differently and behave differently as your company grows.” Alisa and I talk about how to find new ways of tapping into your inner humanity and show up authentically, no matter the situation. Just because the board says “you need to have more conviction” doesn’t mean you have to become a jerk, or invert how you want to be. It’s about finding ways to be passionate and firm that work for you. 

In my own experience, I’ve found that, as a coach and a coachee, a powerful conversation can help me find my own, authentic path forward, through having a conversation with my own inner parts. It’s hard to do that on your own...having a coach as part of the conversation can be transformative.

Alisa also points out that coaching has to be 3-Dimensional, because we are 3-Dimensional. As we grow as leaders, she thinks of three dimensions of growth: we have to grow in our self-management, our skill in managing others, and, of course, in managing the business. A powerful coach is going to make you look at all three.

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Alisa's website

Alisa on LinkedIn

Alisa on Twitter

Alisa on Jeff Gothelf’s Forever Employable series

Alisa Rapping!

Check yourself before you Wreck yourself

Minute 4

The way people feel safe is if you can be gentle with them and with the questions. The way people feel guided and supported is if you can be firm. It's both of those things together and sometimes it's a little more gentle and sometimes a little more firm.

Minute 4

I think for all of us, it's important to have dexterity and a set of tools so that we can use a fine chisel when we need one and sometimes a sledgehammer when we need that too. You need to have both and more in your toolkit.

Minute 7

All my clients want me to tell them how to do it or what to do. They'll ask me a question and my answer is, "Well, listen, I wouldn't be any kind of a coach if I didn't get a chance to say, 'What do you think?" Because the work is in you and the answers are in you.

Minute 8

Let me ask you to actually think deeply about what you want out of this onboarding plan and think deeply about how you want this person to integrate into your culture and your highest and best hopes for this new person and what they can bring to the table and what we can all do together. That is the work is in you.

Also, here's your onboarding plan, here's the form. Right? The form is actually very helpful to structure a step by step process. I'm not the kind of coach that will say, "You've got to figure everything out and we've got to wander together in the wilderness until you figure out what the onboarding plan is." I think that the deep inquiry inside of yourself is very powerful for all of us.

Minute 9

It's not about I want you to wander. It's that I want you to have the fruit of the labor that it takes to actually reflect and to think about it and to gather your thoughts. Also, to let yourself be unedited and explore these ideas and the reason you think you don't know is because you got to get it right. What if you don't got to get it right? What if we're just having a safe space where you can brainstorm on what you think? What would come out?

Minute 11

Certainly, a startup founder and, increasingly, as he or she builds a company to scale, they need to do that self-awareness and that self-inquiry to figure out what are my triggers? What are my strengths? What are the things which are important to me? What are my values? Where are we going with all of this?

It's actually super important. Then, in general, I work for the CEO and people would say, "He needs to have more conviction." He would say, "Listen, I am not the kind of sales guy that pounds my fist on the table." No, absolutely not. But how can you in your quiet way express more conviction? What they're looking for is something a little more firm from you or something a little more awake or passionate from you? How can you do that? That is the question.

Minute 13

Again, I'll talk about the CEOs that I tend to work with, you're onstage. You have to grow and learn to communicate differently and behave differently as your company grows.

You have to practice things that don't always feel authentic. In order to expand your ability and your repertoire of skills and behaviors so that ultimately do feel authentic.

Minute 15

Part of what I think about leadership is that the first people you lead every day is yourself and if you're going into the office or a remote office these days to lead a group of people, that's where one way or the other you need help and support in thinking about that because leadership is an unnatural act. It is learned. You need to learn it.

Minute 34

Well, I think one question is how is this situation serving you? Right? Because people complain about whatever and this question is how is this serving you? What are you contributing to this situation? That's a very important and powerful question. I think what are you afraid of?

Minute 35

That's the initial stage of the coaching conversation. Even that, we talked about people who are skeptical or you said volun-told. It's like, "I don't want to be here." Okay, fine. Okay, great. I love your skepticism. Let's put it aside. If you had a secret weapon dedicated entirely to your success for six months, what would you want to get done? That's just a better question or a better conversation than I'm not happy, I don't like this.

Minute 37

Well, maybe the question is what's the entrepreneurial journey like? Why is it so hard? I would just say that founders are like the most incredible, courageous, crazy people who are risking everything against all odds to build something when they could just get a job at IBM if they wanted to. Right? It's like why are you doing this?

Just maybe to hold with reverence what a founder is and then what a hard job that is because you're learning as you go, the entry level position for a founder is boss, right? The entry level position. You don't know what you're doing necessarily. You may not have had any other management leadership experiences before. You've got to learn all of that pieced together and then you've got to do all the other things that a founder has to do like raise money, like figure out the market, figure out the strategy, run an operational business, hire people, fire people, hire your friends, fire your friends, handle conflict, all those things are very difficult to orchestrate together.

MORE ABOUT ALISA

Named the Top Startup Coach in the World at the Thinkers50/Marshall Goldsmith Global Coaches Awards in London, Alisa Cohn has been coaching startup founders to grow into world-class CEOs for nearly 20 years. A onetime startup CFO, strategy consultant, and current angel investor and advisor, she was named a top 30 “Global Guru” and has worked with startups such as Venmo, Etsy, The Wirecutter, Mack Weldon, and Tory Burch. She has also coached CEOs and C-Suite executives at enterprise clients such as  Dell, Hitachi, Sony, IBM, Google, Microsoft, Bloomberg, The New York Times, and Calvin Klein.

Marshall Goldsmith selected Alisa as one of his Marshall Goldsmith 100 Coaches – a gathering of the top coaches in the world – and Inc named Alisa one of the top 100 leadership speakers, and also been named one of the top voices of thought leadership by PeopleHum for 2021.

Alisa is a guest lecturer at Harvard and Cornell Universities, Henley Business School and the Naval War College. She is the executive coach for Runway–the incubator at Cornell NYC Tech that helps post-docs commercialize their technology and build companies. She serves on the board of the Cornell Advisory Council. She has coached public and political figures including the former Supreme Court Chief Justice of Sri Lanka and the first female minister in the transitional government of Afghanistan.

Her articles have appeared in HBR, Forbes, and Inc and she has been featured as an expert on Bloomberg TV, the BBC World News and in the New York Times. A recovering CPA, she is also a Broadway investor in productions which have won two Tony Awards and is prone to burst into song at the slightest provocation.

She is also an amateur rap artist.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

Alisa Cohn, thank you for making the time to be on the Conversation Factory. I'm really glad to have this conversation with you.

Alisa Cohn:

I'm so excited to be here with you.

Daniel Stillman:

Thanks.

Alisa Cohn:

It's great.

Daniel Stillman:

Thanks for saying. I appreciate it. Okay. I'm really curious, let's start close in. You've been a coach for a long time. I'm curious about how you approach your craft. Because you're crafting conversations with people. I mean, I would presume that's the core of your business is the conversations that you're having with the coachees that you are caring for. Has your craft changed over the almost two decades that you've been doing this? What have you noticed about your growth and transformation as a coach?

Alisa Cohn:

Boy, I love that you just dive right in. I love that.

Daniel Stillman:

Let's not screw around.

Alisa Cohn:

Exactly. No small talk. Let's go. Let's get serious. I want to pick up on what you just said about the conversations. Absolutely. What I tell my clients all of the time is the work of coaching happens in conversation. We're not digging ditches. We're not doing spreadsheets. We are having conversations. That is exactly the work of coaching.

Alisa Cohn:

I think, for me, if I think about how I think about coaching, first of all, is that most people bring me in when there's a problem. The problem may be this thing happened, right? So some people bring me in, "There's an employee I'm dealing with and I can't manage the situation. I'm not sure what to do. I'm having an issue with my co-founder. Whatever it is."

Alisa Cohn:

Sometimes the problem is I'm a new CEO and I know I don't know what I don't know. That's okay, right? That's also still kind of a sensitive problem and that's okay. My first entry point is for me to think about what's going on around here? Right? That's all I really think about. What's going on? To try to understand who this person is who is sitting in front of me. Who this person is and what is their environment and their context like? Because for all of us, we are ourselves in our makeup and we're also our environment. It's a marriage of those two together.

Alisa Cohn:

For me, assessing that and thinking about that and being with the person that I'm coaching as we explore that together in the initial meeting and then going forward but then the last question being how have I grown? I mean, oh my God. I've changed a lot. When I first became a coach, I was nervous and I had a lot of performance anxiety and I wanted to do it right. That made me tight.

Alisa Cohn:

Over the years, I've loosened up a lot and I've let it go the way it's going to go and I would say that the most important thing is that I feel much more empowered personally to follow my curiosity and to go deep with a client and also to help them feel safe in going deep with me.

Daniel Stillman:

There's so many threads to pick up on. I think that's ... This question of what you are curious about is such an interesting question because as a coach, there's so many directions you can take a conversation just through questioning. The phrase you used in the conversation with Jeff on his Forever Employable series was firmly and gently inquire. I was like, "What a great way to put it." I mean, in a way if we're talking about heuristics by which you would judge the design, the way you're shaping the conversation, are you holding those words in mind? Like the firm and the gentle.

Alisa Cohn:

I'm not holding those words in mind. I'm trying to hold that space in my heart. I'm trying to ... The way people feel safe is if you can be gentle with them and with the questions. The way people feel guided and supported is if you can be firm. It's both of those things together and sometimes it's a little more gentle and sometimes a little more firm.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

You know? I definitely have that in me. I think if anything, I have to tone down my firmness sometimes. That's probably also a way that I have grown over the years.

Daniel Stillman:

In which way? Like using the firmness more or knowing how to hold your firmness lightly?

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Right. Yeah. Probably both. Probably both. I'm definitely known for being quite direct, for being kind of blunt. I think that in the wrong moment for me, that can look a little ... I don't want to say dismissive but maybe peremptory or something, abrupt maybe.

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Alisa Cohn:

I think it's important to be able ... I think for all of us, it's important to have dexterity and a set of tools so that we can use a fine chisel when we need one and sometimes a sledgehammer when we need that too. You need to have both and more in your toolkit.

Daniel Stillman:

This is so interesting to hear you talk about the way you're crafting and chiseling at this because I think of the conversation as a craft. For you to pick up a sledgehammer on purpose is very different than you picking up a sledgehammer because you're frustrated with your client. That's control.

Alisa Cohn:

Exactly. Right. Or because you're having a bad day.

Daniel Stillman:

You're right. It's about what you're bringing ... It's also so interesting that you use tight and loose. In design school, one of my teachers said that this is the only criticism that anybody will give you of your work, that it's either too tight or that it's too loose. I think it's such an interesting question of how you were holding the space for the conversation.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Definitely. Yeah. I'm a fitness fanatic, which I'm sure you know. On my Facebook, I do kettlebell quarantine on the weekends. I do a little kettlebell movement. My fitness coach is incredible. He's taught me a lot about strength training and strength training turns out to be the polarity between tension and relaxation. When you need to be tense, you need to go all in tense. When you need to be relaxed, you need to go all in relaxation. The play, the play between tension and relaxation is a dynamic. It's a natural system that plays out in all of our lives and, certainly, in conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm sure that that is also an applicable lesson to the startup founders.

Alisa Cohn:

Oh, yeah. For sure.

Daniel Stillman:

That you work with.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like one of the things that I want to pick at is this, "I don't know what I don't know" feeling that people feel when they are rising in their work. Of course, they don't know what they don't know because they're doing things that they've never done before.

Daniel Stillman:

You have this video where you talk about the work is in you. I mean, there's this idea of like, "Alisa, please tell me what I don't know about being a founder" versus bringing it out of them and maybe this is the tight and loose. How do you handle this shaping of that conversation space of I want to know how to do X, Y, and Z?

Alisa Cohn:

I know. All my clients want me to tell them how to do it or what to do. They'll ask me a question and my answer is, "Well, listen, I wouldn't be any kind of a coach if I didn't get a chance to say, 'What do you think?"

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Alisa Cohn:

Because the work is in you and the answers are in you. That's not always true when it comes to, sadly, we have to lay people off, how should I do it? In part, there's a how do you want to do it? How do you want to be known for it? Even in this difficult moment. But there's also just certain mechanics that have to do with a communication plan and have to do with a messaging and the same is true of an onboarding plan, right? Let me ask you to actually think deeply about what you want out of this onboarding plan and think deeply about how you want this person to integrate into your culture and your highest and best hopes for this new person and what they can bring to the table and what we can all do together. That is the work is in you.

Alisa Cohn:

Also, here's your onboarding plan, here's the form. Right? The form is actually very helpful to structure a step by step process. I'm not the kind of coach that will say, "You've got to figure everything out and we've got to wander together in the wilderness until you figure out what the onboarding plan is." I think that the deep inquiry inside of yourself is very powerful for all of us.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, I mean, it sounds like at some point you'll be like there is a best practice and here's some of it.

Alisa Cohn:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

But you want them to wander a little bit.

Alisa Cohn:

It's not that I want them to wander. I want them to ... The first thing is that people will say, "What should I do?" Right? I'm going to exaggerate. This is not really a dialog but I'm going to exaggerate. "What should I do?" "What do you think you should do?" "I don't know." "What if you did know?" Right?

Alisa Cohn:

Sorry to be so coach-y but the reason that's important is because you might know if you sat and reflected for five minutes. The act of reflecting will actually be very helpful for you no matter what springs up. I promise you something will spring up if we sit together and allow you some time to reflect. That is actually very good.

Alisa Cohn:

It's not about I want you to wander. It's that I want you to have the fruit of the labor that it takes to actually reflect and to think about it and to gather your thoughts. Also, to let yourself be unedited and explore these ideas and the reason you think you don't know is because you got to get it right. What if you don't got to get it right? What if we're just having a safe space where you can brainstorm on what you think? What would come out?

Alisa Cohn:

There is much fruit that comes out of that. Much better than me saying, "Here is your template."

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Alisa Cohn:

At the end, sure, I'll give you the template.

Daniel Stillman:

If you're Alisa's client, know that ... Just struggle a little bit and then ... I mean, I'm joking but if we go back to what you said earlier, what I really loved was ... This is work that I think I do, which is name how you want it to feel.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Right? I can't tell you what kind of a CEO you want to be. Maybe you just want to rip the band-aid off and tell everyone, "Hey, everyone. We're out of money." Or maybe you want to make it into more of a dance, more of a conversation. That's something you can't decide for them, how they want to play it.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. That's also true. I think it's important also for all of us to bring ourselves to the table and I think a CEO needs to ... Certainly, a startup founder and, increasingly, as he or she builds a company to scale, they need to do that self-awareness and that self-inquiry to figure out what are my triggers? What are my strengths? What are the things which are important to me? What are my values? Where are we going with all of this?

Alisa Cohn:

It's actually super important. Then, in general, I work for the CEO and people would say, "He needs to have more conviction." He would say, "Listen, I am not the kind of sales guy that pounds my fist on the table." No, absolutely not. But how can you in your quiet way express more conviction? What they're looking for is something a little more firm from you or something a little more awake or passionate from you? How can you do that? That is the question.

Daniel Stillman:

This is interesting because I've been noodling on this, this idea of leadership as the art of showing up on purpose. I think sometimes there's this idea that we have to assume a virtue that we have ... I was coaching somebody recently who said, "I'm a work horse and I want to be a show horse so that I can get promoted." She resented it. She was really holding that she was like ... This resentment against the structure she was in and the organization that she had to turn herself inside out in order to rise up. That was the narrative she was telling herself.

Daniel Stillman:

What we discover is that there are parts of her life where she knew how to be in charge. It was in sports actually. She coaches a team that she's part of. She's like, "I know how to call the shots that I see and see the system and own what I know." For me, I was like you don't have to become a show horse. Maybe you just need to become the coach.

Daniel Stillman:

She lit up finding it inside of herself. I guess I'm just wondering ... I think there's this idea of like I have to become something I'm not versus the work is in me, I have to find it in myself and how do I ... How do you help people tap into what's native to them?

Alisa Cohn:

Right. What's native is that [inaudible 00:13:18]. It's the idea that you have some internal drivers and you have a personality. At the same time, the truth is ... Again, I'll talk about the CEOs that I tend to work with, you're onstage. You have to grow and learn to communicate differently and behave differently as your company grows.

Alisa Cohn:

You have to practice things that don't always feel authentic. In order to expand your ability and your repertoire of skills and behaviors so that ultimately do feel authentic. I told you I'm writing this book From Startup to Grownup and it's the idea of how do you activate both your internal nature in a way that does feel authentic but learn the counterintuitive skills sometimes that you're required to to become a successful leader, a successful CEO.

Daniel Stillman:

I think that's a beautiful idea because when we think about the journey of a startup, there's I have an idea, I'm making some experiments, maybe I've launched something, I've product market fit, and now it's like I have to build a business.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm just curious because it seems like the ideal client for you is somebody who is not way in the beginning of their journey and saying, "I'm thinking about starting something up. I'm still in the corporate and I haven't made the leap." They are starting up. There's acceleration. We need to catch up with it.

Alisa Cohn:

You know, it's funny because people sort of say, "Who is the ideal client?" And whatnot. I didn't really think about that but it is true. I don't tend to work with folks in that stage. That is true.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

I tend to work with folks who have already ... First of all, I work also with people in large companies. That's a whole different dynamic in helping them, CEOs of large public companies or C suite executives of large public companies, but help them build their leadership skills inside of a certain context.

Alisa Cohn:

I also work with ... I do still work with a few individuals who are trying to think about their careers probably differently in a more impactful way. Yeah. It's like I work with all kinds of folks but when I think about founders and I just focus on founders, there's no question that I work with people who have something to work with.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

Part of what I think about leadership is that the first people you lead every day is yourself and if you're going into the office or a remote office these days to lead a group of people, that's where one way or the other you need help and support in thinking about that because leadership is an unnatural act. It is learned. You need to learn it.

Daniel Stillman:

Can we unpack that? That's so interesting, this idea that leadership is an unnatural act and people have to learn it.

Alisa Cohn:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I'm surprised because a part of me feels like, "Oh, leadership is an innate skill" or it's a human skill. That it's unnatural, tell me more about that.

Alisa Cohn:

Well, I think that we sort of think it's supposed to come naturally and that gets in the way of learning it but here's a very good example of what you have to do as a leader. If someone, let's say, a CEO is looking at their executive team and there's one person, one of their executives is not doing it right, so they're not doing what I want them to do.

Alisa Cohn:

That's annoying. If how you are being naturally is, "I'm annoyed at you." That is not going to motivate that person. Right? Sometimes counterintuitively, you have to compliment this person and praise them for what they've already done for their attempts. You have to take sometimes the blame as in, "I probably wasn't very clear. Maybe I've given you misdirection. Maybe we all together haven't thought through the whole process" or whatever.

Alisa Cohn:

Even though, how you're feeling and what is actually possibly true is, "You're doing it wrong." Now why? Because people get defensive, because people get demotivated. In the fast-paced world, pressure cooker of startups, you can control yourself and if you get irritated, impatient, frustrated with somebody in that fast-paced world, they may very well shut down and that will be counterproductive.

Alisa Cohn:

That's one example. I can give you many, many examples of why leadership is an unnatural act. You must check yourself. You must understand your own triggers, your own things that set you off, your own makeup and then you pause and reflect and think before acting. Then you have a fighting chance of being a good leader.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, it's interesting because I want to hold this intention with ... By the way, the reason I was giggling is because I know you like to rap and when the phrase check yourself, in my mind, must be completed with, before you wreck yourself. It's just a sort of ...

Alisa Cohn:

That's very good.

Daniel Stillman:

That's just a total aside. We can go back around to that later. I want to hold this idea that it's an unnatural act because this is really interesting with the work is in you because it sounds like what you're saying is reactivity and impulsivity are at odds with scaling leadership.

Alisa Cohn:

So true. Yes. You want to be in a position where you can choose a response versus have a reaction.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. In my language, that's design. Right? It's intentionality and it's choice.

Alisa Cohn:

Intentionality. Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

How do people build the capacity to be able to make that choice? How do you coach people to be able to build that capacity?

Alisa Cohn:

It's a great question. First of all, it's taking on a reflective practice, whether it's journaling, meditation, even talking to a friend. That kind of thing. Part of the journaling, in addition to just [inaudible 00:19:29] and reflecting, it's also assessment of how am I feeling right now? What has set me off today? What has energized me today? Getting in the habit of that.

Alisa Cohn:

Also recognizing that you have a choice, right? Viktor Frankl said in the period between action and reaction there's a space and in that space there is your freedom. That's where your freedom is. It's looking for that freedom, relating to it like freedom, and then the very basic and simple, count to 10.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

Someone once told me he could only get to five. I'll take it.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's so true. I'm so glad that Viktor Frankl is in the room. I mean, it's such a small space sometimes between action and reaction. I think the difference is between, "You made me" blank versus, "I am feeling blank."

Alisa Cohn:

Definitely. That's part of it. Yeah. That's not the only thing, though. I think it's also we together are creating blank. Right? Or also maybe it's an even deeper experience of what I'm really feeling. I'm feeling frustrated. Not really. I'm feeling anxious.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Becoming aware of your emotional state, what's your reflective practice?

Alisa Cohn:

Well, my fitness practice is definitely reflective practice. It may not sound like it is but it definitely is. I also do journaling. I meditate not regularly but times. I take a walk. Without any headphones or whatever. Those kinds of things. Also, I'll do a pause in the middle of the day and check in and see how I'm feeling. Those kinds of things.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Spaces.

Alisa Cohn:

Yes. Spaces.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so important. My wife has been [crosstalk 00:21:15].

Alisa Cohn:

What's yours?

Daniel Stillman:

Well, my wife has been going for long walks in the mornings, which actually gives me space. I do a seven minute workout. I stopped playing music with it. Then it becomes more of a reflective ... Like just to be present with the sensation than like I'm going to listen to some '80s hip hop while I get through this. It's a big difference. I think, for me, that's what makes it more of a mindfulness experience.

Alisa Cohn:

Definitely.

Daniel Stillman:

Thanks for asking. I agree. I think it's like table stakes. If somebody is not doing that, it's very hard to help them with the next step if they lack all self-awareness. It's really interesting. There was a phrase I heard you use in the conversation with Jeff as you did a little micro coaching for him where you offered him a different way of thinking about something. You pushed back on his belief system and then you said, "Well, that's how I invite you to think about it." It was really interesting to watch you step in with your perspective but without force. With gentleness.

Daniel Stillman:

I don't know. I just wanted to highlight that and unpack this way in which you help people see themselves as a coach mirror person thing.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. I was just in this retreat center and somebody there said to me ... He also works with founders and startups. He said, "I do a test." Already I'm like, "All right. I don't know ... Where are we going with this?" "I do a test. When I talk to them, I ask them this question and then I give them some material and if they get back to me, I know they're coachable. If they get back to me with a right answer or with an answer, I know they're coachable. If they don't, I know they're not coachable. That's my test." I'm like, "Okay, well, I'm a coach. I don't see it that way."

Alisa Cohn:

You know, it's not one and done. It's not, "Oh, here's the thing. Fill it out. If you don't fill it out, you're not coachable. If you do fill it out, you are coachable." It does not work that way.

Alisa Cohn:

What I told him and what I know is true is that very often people need an invitation, an invitation to change, an invitation to think about something differently. Sometimes it's more than one invitation that they need. He was talking about something else, which is here's my lens about how I decide if I want to work with someone or not. Not a problem. That's fine.

Alisa Cohn:

The notion of coachability, to me, is very ... It's very interesting that people think they can tell by looking at someone's outsides and what I try to do is get on people's insides and then we see how coachable people are.

Daniel Stillman:

I presume that coachability is an important heuristic for someone you want to work with.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Well, of course. I don't know if it shows up right away. People will say to me, "That guy will never change", "She's not coachable" or whatever. I'm like, please don't speak to me. Everyone's got their opinions about whatever.

Alisa Cohn:

I approach somebody as in they have not been powerfully invited to change. They have not seen a what's in it for me? About any kind of change. They have been judged. They have been assessed. They have been demotivated. They have been made put down? "Well, no wonder you're not changing. I wouldn't change either."

Alisa Cohn:

For me, it takes a little while to really figure out what's going on and, again, will this person change?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Also, it's whether you're willing to engage in that conversation with them, which means you have to be excited. Marshall Goldsmith talks about how important choosing your clients is.

Alisa Cohn:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

In the process of do you believe that they've got what it takes to do it with you?

Alisa Cohn:

Definitely. That is definitely important and, also, coachability is important and for him, it's particular. There is this sort of index. Like he doesn't get paid if they don't change. Marshall also knows that people don't always show up immediately the way they really are. It takes a while for defenses to go down.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I think I've noticed with people in my coaching circle who are like ... We, as coaches, can make stories of, "They didn't respond to my email. They must be not into this enough" versus like ...

Alisa Cohn:

Everybody makes up stories. Exactly. Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to really try to peel back another couple of layers on this Startup to Grownup idea, because not for you to ... The book is coming out in a while but when you think about this arc from building a product to building a culture, this transition from that arc in their life cycle ... Part of me is sort of like, "Okay, well, what do they need to learn at each phase?" Is there a beautiful framework that Alisa has? Or just when should they start thinking about having a partner in the process?

Alisa Cohn:

You mean like a partner as in a coach?

Daniel Stillman:

You. Yeah. When should they start thinking about having a coach?

Alisa Cohn:

I do want to say, if you think about a framework, the way I think about the framework is you have to grow in three dimensions. You've got to grow managing yourself, managing others, and managing the business. The framework is to think about where am I inside of managing myself, managing them, the people around me, and managing the business?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

In terms of how do people know it's time to bring a partner ... As I said, you have to have something to coach, something to manage. Also, it depends how interested you are in this sort of journey, in this process. I think that some people get a little bit tripped up at different parts in the way. They may, again, recognize they know what they don't know or they don't know what they don't know.

Alisa Cohn:

They may get into trouble with a situation going on that feels dysfunctional and they don't know what to do. They may have people tell them, "You've got some issues." One of my clients had a board member who said, "You need a coach." You know? He got angry as in like don't tell me what I need.

Alisa Cohn:

They had some harsh words together and my client, ultimately, came to me saying, "I don't think I need a coach because he thinks I need a coach. I think I need a coach because I want to learn." Different people come from different directions. At times, it's also more about how do I scale up because now that my company is getting bigger, I need to change my ways.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. That's pretty mature of him.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Very mature.

Daniel Stillman:

Because the idea of being volun-told. I mean, as somebody who does training and developing groups of people and cultures, the early stage is when people are there because they're the first responders to this new way of working, they're the most fun to work with, and then there's the people who are volun-told.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

To like, "Okay, this is how you need to work." I imagine working with somebody who is being forced or pushed to be coached ... I'm so glad to be in this [inaudible 00:28:42] like, "I can handle that."

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. I tell everybody [inaudible 00:28:47]. I welcome skeptics. I welcome skeptics. I mean, come on and talk to me. It's not about like, "You need to be coached." It's about how can I help you?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

How can I genuinely, legit, help you get more of what you want? Who wants to say no to that? Coaching is not framed that way. [inaudible 00:29:06] fix you. Well, let's not talk about that. Let's talk about you. People like that.

Alisa Cohn:

Also, it's funny because I was ... I've been put into shotgun marriages many times actually. This one person after ... It was a large company I was working inside of and he came to me on our first meeting and he said, "I've been asking for a coach for two years and now suddenly there's a problem and I get a coach. I'm mad but I don't care because I'm going to get the most out of this experience." I was like, "Okay, me too."

Daniel Stillman:

Strap in.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Let's go. Let's go, baby. That is what it's about. Right? I have to align with my clients so that we can figure out where are we going? It's like where are you? Where are you going? How are you going to get there? That's all I care about.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Alisa Cohn:

If somebody doesn't want to ... Who doesn't want to engage with that? Right? Then part of that, then there's trust and then part of that is a 360 feedback process very often where people around say, "He's not influencing. He throws bombshells into meetings. I don't know what he's thinking. He doesn't share. I can feel him in my head but not feel him in my heart." Okay. Now there's something to work on.

Alisa Cohn:

We've already established that we have an alliance here and I'm going to help you get better one way or the other.

Daniel Stillman:

What's your favorite way to contain the coaching conversation? Do you have a periodicity, a rhythm that you prefer to work with people? Some people are two hours, some an hour, 30 minutes. Marshall talks about 15 minute sessions with people.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. The most powerful coaching conversation I ever had was eight minutes on a Friday night, cellphone to cellphone, we're both driving. That was the most impactful coaching conversation ever. Who knows?

Alisa Cohn:

Now that all said, you have to have some structure. Okay? I tend to give my clients more or less, every other week, more or less, for 60 minutes. Also, I'm available as needed. I think that as needed time can be the most important time.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. That eight minutes. Can we unpack that? That's leaving a gun in act one. What made that eight minute conversation so impactful?

Alisa Cohn:

There was a president of a division I was working with and she had some important changes to make. This was like a Friday night. She had to go in on Monday and make these important changes. She was thinking about it very tactically. Like, "I'm going to do this. I'm going to do that." I just asked her a few questions like what are you trying to achieve here? What is it going to look like and feel like when you've made these changes?

Alisa Cohn:

She would hesitate so then it's like, "Why are you hesitating? What are you not saying?" Then what we did was we uprooted a number of things and her realization was, number one, I'm the one that's not communicating enough. The reorg has to happen, the changes have to happen, but I see that they will not take root unless I change my communication style definitely.

Alisa Cohn:

Secondly, she was thinking about the org structure and various people in a way, which was very superficial, because she wasn't going deep enough into what was actually going on and, as a result of that conversation, she made changes in the changes she was going to make and that was a better, more resilient, more effective organization. She was able to immediately communicate differently on Monday, which set the tone for the whole process.

Daniel Stillman:

Boom.

Alisa Cohn:

Boom.

Daniel Stillman:

What I love about this story ... I assume you were some weeks or months into your coaching relationship, right?

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. It wasn't the first time we met.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Alisa Cohn:

Hi. Hi.

Daniel Stillman:

Eight minutes. Kapow.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

What's amazing, I've been sitting with this question of like what's the value of a coaching conversation? People ask this all the time, "How much do you charge?" Well, I don't know. How much change are you trying to make? If you measure it by the value you created in that eight minute conversation, the value is priceless.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. I tell people I want to spend the least time with them as possible. Your time is valuable. Right? I want to give you maximum change with minimum time. Doesn't that sound better? It's only the HR folks who are asking you how many hours?

Daniel Stillman:

For those of you listening at home, she rolled her eyes when she said that.

Alisa Cohn:

I love my HR colleagues, who are excellent.

Daniel Stillman:

Here's the interesting thing, this is something that my coach has coached me on in my coaching, which is as meta as it can get, is coaching people as much as they need. I think many people, myself included, when I started was like, "Okay, here's your beginner package and this many hours" and it's transactional versus what you're talking about, which is having a relationship with somebody and being there when they need them, which is where the juice comes from.

Alisa Cohn:

Totally. That's where the value comes from. That's where I think the joy of self-discovery comes from. Definitely.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm wondering ... I'm unpacking so many beautiful ways you firmly and gently inquire in the work you do. I'm wondering if you have some other of your favorite conversation hinge points, ways that you unpack, questions that you ask in those moments to get somebody to flip the card over and look at it differently.

Alisa Cohn:

Well, I think one question is how is this situation serving you? Right? Because people complain about whatever and this question is how is this serving you? What are you contributing to this situation? That's a very important and powerful question. I think what are you afraid of?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

You know, that's ... Again, with a trusting relationship, that's where a lot of the fruit is.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Taking ownership.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Also, that sort of self-inquiry, the depths of the self-inquiry.

Daniel Stillman:

It's really interesting because there are these two points in the journey where the beginning is like where are we now? These questions are like where do you want to get to? What can draw you forward?

Daniel Stillman:

There was one question I heard you use with Jeff, which was if you had a secret weapon that was totally dedicated to your success for three to six months, what would you want to work on? I just wanted to say I love that question. It was a beautiful question.

Alisa Cohn:

Thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

I don't know if you still use that one but I like it.

Alisa Cohn:

Of course. Well, that's entering ... That's the initial stage of the coaching conversation. Even that, we talked about people who are like skeptical or you said volun-told. It's like, "I don't want to be here." Okay, fine. Okay, great. I love your skepticism. Let's put it aside. If you had a secret weapon dedicated entirely to your success for six months, what would you want to get done? That's just a better question or a better conversation than I'm not happy, I don't like this. Okay, whatever. Those are boring. Let's talk about what's really interesting, which is what you actually want to get done in your life.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, because here you are in the conversation. Somebody potentially has paid for your time already and here we are, what do you want to do?

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

That's a great question. I mean, we're getting close to the end of our time. What haven't we talked about? What haven't I asked you about that I should ask you about? What's important for us to know about the way you craft coaching conversations and how we can help startups, founders, become leaders? Or anything else we haven't talked about.

Alisa Cohn:

Well, I think maybe one thing that I would just say, it's not so much a question ... Well, maybe the question is what's the entrepreneurial journey like? Why is it so hard? I would just say that founders are like the most incredible, courageous, crazy people who are risking everything against all odds to build something when they could just get a job at IBM if they wanted to. Right? It's like why are you doing this?

Alisa Cohn:

Just maybe to hold with reverence what a founder is and then what a hard job that is because you're learning as you go, the entry level position for a founder is boss, right? The entry level position. You don't know what you're doing necessarily. You may not have had any other management leadership experiences before. You've got to learn all of that pieced together and then you've got to do all the other things that a founder has to do like raise money, like figure out the market, figure out the strategy, run an operational business, hire people, fire people, hire your friends, fire your friends, handle conflict, all those things are very difficult to orchestrate together.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Alisa Cohn:

Just to say that, I'm in awe constantly of the founders that I work with and their ability to deal with that struggle.

Daniel Stillman:

The Yiddish word that's coming to mind that my dad loves is [Foreign language 00:38:30], which is like a deep empathy. I can feel that you really get and relate to their journey and their struggle.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Yeah. That is true. I feel really alive and aligned.

Daniel Stillman:

There's some parting things that we should make sure we ... Places where people can learn about all things Alisa and the things that you're launching. There's some programs that you have coming up when this conversation will come out, plus just general evergreen things that you're doing. Where can people go to learn more about you in the internet places?

Alisa Cohn:

Right. On the internets. People can always find me on my website, Alisa Cohn dot com, and all the socials. Right? At Alisa Cohn or LinkedIn, Alisa Cohn, A-L-I-S-A C-O-H-N. Everywhere you find your social.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. We can read you on Forbes and Inc and some other places.

Alisa Cohn:

Exactly. HBR and Inc and Forbes. Find me on Clubhouse. Follow me on Clubhouse at Alisa Cohn. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay.

Alisa Cohn:

All of that. The thing I want to say is that when you come to my website or look for me on LinkedIn, you will see I am doing a program for coaches to teach coaches how to build their businesses, how to get more clients. It's called the Business Development Academy for Coaches. It's got two parts to it. April, we're going to do a 30 day quick start challenge and help you gain traction after this year coming out of the pandemic. Then a 10 month program, which is called Build Your Business program, which is how do you build a sustainable business. That is with WBECS, W-B-E-C-S. Go there or come to my website.

Alisa Cohn:

Then the thing I'm also particularly excited about, October 2021, this year, coming to a bookstore near you, From Startup to Grownup. It's about growing your leadership while growing your business.

Daniel Stillman:

That's a good subtitle. When there's a galley ready, I would love to read it and have you back on to talk about [crosstalk 00:40:31].

Alisa Cohn:

Thank you. I would love that.

Daniel Stillman:

I think it's important ... I don't know a boss who has talked about the zero to one idea. This is what startup founders are doing. They're trying to make something truly new, which is truly hard.

Alisa Cohn:

Totally. Truly hard. It is.

Daniel Stillman:

And also truly important.

Alisa Cohn:

Yeah. Super important.

Daniel Stillman:

I honor the work that you do with them. I hope you can ... I'll find links to all that. There will be links to all that in the show notes.

Alisa Cohn:

I will help you fill out those show notes.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. We'll create that. We'll create an alliance and those show notes will get made.

Alisa Cohn:

I love it.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, then I will thank you for being part of this conversation. I'm really grateful for the time and for your wisdom.

Alisa Cohn:

Thank you. I love chatting with you and thank you for elegantly steering this conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

That's very kind of you to say. Well, then I'll call scene.

Mastering (Virtual) Presence

MS-cover.jpg

Mike Sagun is a certified professional men’s coach, and he has partnered with companies like DropBox, LinkedIn, and Google. Mike also partners with EVRYMAN, where he hosts men’s groups, facilitates men’s retreats, coaches individuals, and co-leads EVRYMAN’s diversity and inclusion program. I met Mike through the work we’ve done together in EVRYMAN’s programs, and I was delighted to have him on the show to get his perspective on facilitation, coaching, leading intimacy online...and just how important it is to create the space to connect with ourselves.

Doing deep, transformative work online is critically important...certainly in the pandemic, it’s essential to be able to keep connecting with people. And as we transition into a hybrid future, it’s important to remember how virtual connection has made so much of the world more accessible.

I always remember an NPR story from the start of the pandemic where a wheelchair bound individual was thrilled that they could finally go to church without all of the hassle of transportation. Worlds opened up for so many as well all went online. As hard as making space and time to connect online is, it’s worth doing and worth doing well.

Many facilitators and leaders still say that “in person was better” or “virtual will never be like in person” to which I say...yes, indeed. They are different animals. My conversation with Mike Sagun will help you see how deep online work can be, both in groups and one-on-one.

My own men’s group has struggled with the online transition, so I visited the Drop In Men’s Group Mike hosts each Friday to see how he does it.

I was excited to see that, in the first moments of the session, Mike formed clear and powerful boundaries for the group of 30 men, and did everything and more that I advise folks to do when they want to build a more powerful group connection. There’s nothing fancy to it. Like some of the best food experiences, it’s about good ingredients, treated with respect. My experience of Mike’s facilitative presence was just smooth, open and easy. His pace is not rushed. Some of the things I spotted him doing, which we’ll dig into in our conversation were:

0. Greet the people. Connect with them, ask for how to pronounce names.
1. Being Explicit about agreements. What is this space for? What isn’t it for?
2. Slow Down. Close whatever came before with a moment of mindfulness.
3. Passing the mike - giving power and control to others in the group to lead parts.
4. Breakout to connect. Smaller groups help create more safety and connection.
5. Assign “captains” of each breakout and give a clear, focused prompt.
6. Get people to share from that breakout.
7. In larger groups, give someone the time-awareness job so you can focus on connecting.

That last element was one of my favorite moments, of Mike setting clear and safe boundaries for presence and connection. Mike asked someone to put in the chat when someone’s share out had reached four minutes. He clarified “When it's four minutes, it doesn't mean your time is up. It just means that you've been talking for four minutes.”

I sometimes call this practice “giving people jobs so you can do yours” and Mike did an amazing job of it. Giving away jobs helps people feel responsible for the space, in control...and it frees up mental space for you to focus on the most impactful aspects of your presence.

Mike also broke down three levels of listening, which are a powerful key to mastering virtual presence. 

Level One is where you are doing what some would call “cosmetic” listening. You're there with a person but you're already thinking about what you're going to say next. 

Level Two listening is being deeply engaged in the person. As  Mike says “We're listening to every single consonant of the word that they're saying and we are very fully tuned in to their story or what they're talking about. Level two listening is one of the most powerful gifts that you can offer for someone. Just being there for that person to use you as a sound(ing) board.”

Level Three listening expands to what's happening within ourselves internally and in the environment. I’ve heard some folks call this “global listening”. Here, Mike suggests that we might notice “what's happening in their body language and their micro facial expressions. Then also, what's happening in the environment... then also what's happening outside in the world. What's happening in the culture, what's happening in politics.”

This level of listening is tremendously powerful, to be able to hold the conversation with the other person, with ourselves and with the larger world, all at once.

As Mike says “Level three listening is one of the greatest gifts that we can offer someone but also what we can offer ourselves... especially when we're facilitating a space like this.”

So there you have it...the secrets to presence. As Mike said in the opening quote: 

“holding that space, I think what's most important is first checking in with ourselves and noticing how you show up. How am I showing up into this space? Do I need to let go of anything in order for me to be completely present for the person in front of me?”

LINKS, QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

mikesagun.com

The Unshakeable Man

Mike's TEDxKP Talk

Mike on LinkedIn

EVRYMAN

Minute 6

when we relearn how to listen to our bodies, we then give ourselves the opportunity to notice what it is that we need. I'm not just talking about the pillars of health. Not just talking about what we need to eat, that we need to hydrate, that we need to move our bodies, that we need to sleep, that we need social connection. It also means that we are relearning what our purpose is or we are discovering what our purpose is. We are discovering what it is for us to be intentional in our lives and be deliberate in our lives. Also, when we are in our bodies, it helps us connect with ourself, lower case s and upper case S. Also, connection to others, connection to people that we love or our colleagues and our peers or even men in our life. When we can drop into our bodies, it gives us more access to connect and to feel fulfilled and satisfied in our lives.

Minute 8

There comes a point and I think many men experience this but don't know how to quite articulate it. There comes a point where these conversations just become dull and they're not energizing anymore. All of a sudden, we are in this place with our best friends who we feel we are deeply connected to that the relationship is stagnant. We start to feel de-energized. We start to feel exhausted in the relationship.

When we can open ourselves up to connection which is vulnerability which is what we would say at Evryman, speaking the unspeakables or if we were to go deeper into this, maybe opening up our hearts a little more. Then, we can start to sense and literally feel in our bodies what it feels like to connect to another person.

Minute 11

I love that because our bodies are our vessels. It is what we drive 24/7 a day. We are in it all the time. Often, we separate ourselves from our body. We don't often allow ourselves to slow down and feel into our body. This is quite important especially if we are in this modern day and age where the word stress means productive.

Minute 12

If we aren't connected to our body and we're not listening to the signals and the symptoms of stress, then what we might be doing is saying, "Hey Mike, you are having this high heart rate, you have high blood pressure, and your body is shaking but you know what, keep going. Keep moving forward because this is what it means to be productive. This is what it means to be a man or this is what it means to be a responsible individual." That is just so nuts and gnarly because, I mean, if we look at data today and if we also know the research on chronic stress, chronic stress basically leads to low life expectancy.

Minute 35

When I used to lead the in classroom workshops with an organization in California, I always made it a point to say, "Hi" to every single student that was coming to my workshop and to make eye contact with them and to, if I had time, then to go deeper into a little bit of a conversation. It takes a lot of time to do that. It takes commitment to do that. It creates the safety in the room and if we're facilitating large groups, if more people feel safe, the deeper work you can do with the group.

Minute 41

When there's a time boundary like that, it doesn't mean to speed up your share. It actually means, "Let's go straight to the emotion. Let's go straight to it.

MORE ABOUT MIKE

Mike is a certified professional men’s coach. He has a BA in Education and spent 10 years as a teaching artist coaching young people. He trained with Challenge Day and with Lincoln Center Education in NYC. In 2017, Mike delivered a TEDx Talk about the significance for young people to have trusted adults in their lives. 

Recognizing the impact and importance of deep emotional health propelled him into his coaching career. After graduating from Coaches Training Institute, Mike launched his coaching practice with the purpose of creating safe spaces for men to think deeply about themselves and to develop skills for living authentic lives. 

Since then, Mike has partnered with companies like DropBox, LinkedIn, Google, Kaiser Permanente, and Saje Wellness. Mike also partners with EVRYMAN, where he hosts men’s groups, facilitates men’s retreats, coaches individuals, and co-leads EVRYMAN’s diversity and inclusion program. 

When Mike isn’t coaching, hosting webinars, or developing ways to help men grow, you can find him with dirty hands, either planting succulents and cacti or in the kitchen cooking with his husband, Jerry. Mike, Jerry, and their pit-bull rescue, Bert, live in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Daniel Stillman:

I'm going to officially welcome you to the Conversation Factory, Mike Sagun. Here we are, I'm grateful for this time.

Mike Sagun:

It goes both ways.

Daniel Stillman:

Thanks, man. I wanted to talk with you. I wanted to have you on the show to talk about men's work in virtual space probably for at least two reasons. One, I think, I mention men's work in my work and a lot of people are like, "What's that about?" Then, I want to make sure we talk about that. The other thing is I know that so many of the guys that we know in this work are ... It's challenging. Everyone's making this challenging transition into virtual space. I think men's work is such an interesting sub-species of virtual conversation. I think there's so much to unpack there.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like the very, very first thing we need to do is talk about who's Mike Sagun and how'd you find your way into doing this work? That's a good place to start.

Mike Sagun:

Hello, everyone. If you really knew me, you'd know that I spent most of my life on the stage in theater. Yes, the charisma comes in naturally. My name is Mike Sagun. I am a men's coach. I'm a men's work facilitator. I facilitate for organizations like Evryman which that's how I know you ...

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Mike Sagun:

... is through Evryman. I am a proud, proud, proud gay man of color. Born and raised in the Bay Area in California, now live in San Miguel de Allende with my husband which is central Mexico three hours north of Mexico City. I focus my work with men or all people who identify as male. The foundation of my work is really a lot of what we practice at Evryman, Daniel, which is slowing the heck down and coming back into our bodies. As men, we naturally are up in our head. We love being up in our head. We're fixers, we're doers, we are problem-solvers. It is completely necessary because we are responsible people. We have families to take care of. We have to earn a living. We have responsibilities. We have friends, unity. Oftentimes, that leads us or that guides us to be in our head all day. What I do with the men that I work with is I teach them skills and tools to add to the tool belt to allow them spaces, intentional time in their day where they can slow down. Honestly, the work is simple. It is really simple.

Mike Sagun:

However, I think the difficulty is knowing when to do it and how to do it. How to get ourselves out of our head because sometimes even being in our bodies, we can lead ourselves back to our head with judgment, with story, with thoughts. The practice, just like my practice of meditation and any practice of meditation, is always about coming back. Coming back to presence. Coming back to this moment. Coming back to my body. What I do with the men I work with is I do that regularly, often, consistently. I bring guys back into their bodies. That's a little bit about me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Why do you think it's important for men to do this type of work?

Mike Sagun:

Well, I firmly believe that intellect and knowledge lives in our head and wisdom lives in our body. When we allow ourselves and I like saying when we relearn how to listen to our bodies because we ... Growing up, when we're babies, we come out of the womb reaching and feeling this world. This is how we develop our brain. We are literally screaming and crying and putting our hands on things. As we get older, we notice that we have a mouth. We want to put things in our mouth and we want to climb things. We want to use our bodies. We naturally do that. We, as babies, we naturally learn how to pick ourselves up. We naturally learn how to turn over. We naturally learn how to crawl. Then, find something to lift ourself up again. We naturally know how to feel into this body of ours. We naturally know what our bodies need.

Mike Sagun:

When we're babies, when we're hungry we cry and we get what we need. When we feel unsafe, we cry and scream and we make ourselves known so that we can get attention. As we develop language and we develop our prefrontal cortex and we develop the understanding of consequences and then also social dynamics, we then unlearn how to feel into our bodies. We have to because we go to school and we take tests and we have to learn and memorize. We have to do all of these things to be quote-unquote "successful" in our lives so that we can go to college or get an education or figure out what we want to do in our life and that actually traps us in our head. Often, when we are conditioned to think that way and live this way, we don't naturally know how to come back into our bodies.

Mike Sagun:

This is important because when we relearn how to listen to our bodies, we then give ourselves the opportunity to notice what it is that we need. I'm not just talking about the pillars of health. Not just talking about what we need to eat, that we need to hydrate, that we need to move our bodies, that we need to sleep, that we need social connection. It also means that we are relearning what our purpose is or we are discovering what our purpose is. We are discovering what it is for us to be intentional in our lives and be deliberate in our lives. Also, when we are in our bodies, it helps us connect with ourself, lower case s and upper case S. Also, connection to others, connection to people that we love or our colleagues and our peers or even men in our life. When we can drop into our bodies, it gives us more access to connect and to feel fulfilled and satisfied in our lives.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's funny because this is on my agenda for us to talk about presence. What it sounds like you're implying, and what I think I also believe, is that if we can't connect to ourselves, it's hard to connect to someone else.

Mike Sagun:

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I was this. This is me in my teens and 20s hanging out with my guy best friends. We would just [inaudible 00:07:28] and just hang out and talk about the most trivial things in our lives. Not saying that that isn't important because it can be very important because part of connection and part of friendships is belonging and part of belonging is shared interests and shared passions. My friends and I would sit around and just talk endlessly about basketball, endlessly about skateboarding or endlessly about the kinds of beers that we loved or the kinds of music that we liked listening to or dancing to. There comes a point and I think many men experience this but don't know how to quite articulate it. There comes a point where these conversations just become dull and they're not energizing anymore. All of a sudden, we are in this place with our best friends who we feel we are deeply connected to that the relationship is stagnant. We start to feel de-energized. We start to feel exhausted in the relationship.

Mike Sagun:

When we can open ourselves up to connection which is vulnerability which is what we would say at Evryman, speaking the unspeakables or if we were to go deeper into this, maybe opening up our hearts a little more. Then, we can start to sense and literally feel in our bodies what it feels like to connect to another person. I want to believe that many of us know what that feels like. Maybe it's like, I'm getting it right now, chills on my arms, chills on my neck. Maybe it's my heartbeat racing a little faster or maybe there's energy running up and down my spine that makes me feel so alive and good. These are sensations in our body that we don't normally pay attention to unless we're guided and directed to. These sensations in our body are lessons for us. There's so much information in what's happening in our physiology and the connection that it has with what's happening in our external world.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I'll just say my opinion is, and there's plenty of other people who've said this, that certainly men in heterosexual relationships, there's this idea of emotional work that women do in a relationship with men. Then, men need to show up more in their work, in their relationships, in those ways. I think there's also in the workplace ... A good friend of mine share with me his principles of running a feminist business. She's in this study program to learn how to make her small business more feminist. The first principle of running a feminist business is you have a body. I was like, "Whoa." I was blown away by this because I think there's this idea that we can force ourselves to be a certain way. That we can show up infinitely. That we can squeeze out effort from ourselves instead of the reality that we have to sleep, we have to eat, we have to take care of ourselves and we're human beings. We have this beingness that we have to take care of.

Daniel Stillman:

I think maybe, and I don't know if you agree with this, that one of the reasons why it's important for men to do this work is so we can have a more balanced world. A lot of women talk about defeating the patriarchy from the outside. I think what we're talking about is resolving ourselves. I think men have internalized patriarchy as well and ways that we are supposed to be, we think we have to be versus, "Well, how are we right now? What do we want? What do we need? Let's be more human." It's real work.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. I love that because our bodies are our vessels. It is what we drive 24/7 a day. We are in it all the time. Often, we separate ourselves from our body. We don't often allow ourselves to slow down and feel into our body. This is quite important especially if we are in this modern day and age where the word stress means productive.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm busy, man, I'm so busy these days.

Mike Sagun:

Right. It's like a badge of honor. It's like a badge of honor to be busy all the time, to work our butts off, and to not have any alone time.

Daniel Stillman:

Not to even be alone with yourself.

Mike Sagun:

Not to be alone with ourselves. Yeah. Absolutely. I think that is destructive, one, to our bodies and our mental health. Also, destructive to everything that we are in contact with, everything that we are in community with. Not only our families but our workplace and the things that we love. If we aren't connected to our body and we're not listening to the signals and the symptoms of stress, then what we might be doing is saying, "Hey Mike, you are having this high heart rate, you have high blood pressure, and your body is shaking but you know what, keep going. Keep moving forward because this is what it means to be productive. This is what it means to be a man or this is what it means to be a responsible individual." That is just so nuts and gnarly because, I mean, if we look at data today and if we also know the research on chronic stress, chronic stress basically leads to low life expectancy.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. It does.

Mike Sagun:

Why aren't we doing more to take intentional time for ourselves throughout the day? I'm not saying go on a freaking awesome retreat and do 10 days of silence and fasting or going on a visioning quest and fasting by yourself. I'm not saying doing that but finding these opportunities in your day to take a deep breath and drop into your body and just notice the sensations we are feeling. Emotions come and go. They wash over us like waves crashing on the sea. How we feel in the morning might not be what we feel when we take our lunch. It may have shifted but often when we don't give ourselves the opportunity to drop into our bodies, that state ... If we woke up frustrated and stressed and we don't notice that we actually shifted it to a place of calm, we might actually be tricking ourselves into saying, "Actually, you're still stressed, Mike, so keep going. Eat your lunch stressed out and keep moving forward." It's like we have to have these opportunities to honor and cherish our bodies. I think women have the intuitive sense to do that.

Mike Sagun:

I think naturally we, as human beings ... I'm not going to say every single human being. I'm not going to say every single human being but I think most of us naturally know what it's like to be in connection another person. Know what it's like to feel love with another person.

Mike Sagun:

It just so happens that socially women ... It's more acceptable for women to have little cuddle puddles with their home girls and sit and talk and gossip and chill out with each other and open up about their feelings. We men have that natural instinct when we are kids. However, we have a brain that says, "Actually, Mike, don't do that because that's social suicide" and that all your friends are going to think that you are whatever derogatory term you want to throw out there. That shoots men down.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Guys police each other very, very hard. I think that's true.

Mike Sagun:

Right. Right.

Daniel Stillman:

It's really interesting though because I think there's a difference between the casual emotional conversations that women can potentially get a lot more access to just because of cultural norms. I was actually coaching a female entrepreneur recently who ... I'll tell the story very briefly because I want you to share some wisdom from your own coaching. I think a coaching conversation is more intentional because it's my job to sit in presence with them and it's their job to be as present as they can and speak the truth. She was expressing that she would be grateful to get all the problems of her start-up if they were handed to her today. Somebody's like, "Here, we're hiring you as the CEO. Here are all these problems." She would be like, "Whoa. This is so exciting. Wow. Look at all these cool, fun problems to work on."

Daniel Stillman:

She then said that she and her co-founder, she's like, "I guess we kind of do have mild PTSD but we're just pushing through." I was like, "Wait a minute. I'm just going to repeat back what you just said to me. You have mild PTSD and you're pushing through." She was like, "You know, when you say it that way, I mean," and I'm like, "Oh, like exactly how you said it to me."

Daniel Stillman:

What would you say to a friend of yours who said, "I have mild PTSD but I am just going to knuckle through this?" She was like, "Yeah. I would say that we should" ... Because she was looking at the problems that she had and there's all this emotional baggage with them. She wasn't just like, "Okay, it's a problem. Let's go solve it." It's like, "Oh my God, I've created this problem and I hate myself. I can't believe I have to do this." Holding that intentional space for something is transformative for them to hear themselves. I think you do an amazing job of creating intentional safe space for people to peel back layers. I'm just wondering what do you think you are doing on purpose? What do you think you are doing? What are you doing internally to show up in that way for people?

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. In a space like this as a facilitator, in a healing space like this as a facilitator, I think what's most important is for me to notice what I'm feeling first, how I'm showing up in here.

Daniel Stillman:

How apropos, yeah.

Mike Sagun:

Coming into each ... Yeah, and just really checking in on myself and noticing what my nervous system is like and if I'm activated or not. Allowing myself to do my work with myself before coming into a space like an Evryman drop-in group or even in a coaching relationship. What I'm really saying is I'm listening. I think in the coaching world we talk about this often as a really valuable coaching skill, listening. Through my practice and through my training, there's three levels of listening.

Mike Sagun:

The first is level one listening which is not really listening. You're there with a person but you're already thinking about what you're going to say next which, I think, many of us can experience and we are very familiar with. Then, level two listening we're really engaged in the person. We're listening to every single consonant of the word that they're saying and every single ... We are very fully tuned in to their story or what they're talking about. That is a powerful skill is just to be there in space because I also feel like level two listening is one of the most powerful gifts that you can offer for someone. Just being there for that person to use you as a sound board.

Mike Sagun:

Then, there's level three listening which is level two listening but also listening to what's happening within ourselves internally but also what's happening in their body language and their micro facial expressions. Then also, what's happening in the environment that we are in both intimately like in our room or in our office and then also what's happening outside in the world. What's happening in the culture, what's happening in politics. Level three listening, I think, is one of the greatest gifts that we can offer someone but also what we can offer ourselves especially when we're facilitating a space like this. Just understanding where this person might be and what they might be going through. Not just internally but also externally in the world.

Mike Sagun:

Holding that space, I think what's most important is first checking in with ourselves and noticing how you show up. How am I showing up into this space? Do I need to let go of anything in order for me to be completely present for the person in front of me?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Then also, and maybe I'm projecting, I feel like I'm also ... This is sometimes called transference and countertransference where it shows up as intuition. Sometimes, what's showing up for you, your internal sensations are, "I think this person might need to know this. I might be two steps ahead of them and they need to get there on their own." That sometimes comes up. I don't know if those are internal dialogues you have with yourself as a coach.

Mike Sagun:

Oh my gosh. Absolutely. I mean, my intuition is ... I mean, I lean on that the most. I've been pushing for several years, and right now, my intuition is 90% to 95% right. That when I call something in my intuition and I see it and I put a voice to it, it resonates. However, there's a five to 10% chance that it's wrong and that's okay. That is okay because when our intuition is wrong and it gets called out for being wrong, the person that you're working with gets to figure out what the answer is for themselves. In many ways, it's a win-win but also if we get it wrong, then it also strengthens our intuition. It lets us know, "Oh great, okay, cool. That was wrong so let's honor that. Let's honor that that wasn't the right path but let's see what comes up next."

Mike Sagun:

I think for us as coaches, I think sometimes ... We all have an intuition. Every single person has an intuition and we would call it our sixth sense. It is right there in our belly. That's where the expression having that gut feeling comes from. Every single time that we have the opportunity to listen to that intuition and we take action based on that intuition, we are strengthening that intuition even if that intuition was wrong.

Mike Sagun:

If we were to think about our bodies, we have a mind that we use to get things done. Then, we have instinct which our body tells us, "Hey, Mike, you should probably eat some food right now" or "Hey, you should probably get some sleep right now" which is the oldest parts of our body. It is part of our reptilian brain. It's part of our nervous system.

Mike Sagun:

Then, we have a third part of our body which is our intuition. That intuition is wisdom. It is not a guess. It is based on evidence though. It is based on what we know. The deeper that we are, the deeper relationship that we have with our clients or the groups that we're working with, the stronger intuition is going to get in understanding and knowing what might be best for this person or what might be best for this group. I love listening to my intuition. It is so part of this work and especially so part of the work that we do with men because sometimes I could listen to my intuition and I'll say something so freaking random and the guy is like, "Oh, whoa. Yes, that totally lands with me. That totally feels right."

Daniel Stillman:

I always like to joke, if you don't listen to your intuition, then you might just pack up and go someplace where it's a little more wanted. I mean, I just feel like I'm in a passive-aggressive relationship with my ... My intuition's like, "Well, I'm clearly not needed here so okay, I'll go visit Mike more often because he listens to me." It's interesting because what you're describing, coaching and facilitation don't sound very different to me in practice because and maybe I'm just looking through my conversation designed cybernetics lens where there's this feedback loop of sensing and responding and stepping forward and stepping back and leaning in and leaning back and pushing and pulling, asking and waiting in space. There's a feel to the thing. I don't know if that was a question.

Mike Sagun:

Say more about that.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I'm just wondering where do you feel the differences? I mean, obviously, as a coach, it's a one-on-one conversation. As a facilitator, you're holding space for, I mean, what was it? The drop-in group. It was almost 30 guys. It's a different type of presence or is it?

Mike Sagun:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I don't know. What's different for you about the way you show up for these two-

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. I love ...

Daniel Stillman:

... different conversations?

Mike Sagun:

I see that. Okay. I love that question. Yeah. In group, I'm also monitoring other guys. I'm looking at their reactions and what their body movements are. I'm noticing how they're being impacted by what's being shared. I'm noticing if they're distracted or if they feel completely engaged in the conversation. With one-on-one, I'm paying attention to everything that's happening with just them and also what's happening maybe in their background or where they are in their environment. There is a slight difference in skill because I think with facilitation there's a little bit more of multitasking listening. You got to listen to 30 plus guys that are on this call with you while simultaneously listening to the guy who's sharing whereas in a one-on-one setting, there's less multitasking. Not to say that the work is more powerful with the one-on-one coaching. There just needs to be a little bit more skill in the facilitators and to manage and to feel into what's happening in these spaces.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to get down to that a little bit because I was taking notes during the drop-in group and just to give people some context because I feel like ... Could you maybe draw the arc of how a regular men's group that you and I would be in differs from the arc of how the drop-in group agenda kind of works?

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. I think when we talk about men's group, I think many of us are very familiar with ... We all meet in person which we're not doing today. It is the same six to eight guys that come every single week to group. What's beautiful about that dynamic is as the group matures and as it gets older, we get to know each other on a deeper level and more and deeper work can happen because of that. In a drop-in group, there is not commitment level. This is an offering that we put out with every man where if you want to taste the sport, if you want to dip your toe in and see the work that we do and kind of see what can happen in your life if you just gave yourself and took a risk to step in a group, this is what can happen. It's an opportunity for guys to see other guys do their work or even participate themselves and share.

Mike Sagun:

What's different is that guys don't have to commit to it. If they decide that they want to come one Friday and then all of a sudden, they're like, "You know what? This work is not for me. I don't think I'm going to come back again" or "I think I need to take a break from it," they can take that break. There's no commitment level. There's no agreement that says, "Oh, I need to tell Mike that this is not for me" or "I need to tell the group that I'm commitment for six months." There's none of that whereas in an in-person group, there's some very clear agreements that we have. Some groups that I've facilitated and that I've started, our agreement is, "Come to one group. If it feels good, commit to one month and see what happens. Then, we'll revisit."

Mike Sagun:

If it doesn't resonate with you in the first group, awesome. Here are other resources. Here's another men's group if this is of any interest to you. If not, okay, well, if it ever calls to you again, come back. In the drop-in group, what's different is we get guys from all over the world. It's not just your local community of men. These are guys that are staying up late in Israel or in the Philippines. Staying up until 9:00 p.m., 2:00 a.m., sometimes in the Philippines to be in this group with us. On some level because I have regulars that come to this group, there is a commitment for them.

Daniel Stillman:

I felt that.

Mike Sagun:

It isn't like in their-

Daniel Stillman:

I felt that. It felt like a lot more cohesive than I expected honestly.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. Yeah. I get like 20 to 30 regulars every week that show up every single Friday. There is a group dynamic that happens when there are 20 to 30 guys that understand this work and that are willing to open up.

Daniel Stillman:

Yet, you are still really explicit about some fundamental agreements because that was one of the things, bullet point one I had was you slowed us down. You really got clear on the agreements. Then, I noticed you did something and I don't know if you did this because your Internet was giving you trouble but you passed the mike. I think this is such a powerful thing to do as a facilitator is to step back. You let another guy in the group ... You're like, "Is anybody called to ...

Mike Sagun:

Lead a meditation.

Daniel Stillman:

... lead a meditation?" I was like, "What a cool thing." I mean, we do that in my men's group. We rotate that job. I thought that was so cool that you just gave that job away in the group.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. Thanks, Dan. In my years of facilitating groups and workshops and classes, what I find most powerful and most valuable for people is when they can feel like they own a part of it.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Mike Sagun:

They can be a part of it and they can also be a leader or a captain in it. Every group I allow guys to step into that leadership. For some guys, it's risky. It's like their opportunity to share their craft. Sometimes, they're not as skilled as a meditator or they're not as skilled as a leader but it's okay because they took a risk and that's what this work is about. This work is about taking this risk in a safe environment so you can see what it feels like to be in discomfort but also be in safety at the same time. I always offer guys to lead the meditation because it does give them a sense of ownership. Then, you might have noticed that also when I break guys out of the small groups for the first time check in, I also assign captains. I assign guys who have been in our drop-in group or who are part of an Evryman group to lead. This also gives them another sense of ownership and leadership in the space.

Daniel Stillman:

I think it's really interesting at this point almost a year into this remote world that a wide [crosstalk 00:32:15]-

Mike Sagun:

Oh my gosh, yes.

Daniel Stillman:

... for people to commit to, I think of many people who have [inaudible 00:32:19] on to the importance of the breakout. I also know that, for me personally, the more closely scoped the breakout question prompt is, the safer I feel. I was visiting someone else's session and there was sort of like an, "Oh, just tell people where you're from" and I don't even know what else it was and just my chest just gripped with fear of like, "Oh, I'm going to be in this room of random people" and in a way knowing that someone is in charge and that the 30-second check in that the men's work that we're in recommends you start with is so crisp and clear. It's very low BS. To me, that's very ... Then, we wound up with lots of time. Then, someone was like, "Oh, where's everyone from?" Then, we got into that conversation and it's fine because we had built that safe foundation which is ...

Mike Sagun:

Right. Right. How can we offer safety? We offer safety by setting people up with success. That means a little bit of hand holding. It's not just like, "Oh, we're doing some small groups in breakout rooms. We're just going to throw all of you in there and let's just see what happens because I think we all know by now," I'm making all these generalizations, "Many of us know what it's like to be in a small group" and it's just awkward silence.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Mike Sagun:

There's no direction and there's no leadership. It's like, "Well, what do we do?" That activates us. That activates our nervous system and all of a sudden we're in a fight or flight and we're like, "Oh God, got to fill the space. I got to fill the space and we men like filling space especially in silent, especially with groups. We like filling the space with words." It's part of, how can we feel the most safe in this? If we feel the most safe in an environment, then we are open and we are open to receiving. That's where a lot of the deep work happens is if we come into a space and feel safe.

Daniel Stillman:

It seems like there's two things I'm hearing, and I agree with both of them, is distributing authority can actually make people feel more in control and more safe. Also, starting with a small amount of intimacy can provide a foundation for deep intimacy.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. When I used to lead the in classroom workshops with an organization in California, I always made it a point to say, "Hi" to every single student that was coming to my workshop and to make eye contact with them and to, if I had time, then to go deeper into a little bit of a conversation. It takes a lot of time to do that. It takes commitment to do that. It creates the safety in the room and if we're facilitating large groups, if more people feel safe, the deeper work you can do with the group. Even engaging in a little bit of intimacy of asking, "How are you doing" or "Hey, what's your name" or even saying, "Hey, how do I pronounce your name," that's one of my favorites is there's a name that I don't know how to pronounce and I'm like, "How do I say your name? Did I say your name right?" That immediately brings them into, "Oh my gosh, this guy cares."

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Mike Sagun:

This guy understands I have a name that might be difficult to the American vernacular and so he might have trouble hearing my name. Asking them simple questions like that can help them open up into the space. My philosophy around facilitation has always been slow and simple. How can we make it slow and simple because if we're hand holding which we do a lot in facilitation is holding hands and guiding people, how can we make this accessible for them? It's accessible when we make things simple.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to highlight something else I saw you do which I thought was brilliant. This is something that I used to do in in-person workshops is you gave away what I call the time friend when people want to do a longer check in. After we had done the breakout sessions, somebody had something deeper that they wanted to check in on. You asked if somebody would volunteer to be the timekeeper and to let us know when ... You have four minutes and when there's one minute left, just drop that in the chat. Here's what blew me away. I loved this phrase. When it's four minutes, it doesn't mean your time is up. It just means that you've been talking for four minutes. I almost died because you talk about slow and simple but you said it so clear. It's important because you want to have multiple guys share what they're working on. You were almost doing a mini little journey with each one. If there was more there, you could pull more out of them. You had asked them to slow down and you were doing a little coaching session.

Daniel Stillman:

There was that guy in the room who was your friend who was just looking out for you who said, "Hey, it's four minutes." He would see it too. Everybody would see it. Everybody knows it's been four minutes and that's okay. That just means it's been four minutes. Such a precise way of saying, "Tell me a little bit about your relationship to time when you're in this kind of a group setting." Mike, I'm going to make sure I didn't lose you or I just asked too deep a question. Oops. Let's see. It looks like I might have lost him. Mike.

Mike Sagun:

Okay. Hey, I'm back.

Daniel Stillman:

Hey, welcome back. When did we lose you?

Mike Sagun:

I apologize for that.

Daniel Stillman:

No, it's totally fine. I was like, "Did I ask too deep of a question?" You just really paused super long and I was like, I gave it some silence and then I was like, "Let's just check that he's still here" and there's one participant.

Mike Sagun:

I lost you at, I think you were getting into the time and setting the time around shares.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, you set up this very clear agreement. You set up the very clear arc. You gave away the time friending, the time boxing role to someone. You said to the guy who's sharing, "When you get that one-minute warning, you'll see it in the chat, it's there." Someone else is doing that for you, you're liberated. You can coach that guy. Then, you said when you see that the four minutes is up, it doesn't mean that your time is up, it just means that you've been speaking for four minutes. There was some, I don't know, man, grace in the way you said it. It's a very generous, very spacious relationship to time. I felt liberated in that moment. The question was like, what's Mike's relationship to time in that context?

Mike Sagun:

Beautiful. Boundaries. We have to create the space and when we create the space, we have to set the boundaries. These are the boundaries. There happens to be a time boundary here. When there's a time boundary like that, it doesn't mean to speed up your share. It actually means, "Let's go straight to the emotion. Let's go straight to it." It takes away time for one, as a facilitator, I know that, "Okay. Cool. If this guys gets into story, if he gets into things that aren't relevant, then I know that he has two or three minutes left and I need to bring him back so that some deep work can happen in this four-minute timeframe." It helps me as a facilitator one, just be laser sharp around the facilitation. It also gives them an opportunity to know that, "Okay. Cool. I have four minutes. This is my boundary. I know that I need to go right to it. If I volunteer to come up and speak now, it's my time and it's my opportunity to share what I need to share in order for me to feel different."

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's a firm boundary but it's also a soft boundary because it's funny, I'm thinking the guy whose timing the share doesn't have am, "Okay, let us know when it's another four minutes." After that four minutes, you're aware. You and everyone else, the guy sharing is ... Because [inaudible 00:42:14] has seen that in the chat. This guy could be crying. He's going through a real moment. When you're talking about presence and holding that safe space that, to me, is that once you're over that initial boundary, that's a challenging space I Feel.

Mike Sagun:

Well, I also say and this is going back to the intuition, if the energy is there, we'll keep it going. If it takes eight minutes and it takes 12 minutes and if it takes us to the end of this call, we'll keep it there if the energy is there. I've been doing this for a while and I can tell if a guy is coming to a place of completion or if a guy is, "I need more work." Also, if a guy is, "I just need to talk and I need to let this out." There have been times because this isn't talk therapy because this isn't group coaching and because we have these firm boundaries and we have an agreement to help, we want more guys to come. Sometimes, we'll have to say, "Hey man, it's been five, six minutes, is there anything that you needed to say to feel complete right now?"

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. That's a great prompt.

Mike Sagun:

I'm using everything in my tool belt to get him to a place of emotional connection. Sometimes, they're not ready for that. They're not there yet and that's okay. It's my responsibility as the facilitator to then start to wrap that up so that we can get more voices in here.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. That incompletion is also okay when it's hard to fully quote-unquote "tie it off" in the perfect bow.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. Yes. Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, we always say in the work that we do in our men's groups is, "We're not here to fix you. We're not here to solve your problems. That's not what we're doing. This work might be therapeutic. It might be therapeutic but it's not therapy or coaching. This is a space for you to share what's on your heart and get down to the emotion. What are you feeling in your body?"

Daniel Stillman:

For that, I think it's a very special and clear boundary that's being drawn out. What type of thing, what type of conversation, what type of transformation can happen in this space and time we have. Honestly, for an hour it's pretty amazing because ... I'll just say this from my men's group. When we met in person, we met from 7:00 to 9:30 or 10:00. I think we got a lot for free for being in person. Being remotely, we had to strip it down. We had to go shorter. We had to be crisper just because people were tired. Then, I think, it gets a little more mechanical. I think it's definitely a balance to be ... I think I was definitely guilty of keeping us on time but then maybe not getting to as much depth.

Mike Sagun:

So many of us are ... We're on Zoom all the time. We're on our devices all the time. There is a threshold of where we don't want to be on our screens anymore where we are more distracted being on our screens. These time limits and being very clear about how much time we're spending on the screen is important but it's also respectful. I always let the guys know, "I'm going to get you out of here at the hour because I know you guys have responsibilities and you're showing up for this hour. The expectation is you're here for the hour. This is the service. You're here for the hour and your expectation is that you're going to be out of here at the hour."

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I mean, that's a perfect prompt because our time is also running short. I mean, what haven't we talked about, Mike, do you think that's important? We've talked a little bit about men's work in the virtual space. We talked a little bit about holding safety and presence. What hasn't been said that should be said? What's left unsaid?

Mike Sagun:

Great men's work question.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, it's how I actually end almost every interview because I think it's one of my favorite questions because I know there's no way we can tap into all the wisdom you have in this time. Before we leave, we'll make sure that you tell us where to find things Mike Sagun. For right now, what else can you leave us with in terms of leading in this virtual space?

Mike Sagun:

I just had to take a deep breath there.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. Actually, can I just because that's the one post that we did not talk about. I saw you do, and I learned this from another facilitator as well, getting the group to take a team breath. You did this three times just to ... You reset the room over and over again. You're like, "You know what? That was elevating." You didn't even say that. You'd just be like, "Let's just everyone take a deep breath." We just all just went down from the red zone into the yellow and back into the green.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I love to see you do that.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. I mean, that work ... Can you still hear me?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah.

Mike Sagun:

Can you still hear me?

Daniel Stillman:

Absolutely. Yeah. You're here. Check. Check.

Mike Sagun:

The body of work that I focus on is emotional awareness and slowing down into the body. Emotions come and go like I said earlier. One moment you can be feeling excited. You can be feeling elated. You can have all of these emotions as elevated emotions. Then, all of a sudden, something might happen in your environment either externally or internally. All of a sudden, you are in someplace completely different. This is normal. This happens all day long. We don't often pay attention to it. In a group setting especially in the work that we do because there is so much feeling, there's so much emotion that is being shared, we as this observer or we witnessing a person also shift in our being. If we don't honor this shift in our being, then we don't notice the different shifts that are happening in our body. Then, we don't honor ourselves for doing that. It's like when we take that deep breath, it's an up [inaudible 00:49:24] just notice what's different now. What feels different now?

Mike Sagun:

I came into this call feeling anxious and nervous. Now, I feel calm and connected. That's something to honor, to highlight or I came in calm and now I'm feeling anxious and angry. That's also something beautiful to honor. This comes down to the nuance of emotions and also emotional embodiment and emotional granularity coming down to noticing where in your body you feel something different. These are the steps to just becoming more emotionally aware so that we can be more emotionally intelligent in our life.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Really this comes down to what I'm hearing you say in terms of presence. I think it's so powerful just to say what is happening, to speak that [crosstalk 00:50:17] to say, "I'm feeling that tension. Let's all take a deep breath. Let's get back to our center" and everyone goes, "Yes, I want to do that."

Mike Sagun:

Right. Also, as a facilitator and bringing back intuition again, if I'm feeling something in my body, someone else is probably feeling something similar in their body. If I'm feeling tension and tightness in my body, someone else might be feeling that tension and tightness in their body too. I'm listening to [inaudible 00:50:54] and then I'm putting a voice to it. I'm just sharing it so that other guys have permission to connect with those sensations too.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. That's leading from your core so everyone else can show up as well. That's amazing.

Mike Sagun:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Mike, I know that our time is drawing to a close. Where should people go on the Internet to learn more about your work and to connect with your work?

Mike Sagun:

Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Daniel. I spend a lot of time on Instagram so you can find me there. That is Mike.Sagun, M-I-K-E-.-S-A-G-U-N. Of course, the Clubhouse phenomenon is going on. It is a great platform but also I laugh because it's just another social media piece to tackle. You can find me there at the same handle.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. Good to know. I haven't yet beasted that beast. I'm holding the beast at a distance right now.

Mike Sagun:

I am too. It's still at a distance for me but I also find it really valuable and interesting to hear other people's perspective in real time. Yeah. You can find me there. You could also find me on my website at MikeSagun.com, so M-I-K-E-S-A-G-U-N.com.

Daniel Stillman:

Mike, I'm so grateful for the time. You're awesome. This is really important work and I hope that people will take what was in this conversation and bring it into their virtual gatherings which are pretty much the only type of gatherings that they should be having for some time.

Mike Sagun:

Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Thank you. Thank you, Daniel, for this opportunity. This was so much fun. Really, really wonderful conversation and thanks for letting me follow. You're a great leader.

Facilitation and Self Leadership

TS-cover-2.jpg

Tomomi Sasaki and I sat down to talk in-depth about her journey of self-awareness and inner work as a facilitator.

We met at an advanced facilitation masterclass I ran for Google at their Sprint Conference, way back in 2018. She tweeted at the end of 2020:

I've been facilitating workshops for about a decade. The first few years were ferocious, needs-based learning. Workshops took a tremendous amount of energy to plan and run, and after each one, I'd faceplant onto the nearest sofa.

Once things became manageable, I plateaued. I worked on plenty of facilitation assignments (and did a bunch of public speaking about lessons learned) but I was coasting and I knew it.

Then @kaihaley and the @GoogleDesign Sprint Conference gave me the gift of a full day training from @dastillman, and I started to think of facilitation as a practice. (you can listen to my conversation with Kai Haley here.)

Building a practice sends a different kind of signal into the universe. This gives me watershed experiences that blows apart a door I didn't know was there. Behind each door is a whole new landscape to explore, and new friends to explore it with.

It happens consistently, once or twice a year. I don't know what's behind that cadence but it is an amazing thing. You *think* you know the edges of the land and then... ah hah! It gets me every time.

It had been a while since we’d connected, but when I read that twitter thread, I knew we had to sit down to talk about her journey to thinking about facilitation as a practice and what that meant.

Tomomi is a designer and partner at the independent design studio AQ, and a frequent collaborator of Enterprise Design Associates. She's also a top-notch facilitator and, as you might have learned by now, a very reflective practitioner, and in this episode, she gives some invaluable advice about how to improve at the skill of facilitation - beyond tips and tricks.

I loved it when Tomomi said that “The insight for me was that I need to take care of who I am and what I'm bringing into the room as a facilitator because that's part of what's going to happen in the dynamics.”

Tomomi is essentially saying in her own words what Bill O'Brien, the late CEO of Hanover Insurance said, that “The success of an intervention depends on the interior condition of the intervener.”

success of intervention.jpg

When we facilitate, when we lead a group, we are noticing the system...and what we choose to respond to, focus on or call out will shift what happens in the system. The question here is...how do you affect change in a complex system...that YOU are part of? 

Many people treat learning and change like a purely technical challenge: They have a deficit in performance and the assumption is that they can learn better ways of doing and apply them.

Similarly, we think we can apply a pattern or tool (like a facilitated workshop agenda, exercise or the like) and get a reliable result - like a baking recipe. But any bread baker will tell you that the weather, the flour and your mood can shift how things go. Dough is alive.

There are two challenges with this mechanical, recipe, way of thinking...one is that people and systems of people are complex...so, the likelihood of things going exactly according to plan without any need for adaptation and improvisation is...unlikely. People, like dough, are alive.

The other issue is that many people think it’s new and better ways of doing that are needed...where it’s actually different ways of thinking, different mental models and assumptions...which will naturally lead to different ways of doing.

Some folks (Chris Argyris and Donald Schön) describe this as the difference between single-loop and double-loop learning and others even point to triple and even quadruple loop learning...the core of which could be self-awareness, or seeing how we ourselves can affect the system. This is the transition from facilitation and leadership as “doing to” or performance to “doing with” and presence.

The way you show up internally will change what happens in the session.

https://organizationallearning9.wordpress.com/single-and-double-loop-learning/

https://organizationallearning9.wordpress.com/single-and-double-loop-learning/

As Tomomi says later in our conversation, 

“I think what struck me was that in facilitation, we think so much about the participants, and the first question you basically asked in the master class was who are you? Until that moment, I hadn't really thought about that, and I think that's why I was getting so burnt out. You give and give without really an awareness of what you're doing to yourself or what you need to be. Then the realization is that, oh, that's where your strength comes from, it's where the practice needs to be built on, because you can't change that much, right?...So, might as well work with what you have. “

I care deeply about this idea. I think that facilitation and leadership more generally, is about expanding your range of capabilities - your ability to show up, on purpose, as the occasion calls for it. Tomomi suggests we can’t change *that much...but we can try to grow. I have a free course on Exploring and Expanding your roles as a facilitator, which you can find here.

There is so much goodness in Tomomi’s reflections. I hope you enjoy the conversation as much as I did.

LINKS, KEY QUOTES, NOTES AND RESOURCES

Tomomi's website

On LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomomisasaki/

On Twitter: @tomomiq

Minute 18

I think that it starts with recognizing that, well, to create space for yourself in the way you facilitate and think about facilitation. The insight for me was that I need to take care of who I am and what I'm bringing into the room as a facilitator because that's part of what's going to happen in the dynamics. So, first, that recognition, and then the understanding that feeling grounded in what we're doing and who we are in that moment was this foundation that we could build upon.

Minute 19

I think once that grounding is there, we're more self-aware of what we're reacting to, and that is what allows us to regulate and recognize if we're just emotionally reacting to something that's happening in the room. Is that something we want to use or is it something that we should let go? Having that, being able to look at yourself in that moment and then what's happening in the room is this level of awareness that I definitely didn't have in the beginning.

Minute 24

One thing about having a practice is that it allows us to actively seek out peers and people to practice with. For something like facilitation, which is always done with other people, doesn't really make sense to just be in your little corner and read about facilitation. Right? You have to go out and really grapple with that liveness. So, maybe even more than other disciplines. For something like facilitation, it's always in the relationship with who you're doing it with.

Minute 27

So, as a co-facilitator, you know how the whole thing is designed and you get a sense of that person. Then when you step into that facilitator role, you start to sense what they're doing deliberately or not, and then how the energy in the room is changing or the conversation is changing. So, I think that gives you this perspective on what power is there and what's being deployed and what the reaction is. So, there's definitely a lot of observation in real-time.

Then the gift of having a co-facilitator, especially one where there's a mutual recognition that we want to grow and be better and help each other, is there's so much debriefing and exchange that just happens naturally. Maybe it's the two minutes while you go grab a coffee, it's lunch during the workshop, and maybe it's the one hour beer that you have afterwards. But all of these conversations, they're like tiny, tiny feedback loops that you can only get from somebody, a fellow practitioner that just experienced the same thing. So, this is invaluable, I think, to get that explicit feedback loop with each other.

Minute 32

So, recently, I've been thinking of facilitation as a capability and equating it to things like writing and presenting, which we all do, even if we're not writers or presenters. We know we need to do these things, regardless of our role or where we are in our experience.

I think in our heads, we know that if we invested in these skills, it would really help with everything else. If I were a better writer, I can write crisper email and more pointy Slack messages, sharper reports, and all these things.

Minute 44

I think what struck me was that in facilitation, we think so much about the participants, and the first question you basically asked in the master class was who are you? Until that moment, I hadn't really thought about that, and I think that's why I was getting so burnt out. You give and give without really an awareness of what you're doing to yourself or what you need to be. Then the realization is that, oh, that's where your strength comes from, it's where the practice needs to be built on, because can't change that much, right?...So, might as well work with what you have. So, yeah. I'm so grateful for you having triggered that realization.

MORE ABOUT TOMOMI

My name is Tomomi Sasaki. I'm a designer and partner at the independent design studio AQ, running projects that deliver useful digital services through a combination of expert project management skills with a decade of practicing UX design and research. Past cases include tools that empower people to train for marathons (ASICS), gain skills in digital marketing (Google) and manage HR data (huubHR).

I am a frequent collaborator of Enterprise Design Associates, bringing product strategy, design research and facilitation skills to challenges like organizational culture change (Toyota Motor Europe), innovation in the employee experience (AccorHotels) and building the digital workplace (Deutsche Telekom).

Based in Paris since late 2014, I'm often on the road and spend a few weeks in Tokyo every six months.

Background

From Apr 2009 to Mar 2012, I was Japanese Language Editor for the citizen media initiative Global Voices Online, writing to shed insight on cultural and social issues from the Japanese blogosphere.

I have a background in multi-database research, professional Japanese/English translation skills, and used to be an editor for Japan’s largest art and design information site, Tokyo Art Beat. I currently sit on the Board of Directors for its parent organization, Gadago NPO.

I was born in Japan, spent my childhood in sunny California, and lived in Tokyo for almost two decades.

My name means 'beautiful friend' :)

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. Well, I will officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory, Tomomi Sasaki. Thank you so much for making the time for this conversation.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Thank you so much for having me, Daniel.

Daniel Stillman:

So, I want to unpack with you your journey as a facilitator, maybe what your inciting event was when you got the call to the adventure, when you started down this road. When does your story start?

Tomomi Sasaki:

I had a very formative experience as a workshop participant after a few years of work, and it was the first time that I had participated in a one week, we were not calling it design sprints, but a lot of the ideas were embedded in that workshop where couple of different companies had come together to envision this big digital service that we were going to design together. I was the project manager of the design team and fairly low on the totem pole within everybody that was around the group, around the table.

Tomomi Sasaki:

It was such an amazing experience for me to see how a group could, once there was a process and principles in place, how we could work together and work on how we work together and also on the idea. So, that was the first time I'd really experienced that in a professional setting, and I felt so welcome and valued in that environment where I didn't go into it thinking I had a lot to contribute. I was really just there to understand what was going on and maybe take some notes.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So, that lived experience of being liberated and being myself in that experience, and also just being able to provide more value and enjoying it was something that I thought, oh, this facilitator skill is something I would really like to learn and be able to design that environment. So, that just got me on this journey of trying to do it myself and just, yeah, trying and failing and spending a lot of time trying to figure out what worked and what didn't.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Along the way, I realized that a lot of what I had learned in high school, being involved in theater, and I was not onstage. I really liked being in the audience with the lights. I was a person trying the spotlight and seeing how little differences in the way the stage was set up would just change drastically the way the experience was for the audience. So, I did not go into theater, but I still have a love for it, and I think in a way, I see the workshop room as my version of a stage, that we're here to produce together.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so interesting. There's so much to unpack there, this foundational moment of being seen and heard and valued, and then wanting to give that to other people. I feel like there's a very ... It's a very beautiful internal move. I feel like facilitators do value this idea of inclusion, and it's great. What I love is that you found a metaphor that works for you to make the process coherent. Some people couldn't see it as putting on a party, if they're party planners, and putting on a show with the front of house and the back of house is a really, really powerful analogy.

Daniel Stillman:

So, for me, the inciting incident for this conversation was this Twitter thread you put on, and I really identified with this. I'm going to quote you directly. "The first few years were ferocious needs-based learning. Workshops took a tremendous amount of energy to plan and run, and after each one, I had to face plant into the nearest sofa." That was a decade of that feeling, or maybe slightly less than a decade.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah, a little bit less. I'm not a super social person. I'm not the one to grab the mic and start talking. I believe so much in the power of good facilitation. I didn't know what really worked for me, and so I was emulating what I'd seen. I think that just took so much energy out of me. It's super intense. There's no breaks, in a way, especially if you don't know how to regulate yourself, which I don't think we do know how in the first couple of years, and without maybe like a co-facilitator, someone more experienced to help pace things. So, it always felt like you spend 200% of yourself, all of your energy, and then once it's done, it was like-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's interesting.

Tomomi Sasaki:

... just flat out-

Daniel Stillman:

In a way, you as an introverted, or an extroverted introvert or an introverted extroverted. I don't know. Which do you self-identify as? Because you're definitely somewhere in the middle. My theory is that pure extroverts are psychopaths and pure introverts are just ... I don't know. I don't think they even exist. So, everyone's in the middle and has many capacities. But it sounds like you value being seen, and I would just presuppose that in a way, there's a part of you that enjoyed somebody pulling you out and bringing you out and seeing you. As an introvert, it feels good to get pulled in to the conversation, to be invited in and just have someone take your hand and say, "We want you here."

Tomomi Sasaki:

Absolutely. Yeah, and that we all have different needs in having that done to us and having the skills and that flexibility and range to be able to do that is something I strive to do as a facilitator.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's just so interesting to me because it's like you're paying it forward, but at a cost to yourself.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Oh. Yeah. Yeah, just burning out, mini-burnout with each workshop. But I see, and especially because I'm Japanese and I'm female, and now I've come to understand, and that's not something I understand in the beginning, is that the skill of facilitation is a radical way to have a relationship with power, and I'm coming from a cultural backdrop where maybe I'm not expected to speak so much or be loud. I think there's a big part of that, of, well, but if there are ways to structure and design and nudge the environment for people to feel like they could do it, and also that actually, that's what we all want to be doing, then isn't that great, without being the boss or the person with official power.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Then I think after a decade of practicing, I've come to understand that this is something that all of us could be doing, even if it's not in the context of a workshop.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, yeah.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So-

Daniel Stillman:

No, please. Please go on. There's more there. I know.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Oh, I was going to refer to your work and your language to describe conversation and our language as material that can be designed, and I really subscribe to this line of thinking.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. Power as an element to play with is really, I think ... There's a whole chapter about it in my book, because I think there's this idea of a normal power differential where people expect, as they sometimes do, to be told what to do or they want to push back against that. Facilitation does play with that power dynamic. I think there's also something in what you're saying about, at least, this is my own perspective, doing all the individual pulling out of people vs. setting up a structure that allows power to be flattened and allows people to step forward is a less exhausting way of holding space.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. Yes, absolutely. Well, first of all, everyone should read your book. So, shout out there. But yes. Yes, exactly. I think that was something that shifted in my practice a few years in and why I'm not ... Well, it's still very intense, but then I'm not having these flat out moments anymore because I learned to let go of things and also embed a lot of it in the structure so that it's not always coming from something that I need to do in that moment. Yeah. This is really fascinating to me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is doing to vs. doing with, and I think that's a huge shift. You used a phrase, and I really want to unpack this, back a few beats about regulating yourself. I don't think many people would normally think about regulating yourself as a powerful leadership skill or facilitation skill. What do you mean when you say regulating yourself and how do you regulate yourself?

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think that it starts with recognizing that, well, to create space for yourself in the way you facilitate and think about facilitation. The insight for me was that I need to take care of who I am and what I'm bringing into the room as a facilitator because that's part of what's going to happen in the dynamics. So, first, that recognition, and then the understanding that feeling grounded in what we're doing and who we are in that moment was this foundation that we could build upon.

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think once that grounding is there, we're more self-aware of what we're reacting to, and that is what allows us to regulate and recognize if we're just emotionally reacting to something that's happening in the room. Is that something we want to use or is it something that we should let go? Having that, being able to look at yourself in that moment and then what's happening in the room is this level of awareness that I definitely didn't have in the beginning.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, in a way, you are checking in with yourself. I'll just say, what I'm hearing you say is you can't regulate yourself unless you are noticing what you are experiencing-

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.

Daniel Stillman:

... and separating what you're experiencing from what's happening in the room, and then making a decision about what you want to do with it.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah. Yeah. Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Which is work, for sure.

Tomomi Sasaki:

It is a lot of work. It is a lot of work, which is probably why I believe that if we look at facilitation as a practice, then we put continued care, intending, and investment in it, and it's not just workshop to workshop to workshop. So, that kind of care into the sustainability of how we do it is something that I'm much more conscious of now.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, yeah. What is the shift? What's the implication of looking at facilitation as a practice vs. I think sometimes people have been saying to me for the last year, "Oh, what are your tips and tricks for facilitating better online?" There's a certain part of me that goes, "You just want me to write it down on an index card for you so that you can just go do it?" Whereas there's what to do and then there's how to show up and how you will choose to do things in the moment are determined by what you think is possible, what your relationship to power is, and I can't give you any tips or tricks about changing your relationship to power necessarily, although we could, I guess.

Tomomi Sasaki:

If only it was really that easy, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Because that's about your childhood and your culture and your gender and everything. That's a lot of baggage. So, then it seems like it's very obvious that facilitative leadership is a practice.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. I would love if we moved the conversation, not you and I, but in general-

Daniel Stillman:

Because we can.

Tomomi Sasaki:

... facilitation, even in design in general as well, we move away from this idea of tips and tricks. It's like, yes, we do need techniques and there are very useful advice that can be given. But if we operate just in that space, it's not so interesting.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, I have your Twitter thread in front of me because I think you dropped so much juicy knowledge here, that you said, "Building a practice sends a different kind of signal to the universe. This gives me watershed experiences that blow apart a door I didn't know was there. Behind each door is a whole new landscape to explore and new friends to explore with."

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. That was quite an emotional outpouring on twitter…

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I want to know what happened that day.

Tomomi Sasaki:

... that I did after a workshop that I facilitated with a friend, and it was one of the sessions in our Liberating Structures practice group. So, my friend JD had wanted to do something around tragedies and gifts. These are not words I typically use in my day to day. So, this was great, right? It was my learning edge to grapple with these concepts. But what had happened in that space was so amazing. Even though we already knew each other quite well and had been together in practice for a few months, now it just unlocked this level of connection that we had never felt before between ourselves, but also within ourselves with our facilitation practice, but also just as people.

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think in that moment, I was deeply grateful to have had that opportunity and also, yeah, to have friends to practice with this kind of frame. But that's a real gift. I'm a big believer in signals, like what we put out weak signals that we catch and maybe ignore, and also how we receive signals is something that I think about a lot. I think that when we approach something as a practice and we have intentional growth in mind, it attracts some things that maybe would have never come our way, or we notice things that we would have just passed on by.

Tomomi Sasaki:

One thing about having a practice is that it allows us to actively seek out peers and people to practice with. For something like facilitation, which is always done with other people, doesn't really make sense to just be in your little corner and read about facilitation. Right? You have to go out and really grapple with that liveness. So, maybe even more than other disciplines. For something like facilitation, it's always in the relationship with who you're doing it with.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So, I try to be active in communities of practice, try to co-facilitate with people who have very different styles than myself. I also try to be a participant. I find that as facilitators, we are often the ones facilitating and don't really get an opportunity to be a participant. Then when we are, we're very judgy. Like, oh, I wouldn’t do that.

Daniel Stillman:

It can be excruciating to put yourself ... Talk about power transference, right? I like to control the conversations because it creates safety for me and a wall that nobody gets behind. Being in someone else's session and having to go into a breakout room and-

Tomomi Sasaki:

We know exactly what to do and what not to do. So, yeah. Sometimes, we mess with that. But yeah. It's great to be a facilitator. Sorry. See, I'm already mistaking ... To be a participant of somebody who's a very skilled facilitator and we can just step out of that mindset and just really experience that ourselves. I think we need to continuously build that lived experience on both sides.

Daniel Stillman:

So, what is it that you learn from watching another facilitator show up as they do? What is that process like for you? Is it emulation? Is it simulation? What do you feel like you're peeling off from that experience?

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think it's based first in observation. So, as a co-facilitator, you know how the whole thing is designed and you get a sense of that person. Then when you step into that facilitator role, you start to sense what they're doing deliberately or not, and then how the energy in the room is changing or the conversation is changing. So, I think that gives you this perspective on what power is there and what's being deployed and what the reaction is. So, there's definitely a lot of observation in real-time.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Then the gift of having a co-facilitator, especially one where there's a mutual recognition that we want to grow and be better and help each other, is there's so much debriefing and exchange that just happens naturally. Maybe it's the two minutes while you go grab a coffee, it's lunch during the workshop, and maybe it's the one hour beer that you have afterwards. But all of these conversations, they're like tiny, tiny feedback loops that you can only get from somebody, a fellow practitioner that just experienced the same thing. So, this is invaluable, I think, to get that explicit feedback loop with each other.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, and rare, especially as you go higher and higher in your game. I think it's getting a chance to facilitate with another master facilitator and then get to be seen and noticed by them is nontrivial.

Tomomi Sasaki:

It's very special. Yes. I would say that somebody with maybe less experience, but just a different perspective or different style, is and can be equally as valuable because it forces you to articulate some things that maybe you just skip over, and also with somebody who's maybe less field experience. It forces you to, I don't know, just bring a fresher perspective, and you also just get a different pair of eyes on the way that ... maybe something that you take for granted. So, I think that having that variety in the people that you co-facilitate with is really important.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a really great reminder. I think I personally struggle with working on my own practice and making time to play with others. It's nontrivial. How do you find that balance between your communities of practice and your professional work, which presumably takes a fair amount of your time?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. Just blends all together, I think. There's a lot of inspiration that we take, even without having that label facilitator. Right? Like, okay. So, I'm stuck at home, so I'm watching a lot of Netflix and YouTube, and one thing I really like to watch on YouTube is kindergarten teachers explaining how they keep the attention of kids.

Daniel Stillman:

Wow.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. I don't have kids, but I'm just addicted to these videos because there's such a craft in the way that they can talk about what they're doing, and then just the sheer repetition, because they're kids that maybe we don't get in our professional context because it changes so much, I think is great. I like watching.

Daniel Stillman:

They do it every day, all day.

Tomomi Sasaki:

They do it every day. Yeah. Then the same thing every year.

Daniel Stillman:

Room management is a real thing. Whenever I work with somebody who has an education background, I feel like they understand room management and energy management, and also being a bigger version of yourself as a character.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. All these things that I wish ... I wish I had known these concepts when I was starting out, and not just the process and the methodology and the canvas, which is where most facilitators in the design space start out. It's like, what's the activity I need to run?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I'm curious about how you take that foundational capacity of facilitation. What else do you feel like you apply it to in your larger work? Where else does it seep into that when it's not just here's a canvas and we're time boxing?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Right. You brought up leadership a little while back, and I think this is definitely my area focus as well. If we increase our capability for facilitation, the way we lead just changes drastically. So, the way I manage my team, the way I interact with, well, anybody, really, I think has shifted quite a bit since I started investing in my facilitation practice.

Daniel Stillman:

What do you see as what those shifts are? What do you feel like has shifted the most profoundly for you in the ways that you lead?

Tomomi Sasaki:

To put utmost value in the way we're having conversations and relating to each other, and that as long as we tend to this, things will follow. So, recently, I've been thinking of facilitation as a capability and equating it to things like writing and presenting, which we all do, even if we're not writers or presenters. We know we need to do these things, regardless of our role or where we are in our experience.

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think in our heads, we know that if we invested in these skills, it would really help with everything else. If I were a better writer, I can write crisper email and more pointy Slack messages, sharper reports, and all these things.

Daniel Stillman:

And amazing tweets. Solid tweets.

Tomomi Sasaki:

There's so much areas in which we need to be using these skills, but somehow, we don't really focus on them, and I think facilitation is actually quite similar. Even if we are not facilitators, or maybe we're not even doing workshops, we're always in some kind of meeting, and in a position to need someone to do something. That's going to happen maybe in relationship and in conversation.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So, yeah. I feel like this is, especially since so many of us are working remotely and there's just so much uncertainty, that ability to hold that conversation is just so critical. So, something that I've been asking myself is really, how can we build that among the people that we work with? Doesn't really work if just one person is really good at it. Right? It has to be this organizational capability.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's had to scale that, I've found, especially when you think about what everyone says, especially now that we're all remote, as a time is so challenging, or time to even have these types of intentional conversations has been stripped down, and our time to give to growth is also stripped down. I'll just go back to something you said earlier, the willingness to be playful with our relationship to power, I think, is an amazing leadership skill. It's an amazing facilitation skill, and again, that is, I think, always going to be rare because most people have conventional relationships to power and the willingness to, as Liberating Structures does, flatten the space and allow everyone to participate. That's revolutionary. It's radical perspective.

Tomomi Sasaki:

You should write another book, Dan. I would love to read it.

Daniel Stillman:

You're too kind. I'd rather read your books.

Tomomi Sasaki:

The idea of power is really, yeah, it's so fascinating, and then this idea that to become a better facilitator or to improve our quality of conversations, that we need to understand power, which includes understanding who you are in that picture. So, yeah. I moved to Paris six years ago and now facilitate in quite different environments from when I was living in Tokyo. Who other people think I am is part of what I need to consider. Can't just try to present myself in one way if it's a room full of strangers. So, I think moving countries was one thing that's really made me more aware of the dynamics of people in the room.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What have you noticed? What's different? Because it sounds like you said ... I think I disagree with what you said. I feel like if you're in a room full of strangers, you get to be whoever you want to be. But I'm also a White man. So, what do I know? Right? It's like, I feel general privilege and I don't feel like there's a general societal idea about who I am in a negative ... Well, actually, I don't know. Let's take a [inaudible 00:29:15]. These days, yes. Is it because you feel seen as a Japanese woman and that there are ideas about that that you are opposing or feel like you have to give in to?

Tomomi Sasaki:

First, a recognition of what they see. Right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Tomomi Sasaki:

A lot of times, I am the smallest person in the room.

Daniel Stillman:

That's fair.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Just physically. I'm actually average Japanese female height. I'm literally average. But that's on my island.

Daniel Stillman:

I see. So, your context is you are different in a different context. I understand that-

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. Always.

Daniel Stillman:

... in Japan, you're average.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. I'm average. But if I'm in a room full of Germans, for instance, I'm probably the smallest person there. So, I don't know. Even something like that is something I'm conscious of, like where I'm standing in the room or what I do with my voice. If I'm not feeling grounded in that moment and I need to ask them to fold a paper in eight pieces because we're going to do crazy eights, if I'm not grounded in that moment, that's not going to happen. So, something as seemingly trivial as that are these tiny, tiny, tiny things that I've become much more aware of just because I have to.

Tomomi Sasaki:

But then it's also among participants as well, right? You start to see how people are relating to each other and how that's influencing what's going on in that conversation. So, I do try to be aware, and if it's something that needs to be explicitly brought into the conversation or not is then a decision that we can make or ask for.

Daniel Stillman:

What's interesting about this and this idea of regulating yourself, I'm the beginning of the middle of a book called Seven and a Half Lessons About Your Brain, and I'm blanking on the name of the author, but one of the things she talks about, it's very, very well founded in good neuroscience, which I think seems rare. She says your brain is actually not for thinking. That's the half lesson at the beginning of the books. Your brain is not for thinking. It's actually for regulating your body and moving towards food and away from death.

Daniel Stillman:

That's the actual function is our brain is managing our whole body. It's helping us regulate ourself. What I think many people don't understand is that this is extra emotional work that you have to do that some people who are unaware of these things, it's not going into their budget. So, some of your budget is being spent on are people willing to hear me? Is it okay if I speak up? Can I be my largest version of myself? Is that going to be weird and hard for people to understand? It's literally taxing.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Then we wonder why things aren't going the way we imagined. Then we ask for tips and tricks.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. Exactly, and the tip is [crosstalk 00:32:50] be your best self. I feel like for myself, when you talked about being small, in my first book, it was dedicated to my origami teacher, Michael Shall, who was a very small person who had an incredibly loud voice. He was also a White male Jewish American who was the youngest and always had to fight his way through.

Daniel Stillman:

So, that's how he became, and I think I learned from him when I was 13 or 14, watching this small man hold a whole room of 60 people in thrall, I think that's, in a way, when we see other facilitators, at least, this is my theory, is we can try to emulate someone else's way of showing up, but potentially at a cost, unless we can find it in ourselves. What's the largest version of Tomomi? What's the hugest version of Tomomi that you can become?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Do you remember the exercise we did in your master class, which is with the shield?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah, yeah.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Was it called the shield?

Daniel Stillman:

The coat of arms.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Coat of arms.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. Do you want to introduce this concept?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's actually a really great ... I got burned recently for using spirit animal in a workshop. A person pointed out to me that this is cultural appropriation and uncool, and I was like, "Oh, god," because what's great about the coat of arms is that it appropriates European heraldry, which is not as complicated or convoluted. So, the idea of the coat of arms is to think about what would be on your sigil. When Game of Thrones was at its height, it was very easy as well to use Game of Thrones as a reference because everyone knew the banners and what's on them.

Daniel Stillman:

So, doing that opening of, oh, what would be on your banner? What animals, what motto, what symbols, what tools, and then people build that together. It's a great way to introduce yourself. It's also a great team tool. Right? You did that in the master class?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah, absolutely. I did that. That's right. I think what struck me was that in facilitation, we think so much about the participants, and the first question you basically asked in the master class was who are you? Until that moment, I hadn't really thought about that, and I think that's why I was getting so burnt out. You give and give without really an awareness of what you're doing to yourself or what you need to be. Then the realization is that, oh, that's where your strength comes from, it's where the practice needs to be built on, because can't change that much, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So, might as well work with what you have. So, yeah. I'm so grateful for you having triggered that realization.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you, and I want to go back to the theater analogy because in method acting, one of the processes is to say how is this character different from me? So, one of the things that I would say is if you need to be larger, then there's this relationship between, okay, what's the largest version of me, and then how big is this character that I need to take on? I think it's possible to bridge that gap, to say-

Tomomi Sasaki:

That's interesting.

Daniel Stillman:

... well, I'm not that large. Well, who is that large? Then you act like that person. Because I'm sure you've tapped into larger-ness, being larger than you thought you could be.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. I don't know if the word large resonates with me. I think more of the space and how I am in that space rather than my particular size within that space-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Yes. Fair.

Tomomi Sasaki:

... if that makes sense.

Daniel Stillman:

It does.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

So, I feel I would be remiss if I didn't ask you what has been different for you in the last, oh, so year of facilitating, going online. I presume, before you had a mix of in person and remote, and now it's mostly remote, although maybe you-

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mostly online. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Have there been any live sessions in ... I know that some places in Europe are trying to have socially distant in person live sessions, but that seems strange to me.

Tomomi Sasaki:

No. I've not done anything, I think, in person since February, March-ish last year.

Daniel Stillman:

Wow.

Tomomi Sasaki:

What's changed? Yeah. I work very internationally, and so doing workshops online was not a particular hurdle for me. Was interesting to see the more general conversation be around, hey, we don't have to meet each other, it's still fine, kind of reckoning that happened last spring, if you remember.

Daniel Stillman:

I do.

Tomomi Sasaki:

It was like, wait. We didn't know that already? I was a bit confused. I think there's a stronger recognition that this is something organizations need to learn how to do and a willingness to experiment and a recognition that there's a learning curve in it, and it's not just something everyone can be expected to do. So, that's pretty exciting. What I would wish for is for more people to have access to resources and opportunities to fail and people to grow with so that it's something that just keeps growing.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. For more people to be part of the conversation. It's such critical skill.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mm-hmm (affirmative), and just for it to be normal. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What do you think would make that shift possible? First of all, is it possible? I don't know if anybody's even interested in mastering it. As we said, some people just wanted the tips and tricks. Not everybody's interested in this as a practice. This is the Tim Ferris question. If there was a billboard that was on the highway, what would you want people to know about this thing?

Tomomi Sasaki:

That we can all have better, better meetings, and better ways to engage. I agree. Not everyone needs to master it. We can't all do the same thing. It's better if everyone does different things and master different things. But a realization and almost demand better and just not put up with poor interactions is something that I think we could all have and benefit from. Even if you're not interested in learning how to do it yourself, still demand that from your environment would be cool.

Daniel Stillman:

So, the analogy I use is food. You don't need everyone to be a master chef. You do want a certain amount of cooks. But I would love everyone to be a connoisseur. Right? To understand the savor of a delicious, like that was delightful, but maybe a little less this. Or I'd love next time a little more of that. What you're talking about there is there's no best. There's better, and people can do it their own way and have it still be delicious. It's not like there's, oh, everyone has to do-

Tomomi Sasaki:

Right. Have that curiosity.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is a really subtle thing you said and I want to make sure everyone noticed this. It's like, everyone can be better, and maybe their better is not better than mine, but different and interesting in that there's something that we can learn from their way of being and their way of showing up that we can then tap into and make ourselves more interesting and better in the way that we show up in the room.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes, like enjoy what's happening and have that curiosity to be like, "Oh, that was different." I think this ooh feel is something that only happens if you are appreciating it. Yeah. I like food. I'm always like, "Ooh."

Daniel Stillman:

That was interesting.

Tomomi Sasaki:

That was interesting. Yeah, exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

You shared an ooh moment with us with your co-facilitator where she was, and this is my interpretation, heightening the challenge of the moment, like tragedies and gifts. That's very different than reflecting with rose, thorn, bud, or plus delta. Plus delta is very, very bland in general, and then tragedies and gifts. That's something you were like, "Oh. Interesting." Do you think you'll try that on?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Well, I'm on the path, or I've been on the path to explore what's outside of the design and design thinking canon. So, other styles or other schools of facilitation, and then things like education. Just have other bodies of knowledge and different ways to think about it that ... Well, we're all in our little silos, right? So, what happens if we just jump and work with somebody else, or just encounter a different body of work that has a different language for what's actually very similar things is something that I'm really curious about.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. I work in design consulting, and so a lot of the facilitation that is around me is very much rooted in rose, thorn, bud. I think there are lots of conversations and, yeah, that maybe are not a good fit. It's just not a good fit because that's not what it was designed for, to talk about tragedies in life, for instance. Then it's like, oh, we need to expand our range of facilitation in order to be able to hold these conversations and then also not feel uncomfortable having them.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I think this idea of range is a huge concept. Sorry for cutting you off there. Was there more there?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Well, no. I was agreeing with you.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. I'm curious. So, what are some places you've been feeding yourself? You mentioned Liberating Structures, and if people aren't familiar with Liberating Structures, they should explore it. I definitely want you to share some YouTube teachers that we should be watching. What other fringes or edges, edges for us, but centers for them, are you finding food, nourishment in?

Tomomi Sasaki:

In ways that communities gather, for instance, where the format is not a meeting. It's not a workshop. But maybe it's the way we tell stories, or it's the way a town conveys information, and just looking at different formats that have been established, just in very, very different contexts. I'm just curious about the structures and what that enables and see what translates in other contexts. So, I think that's a lot of fun to tap into.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is presenting the idea that there's no place you can't learn from. Right? You can take-

Tomomi Sasaki:

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Daniel Stillman:

... an insight, a human interaction insight and bring that into your practice.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Absolutely, and it's also why I'm on YouTube all the time.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. By the way-

Tomomi Sasaki:

This is what I tell myself.

Daniel Stillman:

... if you can't travel right now, and I presume that if you're listening to this in 2021, you can't or you shouldn't. Sorry, no judging. But just saying, Tomomi has a Brompton, which it's a U-sized bicycle, and she bikes around Japan. I haven't been to Kamakura in more than a decade and I just went on a bike ride with you along the coastline of Japan, and it was delightful. So, everyone should definitely follow you on YouTube in your adventures to buy baguettes and wine.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Thank you. Yeah. I started the YouTube channel over the holidays. It's like, I want to do something fun. I'm always like, "What can we learn and how does it relate to growth?" I'm like, "Just do YouTube to see what that's like," and it's been so much fun.

Daniel Stillman:

What have you learned from it?

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think I'm just enjoying the process. It's kind of basic, but I don't need some kind of, what do I get out of this? Or why am I doing this? It's just fun. For that to be enough, actually, it's more than enough. It's why I'm doing it, and I feel like we've forgotten how to do that. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I think this is so impactful, the idea that the whole effort of an organism, we talked about regulating yourself, you can't use all of your energy for survival. You need to have some leftover for regenerating yourself, for play, and I think it's super important. I've taken on watercolors. I've been watercoloring quotes and design thinking diagrams. So, it's combining some of my hobbies. But watercolor is something that's just so human and predictable. I think it's really important to have something that is flowy, gets you in flow, and is very different from everything else you do. So, good for you for doing ... And thank you for taking me to Japan, because I miss it.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Well, I'm in Paris now. So, trying to wait for the weather to clear up so I can make some more videos. But yeah. I think we don't need to overthink it or talk ourselves ... have a reason that we agree with ourselves, like have a vocabulary to even explain it. Yeah. Just do it and enjoy yourself enjoying it, I think is something that then just lifts everything else that we're trying to do, just by having that space. So, I watch, yeah, I mentioned kindergarten teachers, but I also watch a lot of opera master classes.

Tomomi Sasaki:

I love watching, having, like a student sings, and then somebody who's able to give the technical direction, but also help nurture that creativity and expression and that internal dialogue, but then separate from the performative aspect, which is another thing, and then audience engagement. So, yeah. Opera and then weightlifting coaches, for instance, who are just able to give different cues. So, yeah. All of these things, I find super interesting. What is the language we can give to the knowledge and expertise that we have so that it's translating to somebody and they can do something with it? Then the beauty of the video format, of course, is that we can see that transformation happening before our eyes, and this is super addictive.

Daniel Stillman:

I can't think of anything more impactful because what you're talking about is the ability to help someone change to transform to grow. That's coaching, that's facilitative leadership, so it makes perfect sense to me that you would get energy off of that. That's so cool. I want to watch all of those things with you, because I just watch people cook and do wood turning because it's deeply meditative.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes. Meditative. Yes. This is also something we can get from watching videos.

Daniel Stillman:

So, I want to be respectful of your time. What haven't we talked about that we should talk about? What haven't I asked you about that it's important? What remains unsaid about these topics?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Well, we talked about capability and practice and growth and also structures, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). A little bit. We didn't talk about your Medium article, which I'd love to just at least mention. People should read it. I'll link to it in the show notes. Your meta-thinking about multiple sprints, which I think is really great thinking for people who are interested in larger scale change.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Thank you. Yeah. Maybe just a quick note on structure then is, yeah, you mentioned the arrows, which in the article is about the different sprints. So, yeah. My thing with having multiple design sprints or different workshops within a bigger transformation or innovation initiative is that when we're delivering the workshops, we just think of what needs to be done next, like what's the activity and then what's the next workshop. That blinds us from seeing the workshops and facilitation as an intervention into that system that we're trying to, well, supposed to do something about and what everyone is supposed to do something about.

Tomomi Sasaki:

So, developing an eye for seeing the structures that are in place as the intervention is something that I am interested in exploring, and also trying to build more awareness about, I guess, in conversations about facilitation, that it's not just about what you're doing in that activity because it's fractal and it has a place in that bigger picture.

Daniel Stillman:

I think this is an important perspective. I started a slightly controversial thread on LinkedIn about design thinking vs. sprints, and because I quoted somebody who I think said at that first sprint conference who's kind of like an OG design person who was like, "Nothing of great impact ever comes out of one single sprint. It's all about longer work over time." I think somebody took a little bit of ... They're like, "Wait. What do you have against sprints?" I'm like, "Nothing, dude. It's just, a single sprint is about a single decision about a single product."

Daniel Stillman:

For many people, that is a tremendously impactful moment. But I think I'm grateful that there are also people like you who are like, "How do we all swim in one direction and solve lots of problems, or how do we swim in many directions and solve many problems?" Those are two very different ways of meta-facilitating and building structure of making sure we're moving in the right direction.

Tomomi Sasaki:

I think that workshops take so much energy. The pressure is very high that something needs to change from the number of people gathered in that room. That pressure is so high and if you're the one organizing it, that's where your focus is, and we lose sight that what's important is what happens after the workshop. Like, yay, it's done. It's like, no. No, it's not.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. I'm on the couch. What are you talking about after the workshop? Where's my cocktail?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

We won. You're like, "No, no. There's more."

Tomomi Sasaki:

I know. Yeah. Exactly. The game's just beginning. Right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, that's like the long game and the big game. What advice would you give people who want to facilitate that level of interaction, how to step into that?

Tomomi Sasaki:

What advice do I have? I think it's not something you can do alone. So, the team that you're doing it with, and it can be just one person, but the partnerships that you have with the immediate people around you in carrying out the initiative is what's going to make the biggest difference. So, being able to sit in the pluralities together and not let the whatever's going on knock us over, like build that resilience and that awareness and the language to discuss it, find the people you can do that with, I think would be, well, it's what's worked for me, if I think back to when things have gone really well, and also when things just have really been like, what was that all for? We've all been there, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. Well, and it's like, not for nothing, this is working in conversation. Right?

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

It is very hard to just make that happen on your own, to draw that diagram and be like, "This is what we should do." Everyone else is going to want to have a voice in that. So, that's another conversation to facilitate, and in terms of languaging, I will link to that article because I think it's such fundamental visual language to just say, "Well, where are we going?"

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Where are we and where are we going?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, so speaking of where we're going, it's getting late in Europe where you're at. You've had a whole day. I'm really grateful for the conversation. It's just super fun to hang out with you. It's been too long.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Aw. Thank you so much, Daniel. I'm such a big fan of the podcast and your work, and as we've already discussed, some of the aha moments that have really shifted for me in conversation with you and in spaces that you've held. So, I feel like it's all connected.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm so honored.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Yeah. I'm really grateful.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh. Thank you so ... I love being in conversation with you. I'm grateful for it.

Tomomi Sasaki:

Me too. Thank you, Daniel.

Daniel Stillman:

Let's call scene. That's perfect. That was awesome. That's so much great stuff in that. I really appreciate that conversation.

DeColonizing Design Thinking

LAN-cover.jpg

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel PhD, is the Associate Director for Design Thinking for Social Impact, and Professor of Practice at the Taylor Center for Social Innovation and Design Thinking at Tulane University, where she teaches design thinking from an emancipatory perspective.

Design Thinking is a powerful set of tools and mindsets that can help people solve problems. But which people and which problems?

So first off, if you’re new to this conversation, design and design thinking can be racially biased, because people are racially biased. As Dr. Noel says in the opening quote I chose, most of us don’t understand our positionality - especially if you see yourself as “white”. It’s essential to see and understand what position are we looking *from* when we look *at* people and the problems we seek to solve for them.

Design is, in essence, making things better, on purpose, and it’s a fundamental human drive: To improve our situation by remaking our surroundings. But when we design for and with other people, the process becomes more complex.

So, you might not see yourself as a designer, but if you solve problems for other people or build systems that other people use to solve problems, you might be a designer in the broadest sense, or design thinker, even by accident. 

So...you need to get serious and clear about how you learn about problems (ie, do research), frame them and solve them for others (ie, design - attempt to make something better on purpose).

If you do see yourself as a Design Thinker, you might feel challenged by Dr. Noel’s reflections on Design Thinking, not as a set of Boxes to be ticked, but as a universe of different ways of thinking and knowing. Dr. Noel makes beautiful diagrams and models for the creative process that breaks out of the hexagons and double diamonds beautifully. I recommend checking out the screenshots I’ve taken of some of these models from her talks in the Links section

Another resource I suggest you dive into is Dr. Noel’s Positionality Worksheet, 12 Elements to help you and your team see the “water they’re swimming in.” You can also check out a Mural version I mocked up.

As Dr. Noel writes in her excellent Medium article “My Manifesto towards changing the conversation around race, equity and bias in design” it’s essential to start with positionality, for yourself and for your teams. That’s point one. Who are you in relation to the people you are working with and solving for?

Point Two of her manifesto is about seeing color, oppression, injustice and bias. For this I recommend getting a deck of her Designer’s Critical Alphabet cards on Etsy. They’re awesome!

Point 3 might surprise you: Dr. Noel suggests that we “Forget Diversity, Equity and Inclusion”...and instead embrace Pluriversality. DNI assumes an inside and an outside, an includer and the included. Pluriversality looks to remove the center and honors multiple ways of knowing and doing, each with its own valid center. 

It’s nice to believe in a single ultimate truth for everyone...but that’s not going to happen. Pluriversality suggests that there are more than one or more than two kinds of ultimate reality.  Pluriversality is essential for our time - finding a path forward together while respecting other’s paths and ways.

Pluriversality was a new term for me. I suggest you watch Dr. Noel’s talk at UC Davis on Embracing Pluriversal Design to learn more.

And I suggest you read the rest of her Manifesto for yourself! 

I am thrilled to share Dr. Noel’s ideas on DeColonizing Design Thinking. It’s a critical conversation for our time. Design Thinking still has so much to offer the world if we are willing to lean into it and engage in dialogue with fresh and evergreen interpretations of it. People have been designing for as long as we’ve been people. Learning and respecting the pluriverse of Design Thinking in all cultures can deliver powerful progress.

Enjoy the conversation as much as I did.

Positionality Template Designed with Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel

Open to create a mural from this template in your workspace. Powered by MURAL


Design Thinking as Curry:

Lesley-Ann Noel food image.jpg

DeColonizing our Bookshelves:

Lesley-Ann Noel reading.jpg

Using Mural to explore Positionality and Identity: A positionality worksheet More on that here

PositionalityWheel.png
Lesley-Ann Noel who am I.jpg

Slides from Dr. Noel’s talk on Pluriversal Design, illustrating many ways to visualize the design process.

Screenshot_20210106-105812_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20210106-105928_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20210106-110012_YouTube.jpg
Screenshot_20210106-110054_YouTube.jpg
Lesley Ann Noel headdress screenshot.jpg

The Designer’s Critical Alphabet...a powerful resource to check your biases as you create.

DesignersCriticalAlphabetSample.jpg

Minute 3

And then I started to see, well, okay. Actually as designers, design thinkers, whatever term you want to use. People who are creating the solutions, our positionality affects how we create a solution. Our positionality affects how we view the people that we're working with and sometimes we don't see our positionality. There are elements of our personality that become invisible and so I created that theme thinking of twelve elements that we might include in a positionality statement. 

If we were writing research, I thought, how do we make this visible and interactive for people who are going to embark on a design process, right? So that we could see our positionality both individually and as a group and then understand how that impacts the work that we're doing throughout the process. 

If we are to pick on white men as we always do, right? If we are a group of white men, let's say we are a group of six people working on this project. The idea was that after we went through this positionality exercise where we talk about race, gender, language, sexuality, ability status, social class, after we talk about all of this, we use the positionality wheel. It then becomes evident that, oh, our group actually does not have diversity in this area, or even if we're not talking about not having the diversity, at least we could see. Oh, actually, we all speak English only. And we are all upper middle class and we're doing this research with this group of people in New Orleans. How are we going to get a perspective? How are we going to be able to understand their perspective better when we are so different to them?

Minute 9

I actually was interested in that mass design surprisingly through a social lens because I always was thinking. Okay, well, how do we mass produce this thing to make it more accessible to people? But definitely, I have learned that diversity is very, very, very important focusing on the needs. Well, this is a human centered process that we really talk much more about today than when I left university focusing on the needs, the very specific needs of individuals that come up with design that then actually serves more people, I think is important.

Minute 11

And maybe about three years ago, I was in a design thinking space and someone told me, okay, well, here are the steps, you do this and then you do that. And I said, well, actually, I've been doing this for many years. And they're, yeah, but you have to follow these steps. And the thing is, I found that I was horrified that we had reached this space where people really felt that, okay, if you haven't checked off all of these boxes, you're not doing it right. When those of us who studied in the '90s and the '80s and I think, anytime before 2005, let's say, we were encouraged. Maybe we were shown different processes along the way, maybe each professor had a different model but we knew that we were going through a type of process that would get to an outcome at the end without learning those models. 

Minute 38

Again, actually, I had a conversation yesterday where I was saying organizations actually need one or two angry people who are always going to be pushing you to make things better so you need to figure out, okay, where is this angry voice going to come from, right? Whether it's within the organization, or whether it's somebody from outside and that angry voice is going to push us a little bit, that little bit of dissatisfaction is going to push us to do things in different ways.

Minute 43

we just have to go through life with this openness and always this willingness to learn new things and understand new perspectives and talk with new people. The man who cuts my lawn, we normally have a good conversation on all that. We have just been talking and talking and talking about tips about gardening, right? And again, this all sounds random but it's not random. It's about how relationships with people help us to become, I guess, better designers.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

And I'm going to officially welcome you to the conversation factory, Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel. I'm so glad you're here.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Thank you, Daniel. Thanks for the invitation.

Daniel Stillman:

Thanks you for saying yes. Yes, and happy Friday. I don't know whenever anybody else is going to be listening to this, it probably won't be Friday. There's a one in seven chance that it is.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

It's always Friday.

Daniel Stillman:

But it's always Friday inside.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

There's the question of where to start the conversation. I feel I have point one of yours from a talk you gave, which is that everything starts with positionality. I feel it's worth setting up your positionality however you'd like.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Okay. Yes. Well, thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a broad question.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

No, it is a broad question and it's specific and thank you for noting that because I really do think that positionality is important. I start all of my classes with positionality so my positionality, I am a black woman from the Caribbean specifically from Trinidad and Tobago. I add to my positionality that I did undergrad in Brazil. Fortunately, the Brazilians haven't yet said, oh, she's stealing our identity because this is ... I left Brazil more than 20 years ago and I still consider myself very, very tied to that country. I do a lot of collaboration with Brazilians so I do consider that part of my positionality as well. I am a parent so I'm a mother of a 13-year-old boy. What else can I add to the ... I guess that's where I will leave it for now because sometimes in our positionality there are things that we want to share and there are things that we don't want to share. But the things that are most apparent are that I am someone from the African diaspora.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Right. And then once I open my mouth, you say, okay, she has a different accent so I clear that up very quickly. I'm from Trinidad and Tobago. And I consider myself very much someone from the Americas, from the Caribbean and with this connection to Latin America.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Where do you ... There was an article, sorry. An exercise I saw the evidence of you running in one of your talks about Who Am I? in getting students. You're a professor of design thinking and so you teach this stuff to students all the time, when and where and why do you run this Who am I? exercise? Because I just saw the mural board and I can suspect I saw clusters and I wasn't sure if you put those gray bubbles there, or here, or where do you have this type of identity? And maybe you can just talk a little bit about when and how you run through that exercise with people because I think it's a really interesting and important one.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Okay. I have a PhD in design and the way I did my work is qualitatively. And so very often when you're doing quality to research, you have to start off with this positionality where you write a positionality statement and you say, well, okay, who am I?, so that the person who is reading the research will understand. Okay, if you think about me again, this person is a black woman from the Caribbean and that affects how she wrote this research. And then I started to see, well, okay. Actually as designers, design thinkers, whatever term you want to use. People who are creating the solutions, our positionality affects how we create a solution. Our positionality affects how we view the people that we're working with and sometimes we don't see our positionality.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

There are elements of our personality that become invisible and so I created that theme thinking of twelve elements that we might include in a positionality statement. If we were writing research, I thought, how do we make this visible and interactive for people who are going to embark on a design process, right? So that we could see our positionality both individually and as a group and then understand how that impacts the work that we're doing throughout the process. If we are to pick on white men as we always do, right?

Daniel Stillman:

It's totally fine.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

If we are a group of white men, let's say we are a group of six people working on this project. The idea was that after we went through this positionality exercise where we talk about race, gender, language, sexuality, ability status, social class, after we talk about all of this, we use the positionality wheel. It then becomes evident that, oh, our group actually does not have diversity in this area, or even if we're not talking about not having the diversity, at least we could see. Oh, actually, we all speak English only. And we are all upper middle class and we're doing this research with this group of people in New Orleans. How are we going to get a perspective? How are we going to be able to understand their perspective better when we are so different to them? It just brings that identity to the surface so that you don't ...

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Because what sometimes happens in design is that, we assume that the decisions that we're taking represent a mainstream, or we don't understand how our assumptions affect the design process. This is to bring our personalities out in a visible way and we can talk about this. It also helps us see where there might be some hidden benefits within the team, or hidden alliances. Once I did this exercise with a very large group of people, about 75 people and as we were analyzing bubble by bubble because we did this now on a mural but on a remote white boarding app. Right? And as we started to analyze bubble by bubble, someone piped in and said, oh, I speak Vietnamese. And look, there are three other people who also speak Vietnamese. And so it also revealed some very interesting things about your group. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and things that you wouldn't normally know. Otherwise, I think we've all made assumptions about people's background and sometimes it's wrong. Right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

And that can be both offensive or surprising or delightful, there's a whole range of possibilities.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes. You're not going to look at me and know that I speak Portuguese. Right?

Daniel Stillman:

Right. Well, if you navigate in Brazil as we've talked and I would hope eventually you made it through that but it's really interesting because I think we have some affinities, if not shared identities because I studied industrial design as did you. And I think there's the promise of universal design was something that I believe I was taught is that, that was certainly the vision of post-World War II. Bauhaus design was like, let's make things that everyone can afford and that everyone will love and everyone can use and everyone will understand using universal language. And I think what I'm hearing you say is that, that is not necessarily possible.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I definitely say that that is not possible and like you, I believed in that idea of designing for many. And I actually, when I left university in Brazil, which gives me then a completely not a completely, it gives me a very different kind of framing. Right? I was so in love with the idea of mass.

Daniel Stillman:

Like mass appeal?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

But I was ... Yes, I loved designing for the masses rather than designing for a smaller group. I actually was interested in that mass design surprisingly through a social lens because I always was thinking. Okay, well, how do we mass produce this thing to make it more accessible to people? But definitely, I have learned that diversity is very, very, very important focusing on the needs. Well, this is a human centered process that we really talk much more about today than when I left university focusing on the needs, the very specific needs of individuals that come up with design that then actually serves more people, I think is important.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And I want to go to that in a second but the first thing I wanted to touch on in this idea of universal design is, I was reading an article where somebody was writing a very, very high level overview of design thinking and it was hilariously general. They were like, well, so as we all know, by definition design thinking is a human centered design process that has five phases and here are the five phases. And everyone who's not, because there's no video for this. Her eyes widened everyone. That should have come with a trigger warning. I apologize, Dr. Noel.

Daniel Stillman:

But one of the things that I really loved about, I watched one of your talks was the ... I suppose, excessive is the wrong way to put it. The abundant model making that you've participated in. There were three or four different and I want to just flash them on the screen. There was like, oh, a woman in a head dress. And like an organic, it looked like a batik print. And I read an article of your students, many, many self-made models and I have always believed that it's important for people to map and understand their own design process and to craft it for themselves. What is important to you about people making their own design process?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I'll tell you my own triggering experience. I graduated in 1999. No, actually not '99. I finished university in '97 and then the ceremony, the walk was is in '98, right? I've been a designer for a little while, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And maybe about three years ago, I was in a design thinking space and someone told me, okay, well, here are the steps, you do this and then you do that. And I said, well, actually, I've been doing this for many years. And they're, yeah, but you have to follow these steps. And the thing is, I found that I was horrified that we had reached this space where people really felt that, okay, if you haven't checked off all of these boxes, you're not doing it right. When those of us who studied in the '90s and the '80s and I think, anytime before 2005, let's say, we were encouraged. Maybe we were shown different processes along the way, maybe each professor had a different model but we knew that we were going through a type of process that would get to an outcome at the end without learning those models. Right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And so it's, while I will actually say, so as someone who studied way back then and we'll actually see then the proliferation of templates of how you do design thinking. It's actually, it can be helpful. It gives you a shortcut where you're like, okay, so maybe I'm in this field and maybe I'm in that field but I'm into something called critical pedagogy, which means that ... No, it's not even, which means that. But using this research, people are actively involved in shaping their own knowledge and so that's why I ask people to draw their own process. I pick them, in my PhD research, I did some work with some children where we discussed what designers do and all of that.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Then I asked them who they would identify as designers and then they told me some people. And then we were together for three weeks and each week I had the children, I asked the children to draw the process that they were using to solve the problem and each week they would look back on the process from the week before and they would decide how they would tweak it. Right? We don't have to show people models for design thinking. We could talk about, okay, what are we doing? And then we could let people create models that are relevant and also see how they have to edit the models to suit what they're doing. Another way that I describe it, which I think people enjoy is I describe it as cooking.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, design thinking as curry.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes. You know that word, right? Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

I do. It's a beautiful metaphor and I love curry.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Who doesn't like [inaudible 00:14:37]?

Daniel Stillman:

Jokes. This is just a total side issue, but what do white supremacists get to eat?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Oh boy. What do they get to eat?

Daniel Stillman:

Do they get to enjoy Thai food or do they think that white supremacy extends to culinary activities as well? Can a white supremacists enjoy Thai food? I shouldn't be laughing but I've always thought it's like, I love Thai food. I love Caribbean food. I'm a Universalist, I come from New York city where we eat the whole world on the street so that's just me.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm really glad you talked about this because there was a phrase you used about liberatory versus depository. And I thought this was a wonderfully clear way of explaining how I like to teach people, which is pulling it out of them as opposed to inserting it into their brains. And I think people would be surprised to think that design thinking could be fully decolonized and self discovered by a group of what was it? 10-year-olds?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. And I think maybe the oldest was nine to ... We had an outlier who was 12. But yeah, let's say ... Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

What about the C-suite? Can the C-suite do what a group of 10 to 12 year olds do?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

It takes more work per C-suite.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. It definitely takes more work. Children are more open, even when I work with college students, college students sometimes want to know. Okay, so what textbook is this in? And I'm like, the textbook is forthcoming. But children are open to trying things out and that's something that we have to learn to cultivate. One thing that I do like about the design thinking work that people do and in a more commodified way is, I love how much fun they inject into the process. I sit there and I step away. Right? No, but I want to do it in a fun way but for those of us who are going through design education, it's because it's our main career. It might not have that level of fun but it's like when you take design thinking into somebody's boardroom, you make it all fun and whatnot because it's a secondary space and I think that that fun is important.

Daniel Stillman:

I'm just disrupting you for a second because I feel I have a rare opportunity to actually get you to like ... I'm flashing, I caught a couple of screenshots from one of your talks of just some, what I thought is just a revolutionarily, a radically different way of visualizing processes and I loved this one because this is a black woman wearing a traditional head wrap and each fold in her wrap is a different strength, or focus core area of a design process.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. But this one is less of a process. This is actually an imaginary curriculum where each ... It's a series of curricula that I had been designing. And this one I created, well, in June. In May, June, at the height of the pandemic as a response to George Floyd's murder, where I was thinking of who is excluded very often in design and design thinking and what does the curriculum look like from their perspective? What are the things that a black person ... I am a black woman. As a black woman, what am I going to put into a design curriculum for other black people? Right? And this actually started out of ... I did this in June, 2020 but it's a question that I've been asking for quite some time because I came to the States in 2015.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And so, I had never taught a predominantly white class before. Right? Even when I lived in Brazil, I was never in a predominantly white design space. And for the first time I was in this space in the US. And I once had a small class, like a Saturday class with all black students and I asked, okay, so why aren't you doing these design classes? And then they said but these classes don't have material that we're interested in. And so that's how-

Daniel Stillman:

It's not for us.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah, it's not for us. And so, I've been starting to ask all of these different questions. What do different types of design curriculum look like? Designed by the people or with the people.

Daniel Stillman:

These visuals and this one, which is very organic and sort of cell-like, that was very beautiful and this other one here, very sort of traditional colors. And this one, I love too because it's like, oh, this looks pretty conventional. It's some concentric circles and there's something in the center. What does having a visual do? How does it change the conversation about what we're doing here together, like what our process is?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I think if we're talking about how we think as designers and not designed thinking, or how do we think as, we can make it about the two groups, artists and designers. We manipulate information and knowledge in different ways. And so the experiment about drawing new frameworks, drawing the curriculum as an image, drawing processes by hand, these are to really dig into the way that we learn to work with information as people in these visual fields. Right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And currently, my students are not generally not coming from an art and design background and so I have to really bring them back to that space of, it's okay to draw. It's okay to doodle so I have one, at least one assignment within my courses where students have to give a reflection but I ask them to challenge themselves to do the reflection visually. They don't have to but I give them three alternative options of doing the reflection because the assumption is that they have to write. I said, you can do a voice note for this reflection. And then the other thing that they can do is, they can draw because I'm thinking of different senses.

Daniel Stillman:

And different ways of knowing.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Again, different ways of knowing. I really try to do a lot of the work that I do through a conscious lens of anti-hegemony.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And so in doing that, I'm trying to say, well, okay, not everybody wants to write, so what is the alternative road?

Daniel Stillman:

Can we unpack anti-hegemony for those people who don't know how to-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Right. Okay. Actually, maybe I'll just use a completely different way of describing it. In the work that I'm doing, I'm assuming that's somebody's perspective is normally considered dominant, or will take up the most space and I'm seeing, how can we consciously make sure that the people who are in the dominant space recognize that they don't, they're not all ... Well, see that they are normally in the dominant space and understand how they have to change that position and also make everything. I'm trying to create these spaces where people with different identities and positionalities can contribute in different ways. And we don't just be food to this person's perspective that is normally dominant.

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting and I want to unpack this. There's several things I want to make sure we hit on here because in decolonizing design thinking, I don't think many people realize that there are inherent challenges with designing for other people. It's not just that like, oh, and I'll admit my positionality when I've read some of these articles that say like, oh, how can a white person empathize and design for someone else? It's hard to look at the limits of one's positionality, right? And say, because I was certainly taught, I should be able to, as a human being empathize with and take on the perspective of anyone like universal humanity if it's a reasonable position. And yet there are plenty of examples of white Western, "First world people gazing across at third world communities and saying, "I know exactly what they need making it and it not working for a whole host of reasons." Most with which go into them, not possibly understanding the complexity of the challenge that-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Of the problem. Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

... they're trying to solve. And so this is the question of, how do we ... This is the gaze of the "privileged to the non privileged." And one thing I heard you speak about in some of your talks is seeing power and trying to shift power so inverting it, sharing it, redistributing it. And certainly, maybe you can talk a little bit about sort of the Trinidad for California project because I think that was just a wonderful thumb in the nose of this common pathway of power and inverting it.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. Yeah, so that was an experiment that came about my friend, Glenn Fajardo, who is a design educator in California.

Daniel Stillman:

I know Glenn.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

You know Glenn? Okay.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, that's right. Oh, this is a small world. Well, okay. This wonderful. I'm going to have him on this show for sure.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

The worlds gets smaller and smaller, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Glenn's a deal, man.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes. And Glenn and I were actually, I think literally we were standing up next to each other. We didn't know each other that well yet and we were probably like, sure, that's a shoulder. We were listening to a conversation and there was something in the conversation that just sent up this light bulb for both of us, that we felt demonstrated the need to consciously decolonize this kind of international collaboration. And we both turned to each other and said, well, okay, how about we start thinking about doing something, right? And so Glenn and I planned this class with a colleague of mine, Michael Lee Poy, who's now a professor at OCAD in Toronto. But Michael is Trinidadian. Well, Trinidadian, Canadian. Right? And so, the three of us, we started this conversation as, okay, well, how do we flip this?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

How do we have this class so that the students or the designers from the so-called developed country, we want to assume that they are the ones with the power, right? And how do we design it so that the students in the developing country, again, so-called developing country know that they actually do have more power than they think they have? Because sometimes in the international collaboration, it isn't just always about the people from the global North, assuming that they're the ones with the power. It's that in the global South, you also get messages that you are the one without power. Right? And so we wanted to flip that and so we created this class where the students at a business school in Trinidad actually had a little bit more power in the class than the student in the school in California. And so we didn't go through the entire design process but it is a project that I would love to do at some stage where we go through the entire design process. The students in Trinidad had to diagnose the problem.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And reading the responses of the California students was like this ... It was hilarious. Honestly, I think this was like the best design thinking joke ever because they're like, I don't know.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Oh, is that a joke?

Daniel Stillman:

But they had this experience of like, oh, they just swooped in and I felt like they didn't really understand everything about me. And it's like, well, all right. This is empathy. This is the dawn of empathy in them.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. Yes, and really it's a very reflective exercise. I could see why people might see it as-

Daniel Stillman:

I don't mean to ... It's a cosmic, sorry. My father saw everything as a joke. It's like a cosmic reversal, which is how God laughs at the world. That's-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I guess so. Yes. Yes. But where we were trying to get to was some light bulb moments and we definitely got that.

Daniel Stillman:

You absolutely did. Here is the question because a lot of the people listening to this are in corporate settings where there is real imbalances of economic power. The idea that the person inside of a corporation gazes out of the world at a consumer, diagnoses a need, designs for it, that's an imbalance of power. And co-design can seem like paternalism, right? I'm going to bring you into my co-design circle but there's no actual re-distribution of power which is a terrifying thing because that can sound like, I don't know, socialism which United States, Americans have been taught to be afraid off. How can-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. That's a long conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

It is. How should people who are listening to this who are in capitalist endeavors, who are designing for audiences, change the gaze and transform this researcher subject conversation, redesign that conversation so that it is more egalitarian and that power balance is shifted in a way that matters?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

You're asking me such a hard question. You're going to edit some of this out?

Daniel Stillman:

We can. Let's talk it out because it is a hard question. That's why I'm asking because-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

It is hard question. Yes. And sometimes I have to say both to myself and to other people, I am in Academia, which ends up being a luxurious space where I can experiment with ... Actually, in Academia, I should not be maintaining the status quo because I'm in a space where I can be experimental. And then the people who are out in industry can say, oh, they tried that experiment and now let's take that experiment freely in a different way. Right? I was in a conversation with someone, this conversation is tied to your question. I was in a conversation with someone yesterday where I described that class, the Trinidad, California collaboration.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And I said, well, okay, what does that actually tell me if I'm back into the corporate world? What did students in Trinidad, or actually even before that. Glenn, Michael and I were talking about, where is the power? What's the power that the students in Trinidad have, where is their advantage? Okay? And what is the advantage if you are from ... This will probably sound like stereotyping but I'm going to run that risk, right?

Daniel Stillman:

It's totally fine.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

If you are from Trinidad, Brazil, Mexico, there are some places in the world where one of the advantage of people have, people really know how to socialize and how to build community and how to build networks and all that. And so that was actually how the students in Trinidad diagnosed the problem in California. They said there is a problem here that these people don't understand how to socialize. They are socially isolated and all of the conversations that they had, they picked that up. Right? And so now if I come back to the corporate space, I might say, actually, if I want to design a social network, I need to go to Trinidad, not to California where Facebook is. Right? Facebook should be designed in Trinidad or in Brazil or Mexico, or where people are really good at building community not in a place where people are socially isolated. That doesn't actually answer your question at all.

Daniel Stillman:

Because that's still taking inspiration from another culture rather than-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Well, engage that. You see, I'm not anti-core design, you know?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I would still come back to something like co-design or I'm still trying to think how to really answer your question. Yeah. Ask me another one. Push me a little further.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, so what I'll say is the framework that I've seen is called the IAP two framework, which is from ... it's called the International Institute of Public Participation. And they have ... It comes from political participation, this idea of like, I'm going to tell you what's going to happen versus we're going to truly work on this together.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Build it together. Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, so it's like, am I empowering you, or am I might consulting you, or am I just like informing you and everything in between. This is just me personally. I think, being explicit about the power dynamics is the first step, is like saying, hey, we're just going to listen and we're not going to do everything you tell us, just so you know. I think from my own experience in design thinking, it can be very frustrating to ask people to participate in a process when nothing is done with their input.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. And actually that is my frustration with design thinking. And in some of the work that I do because I have been involved in a few civic type of projects. I really enjoy conversations about utopia and co-designing utopia and co-designing utopian concepts that could lead to policies and services and whatnot. But there is some frustration sometimes as a participant, as you rightly identified, if you get involved in this process, how do we move it forward? As an academic, that is a little bit of my frustration as well. Our students design these fantastic policies and programs that every semester and how do we actually move these forward. But I'm happier with co-designing than nothing at all. Right? I think better co-design could happen if we really have commitment to implementation and I think that that sometimes is not there.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Maybe this goes to some of the questions we were talking about earlier, before we started about ways of connecting with people and communities in ways that are not predatory, that are synergistic when there's the gaze relationship of like, oh, I'm going to go and study them and then make my own interpretation versus I'm going to actually participate with this community and understand that what they need.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes. Yeah. I think that that's a possible challenge that we have all the time in research, when you operate through a critical lens, you end up with frustration, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Why is that when you operate through a critical lens, you wind up with frustration? Can I just unpack? That's as a really interesting idea.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

A frustration, because you're reflective.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

And then this even as the designer thing where you know that your design is always in progress so like I've been involved in research where when I sit back and I reflect, I'm like, this could really be much more effective if we did X, or and sort of my frustration question sometimes is, okay, how do we ensure that there is more benefits to the community participants in the project, right? And so, I consider this a little bit of a saving grace for me that if I live with that frustration, I will design projects where there is more benefits. Or if we have that frustration, we will have the eye to see that we have to go through that. And so, I think that little discontent is something that we're going to live with to make things better.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's interesting, I think. Certainly, in corporate America, there's always this like, well, let's just get on with it. There's this pace speed of, let's get going and slowing down and saying, well, who are we? And what are our positionalities? Seem like, come on teacher, time's running, we got to get going but having the conversation can give you so much benefit. Can you talk a little bit about the designers critical alphabet? Because I feel like, having that critical conversation is something you want more people to be having more often so you want to spread more frustration at the same time.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Exactly what I thought. Yes. Yes. Before I started, as I had said, so when I was working on that project with the children, one of the board members who was responsible for this school said, okay, you want to get these children angry? And I'm like, geez. I want to make angry, which I actually think that people mustn't be afraid of anger and angry people. Again, actually, I had a conversation yesterday where I was saying organizations actually need one or two angry people who are always going to be pushing you to make things better so you need to figure out, okay, where is this angry voice going to come from, right? Whether it's within the organization, or whether it's somebody from outside and that angry voice is going to push us a little bit, that little bit of dissatisfaction is going to push us to do things in different ways. Right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

The thing about the designer's critical alphabet is that, it's me trying to get, I was building tools so even the positionality wheel is one of those. I was trying to build a series of tools to get designers to see the world around them through more complex lenses. Okay? I operate through an emancipatory frame, which is about making sure that I'm thinking about shifting power, making sure there are participants very involved in the work, or that I'm doing the work from the participant's perspective and not from my own so that card that's in there, there's a feminist card. And there are some cards that are around things like attitudes that we have to take on like self-awareness which you might not always have as a designer. You might enter the room and we walk in with our fancy clothes and fancy glasses and all that and we're not really self-aware, right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Or you drive into your community project with a big car and we don't always stop to reflect on these things, how we show up in spaces. The positionality wheel is one of those things, that's what we were talking about earlier. And then the critical alphabet is about introducing a new type of language to designers, a lot of languages I picked up in my PhD and in my reading and then with the question below that makes this theory relevant because that's the other thing. If I tell them about decolonizing spaces and decolonizing the field that we're in, we have to make language accessible. Even if we jump away back to design thinking, that's a bit of an issue in design thinking. It's just still jargony so like how do we talk about brainstorming without using that word or prototyping without using those words? How do we make all of this stuff accessible? The critical alphabet is about making critical language, or perspectives accessible. I was thinking specifically about designers but a lot of other non-designers use the tool as well.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And it's available but people get can get a deck of these cards to thumb through.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes, they can. They could actually Google critical alphabet or designers critical alphabet and an Etsy link will come up. Or it's tagged in all of my profiles, if they find me on Twitter or Instagram or something like that, they can get it. They'll find the link.

Daniel Stillman:

I think it's one of these things where, I think we share a mission, which is having everyone be a reflective practitioner. Right?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes, that's exactly it.

Daniel Stillman:

You did this with the fourth graders-

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

... to be reflective about their practice, what process do you think you're following? What happened last week? What would you like to happen this week? And don't keep looking back so that you can keep looking forward.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yes. And I teach in a vague way around questions that must be very frustrating for students but at the end of it, it's about them learning to be reflective, to also ask questions and not just assume that the knowledge that is given to them is valid knowledge, so try to question it.

Daniel Stillman:

This seems like the path towards de-colonizing design thinking.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

It could be. I've come back with my vagueness, it could be.

Daniel Stillman:

It could be.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

It could be one path.

Daniel Stillman:

It could be one of many because there's no privileged universal perspective on it.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Exactly. And this is one tool that I've used. Right? And I may design others and I'm also anxious to hear what are other people doing to change up the space? How are other people questioning things and changing things?

Daniel Stillman:

Well, it's very clear. This is the beginning of a really ... I'm so grateful you sat down for this conversation with me. I know we've got a hard stop. People can find you on the internet. I will include all links to that. Is there anything I have not asked you that I should have asked you, parting thoughts on this very broad topic?

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

I'm going to say something really random, it's really hard to grow tomatoes.

Daniel Stillman:

It's January, even in New Orleans, I imagine it's hard.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

You're like, where did this random thing come up? I've spent about six months during the pandemic learning new things. And actually, that's the connection that I'll make, that we just have to go through life with this openness and always this willingness to learn new things and understand new perspectives and talk with new people. The man who cuts my lawn, we normally have a good conversation on all that. We have just been talking and talking and talking about tips about gardening, right? And again, this all sounds random but it's not random. It's about how relationships with people help us to become, I guess, better designers. Now that sounds a little preachy but it's ... yeah, that we have to cultivate this curiosity about other people in life and yeah, could be better at what we do.

Daniel Stillman:

It's really interesting because it feels we didn't talk nearly enough about this, is that design thinking is a conversation between a group of people and relationships. Life moves at the pace of relationships. You can't make a tomato grow any faster than it's going to grow, regardless of how much effort you put into it. All you can do is set the soils as best you can.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah. Life is about these conversations that we have and we can design these conversations. And so yeah. How do we design them more intentionally?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. And I think you've given us a lot of tools to think about, power and positionality has the foundation for making sure that it's a clean, a real relationship and not a predatory relationship and not a one-sided relationship.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Yeah, not transactional.

Daniel Stillman:

And not a transactional relationship, a relating relationship, which is really different. Well, this is really great. I'm really grateful for your time. I think there's a lot of food for thought here. Thank you so much, Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel.

Dr. Lesley-Ann Noel, PhD:

Thank you. This has been great.


Negotiation with Compassion

KC_0501-v2.jpg

Today I have a deep dive conversation with the magnetic Kwame Christian, Director of the American Negotiation Institute and a respected voice in the field of negotiation and conflict resolution. Kwame also hosts one of the world’s most popular negotiation podcasts, Negotiate Anything. Kwame and I dig into how to be confident in the face of conflict: Confident during a difficult conversation, and confident in yourself, before you step into the conversation. As he points out, it doesn't make sense to give recipes to people who are afraid to get in the kitchen! So confidence is critical. 

This is one of the most fundamental points that many people miss about negotiating - they see it as a series of tips, tricks and tactics, but it’s really about a way of thinking. Before you start any negotiation with another person, you have one with yourself. You convince yourself that you deserve more than you are currently getting, you resolve to speak up. In Negotiation-speak, this is sometimes called the aspiration value - what you aspire to get. But often there’s another part of ourselves that tells us exactly the opposite - we don’t deserve what we want or we shouldn’t bother asking, or that we’ll never get it, no matter how hard we negotiate. These parts need to have a conversation and negotiate an approach that feels right to ourselves.

Kwame’s book, Finding Confidence in Conflict: How to Negotiate Anything and Live Your Best Life spends a great deal of time on this inner negotiation and the tools to help you step up, including mindfulness and self-compassion.

What I love about Kwame’s approach to negotiation is that the patterns to shift a negotiation with another person are the same tools he suggests to shift a negotiation with yourself: Compassionate Curiosity.

Force and coercion are not effective long-term negotiation or conversation strategies with another person...and they don’t work very well when we apply them to ourselves, either. Forcing yourself to do something you don’t want to do...it usually backfires, right?

Kwame suggests applying a 3-step process to be compassionately curious with difficult conversations - a way through challenging disagreements with others or ourselves.

  1. Acknowledge emotions

  2. Get Curious with compassion

  3. Joint problem solving

About halfway through our conversation, Kwame talks about how it’s hard to force yourself to not worry and what to do instead: It’s better to admit that we DO feel worried and seek to understand why. Like in any negotiation, get curious about what data there is on the other side of the table...in this case, what there is to worry about…and then start problem-solving. How likely are those scenarios? What can we do about each? It’s much easier to negotiate a time-boxed worrying session with yourself than it is to push it off. Leaning into difficult conversations is always more rewarding than avoiding them - this is doubly true with yourself.

Enjoy the conversation as much as I did, and make sure to check out Kwame’s resources on ways to transform negotiation, resources for learning negotiation, and useful meditation techniques: check out Kwame’s TEDx talk, the negotiate anything podcast and The American negotiation Institute.

KwameChristianSketchNotes.jpg

Second 27

If you look at any part of your life, like the most impactful moments, most likely, there was a difficult conversation somewhere in the vicinity of that moment, of that decision. Especially when you think about the most impactful relationships we have, it's not always sunshine and rainbows all the time. There are going to be some of these difficult conversations. And then the success or failure that we have in those relationships is going to be contingent upon to a large extent, how well we have those conversations. Same with our career, same with how we operate in business. It's all the same. So, I genuinely believe that if we're better at having these difficult conversations, we're putting ourselves in the best position possible to live the best version of our life.

Minute 6

it comes down to this, it doesn't make sense to give recipes to people who are afraid to get in the kitchen. I can give you all the tools and tactics that I want. You can know exactly what to do. It doesn't mean you'll do it. It doesn't mean that if you do it, you'll do it confidently, right? So, it's important to have that psychological and emotional foundation in place. So, you can be effective once you get that understanding of the tools.

Minute 12

For me, thinking about my fear of difficult conversations that I had in the past and my fear of public speaking, that a lot of people are shocked to hear when they see my TED talk and recognize that the foundation of my business is public speaking at this point. They're surprised to hear that I had that struggle. They're even more surprised to hear that I still have it, right? That's the thing. Daniel, the feelings are still there, but we go through a process called cognitive reappraisal. So, what we're doing is that even though we're feeling something, we change the appraisal of the phenomenon inside of us. So, I'm changing the way that I think about it. So, when my heart rate elevates, I perspire a little bit. My breathing gets a little bit shallow. Instead of saying, "I'm afraid," I say, "I'm excited." That means I'm having a conversation that means something.

Minute 13

So, now as a mediator, I'm constantly leaning into difficult conversation as a negotiator on behalf of my clients, because I still want to keep myself sharp. I still practice mainly to collect stories that I can use to teach people at a higher level, but I still do this and I get nervous. I feel that, but I've changed my perspective. So, whenever a mediation would come to me or a negotiation would come to me and it was really dirty, just highly emotional. People are using underhanded tricks. I get excited. I'm like, "Oh, this is going to be good. This is going to be good." 

Minute 15

If you're going up to bat, you might have an opportunity to hit the ball, right? But sometimes you strike out. Sometimes you can strike out by swinging. Sometimes you can strike out by looking. People who go down looking feel much worse than the people who go down swinging. So, the way that I think about it is that listen, there's a chance that I miss, but I'm going to miss by trying to be proactive and taking control of the situation rather than being passive and hoping that things go my way.

Minute 22

One of the things you have to recognize is that effective negotiation usually is boring, right? I'm not exciting to look at when I negotiate. I might throw in some jokes well timed and everything, but that's about it. Because I remember when I was learning to drive, my dad taught me a very important lesson. He said, "You're going to make more mistakes by driving too fast than driving too slowly."

Minute 26

I think it's almost like a negotiation with myself. I don't say, "Nope, you cannot worry." No, that's not how my brain works. All right, how much are you going to worry. How are you going to do it? How can you actually make it productive? I think that's worked well for me.

Minute 29

So, with neuroplasticity, that's just the recognition that your brain changes with experience. Neurons that fire together wire together. So, the thing is if you train your brain to be resentful, that's how you will be. You will start seeing negativity everywhere and went through some tough times. I started to recognize, "Oh, hey, normal, happy Kwame isn't there anymore. He's starting to get really negative and the pattern was not good." So, I said, "No, I need to retrain my brain." So, what my new habit is, is in the morning, I go through my gratitude journal, write three things that I'm grateful for. Then I put it down and then I do a five-breath meditation, just long breath in, long breath out.

Minute 38

Understanding the way that the brain works, these fundamental psychological concepts, helps you to make better decisions in the moment. Again, not a really difficult negotiation technique to understand, but it has a significant impact on your negotiations and difficult conversations. Waiting, simply having the mental discipline to inject a little bit of time between the stimulus and response. It plays a significant dividend during the negotiation.

Minute 41

What is the saying, what's the point of gaining the world if you lose yourself in the process? If you're okay with yourself, then you can lose the world, then you can still be okay with the outcome. I think that's really, really, really powerful, really powerful. The more time you spend with yourself appreciating yourself and taking the time through gratitude to appreciate the things that you already have, then you're going to be in a much better position. One of my favorite definitions of happiness and success is when you want what you already have.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

Kwame Christian, I'm going to officially welcome you to the Conversation Factory. Thanks for being here. I really appreciate your time.

Kwame Christian:

My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

Daniel Stillman:

So, there's a quote I have from you that it seems to appear in a lot of different places that "The best things in life often lie on the other side of a difficult conversation." I'm wondering if you can just say more about why you believe that to be so true.

Kwame Christian:

Yeah. If you look at any part of your life, like the most impactful moments, most likely, there was a difficult conversation somewhere in the vicinity of that moment, of that decision. Especially when you think about the most impactful relationships we have, it's not always sunshine and rainbows all the time. There are going to be some of these difficult conversations. And then the success or failure that we have in those relationships is going to be contingent upon to a large extent, how well we have those conversations. Same with our career, same with how we operate in business. It's all the same. So, I genuinely believe that if we're better at having these difficult conversations, we're putting ourselves in the best position possible to live the best version of our life.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, I think what I found so interesting about your approach is I think often people think about negotiation as a way to design a conversation between me and another person that there's all these tactics that I should know and there's all these mental models I should be bringing to bear on the conversation. But the idea that I should be using compassionate curiosity, not just for my "opponent" or my somebody on the other side of the table, but that I should also be using it for myself, I think is a really unique perspective that you have on negotiation.

Kwame Christian:

Thank you. Yeah. I wanted to make sure with my book, Finding Confidence in Conflict, I had a unique contribution, because there are tons of books out there that do a great job of addressing negotiation, conflict resolution. I wanted to take a different approach. So, the compassionate curiosity framework is a three-part framework that you can use in any difficult conversation you have, whether it's at work or at home. Like you said, you can turn that into an introspective process and look at yourself. The steps are the same.

Kwame Christian:

So, the first step is acknowledge and validate emotions. The second step is get curious with compassion. And then the third step is joint problem solving. We do this externally in our difficult conversations, but beforehand, it's good to do it internally as a tool of introspection to get a better understanding of the challenges that you face. So, you can have more clarity during the conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

So, what I love about this in my own work in conversation design, I love the idea of durable patterns that apply everywhere, right? This idea that that design for that arc of that conversation of start with acknowledging emotions, open there, explore through compassion and then joint problem solving as a way to close, it's a durable pattern that you can apply for a group negotiation or a one-on-one negotiation or an internal conflict that you, yourself are having.

Daniel Stillman:

I guess my question is, "What was your journey inward?" Because I feel like most people go outward. There's an old scripture about this, "The senses all go outwards." So, we go outwards or we look outwards. We smell outwards and we speak outwards. But going inwards, I think, takes more work. So, where did you get that drive to go inward?

Kwame Christian:

I've always been fascinated by the human mind. So, my undergrad degree is in psychology. I think when I tell people that and the fact that I wanted to be a counselor or a therapist or get into psychiatry, one of those options, I think it makes a lot more sense with my approach, because people often say, "Oh, you don't sound like a lawyer." I was like, "Well, my degree's in psych." Oh, that makes sense. I get it now. So, I think that's really where it came from. There's this joke in psychology that people often study the thing that they struggle with the most.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Kwame Christian:

So, for me, it was confidence, especially in difficult conversations. So, I wanted to become a therapist to help people overcome their personal fears, whatever it happened to be. So, for me, I'm a recovering people pleaser. So, I wasn't very confident in difficult conversations. So, I just used myself essentially as my own client. Put myself through cognitive behavioral therapy just for myself, treated it like a phobia. All right, I'm afraid of these conversations. What can I do to get over it? So, by working on it and thinking through it and looking deeply within myself, I was able to find the answer.

Kwame Christian:

So, for me, one I'm doing now with the American Negotiation Institute and my negotiation and conflict resolution trainings, I really think of it more as putting myself in a position to help people overcome those psychological and emotional barriers. Then once they have that confidence, then give them the skills and strategies in order to be successful.

Daniel Stillman:

Do people resist that path? I feel like the outward strain is people want the tools and they want the tips. They want the tricks that they can apply. So, that they don't have to think or feel.

Kwame Christian:

Yes. I wouldn't say there's a resistance once they get in it, but there's a resistance in the way you market it, right? Because if I say, "Hey, I'm going to talk about your feelings," then people say, "No, no, no, let's talk about money," right? That's easy. That's why with my approach, you see with the book, people are usually surprised that 50, 60, 70% of the book is about psychology and introspection and overcoming those personal challenges. But then as they go through it, it makes sense. Everybody comes to the conclusion, "Yeah, it makes sense."

Kwame Christian:

Really, it comes down to this, it doesn't make sense to give recipes to people who are afraid to get in the kitchen. I can give you all the tools and tactics that I want. You can know exactly what to do. It doesn't mean you'll do it. It doesn't mean that if you do it, you'll do it confidently, right? So, it's important to have that psychological and emotional foundation in place. So, you can be effective once you get that understanding of the tools.

Daniel Stillman:

So, this is the thing that's potentially interesting. Let me see how I can phrase this, because I was actually just coaching somebody about this. There's the idea of the ZOPA, where the zone of possible agreement. I have my range of prices that I want to get, and you have your range. Maybe there's something in the middle. There's this idea of the aspiration value, what I'm willing to ask for. I hope I don't go into dangerous waters here. There's some studies that actually attribute the salary differences between men and women to the fact that men ask more often for more.

Daniel Stillman:

So, my friend, Claire Wasserman, who I had on the podcast, a couple years ago, she is writing a book called Ladies Get Paid. She has an international women's group that's about teaching women how to get paid and to ask for what they're worth. It's about starting with the individual. I think there's some challenges with saying, the individual has to ask more and the individual needs to learn how to do all this work when there's all these structural things that are around it. I don't know what my question is, but there's the internal negotiation and then there's all these external factors that go into it.

Kwame Christian:

Absolutely, yeah. We also have a podcast called Ask With Confidence that's all about women in negotiation. Our Chief Operating Officer, Katherine Knapke is the person who is the host of that show. I'm always afraid of mansplaining on this show.

Daniel Stillman:

How it should be, yes.

Kwame Christian:

But the thing is, this is a question that I get asked all the time, Daniel. You're right. The studies, if you look at the really great book, Women Don't Ask by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever, they talk about that study. Those are studies that they did in their time in... I cannot remember the name of that Ohio University. It's going to bug me for a while.

Daniel Stillman:

We'll Google it later and put it into the notes.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly, exactly. They did a great study. They recognized that in their classes, the men were four times more likely to ask than the women. Based on their studies, they determined that a portion of the gender gap, the wage gap could be eliminated by effective negotiation skills. And then some more updated studies have demonstrated that now, because of their work and the work of other great people, especially people like Sheryl Sandberg with Lean In, women are now more likely to ask, but now what we're running into is they're finding that even though they're asking more, they're still getting less compared to men when they ask for a comparable amount.

Kwame Christian:

So, that's where you demonstrate that interesting dichotomy, because there needs to be an individual approach and then approach directly to society. Because individually, we can talk about the negotiation strategies and tactics that we can use to improve our outcomes. But then on the other side, we also have to address the reality that there are some structural and societal and psychological inequities that exist. When I talk about psychological, I'm talking about bias against women, where when a woman is assertive and advocating for herself, it's looked upon negatively too. So, we have to have a bifurcated approach where we focus on the development of our own skills to advocate for ourselves, while at the same time, addressing those inequities and changing culture to make it more equitable.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, this is where it comes down to because this idea that well, you should just ask for more. You should increase your aspiration value and just work through your internal conflict, there's data that shows that asking make somebody look bad, right? So, they're like, "Well, why should I bother asking?" So, I mean, this is one way I want to explore one of your statements from the book about fears and anxieties being the manifestations of a healthy, functioning mind. I often tell people that the emotions are just information.

Daniel Stillman:

What we do with that awareness is up to us. I'm just wondering if you can say more about how we should all deal with our own fight, flight, and freeze responses that we'll experience. If we're talking about designing the arc of the conversation and the negotiation arc of compassionate curiosity starts with acknowledging emotions, in there, there are those three directions that we might want to go. If we slow down and experience our response in that moment, what should we be aware of? What should we be doing with that information that's coming in?

Kwame Christian:

Yeah, like you said, we have to recognize that it's information. There's a difference between thoughts and truths, emotions and truths, right? So, we need to evaluate it. I think about it just like a signal. What is the signal saying? Okay, let's make an assessment and then make a decision based on that. Sometimes introducing a little bit of time between the feeling and the decision or the action, that can help you to think a little bit more clearly about the situation. One of the things that people have to recognize is this. For a lot of us, those feelings don't go away. They don't go away.

Kwame Christian:

For me, thinking about my fear of difficult conversations that I had in the past and my fear of public speaking, that a lot of people are shocked to hear when they see my TED talk and recognize that the foundation of my business is public speaking at this point. They're surprised to hear that I had that struggle. They're even more surprised to hear that I still have it, right? That's the thing. Daniel, the feelings are still there, but we go through a process called cognitive reappraisal. So, what we're doing is that even though we're feeling something, we change the appraisal of the phenomenon inside of us. So, I'm changing the way that I think about it.

Kwame Christian:

So, when my heart rate elevates, I perspire a little bit. My breathing gets a little bit shallow. Instead of saying, "I'm afraid," I say, "I'm excited." That means I'm having a conversation that means something. That means I have an opportunity to speak to people and share a message and change lives. This is a really good thing. I'm excited. That's the really interesting thing, because we have a limited range of physiological responses. So, if you're scared, you're going to have that increased heart rate, shallow breathing, perspiration. Same things going to happen if you're excited. So, I just changed the perspective to say, "I'm excited."

Kwame Christian:

So, now as a mediator, I'm constantly leaning into difficult conversation as a negotiator on behalf of my clients, because I still want to keep myself sharp. I still practice mainly to collect stories that I can use to teach people at a higher level, but I still do this and I get nervous. I feel that, but I've changed my perspective. So, whenever a mediation would come to me or a negotiation would come to me and it was really dirty, just highly emotional. People are using underhanded tricks. I get excited. I'm like, "Oh, this is going to be good. This is going to be good."

Kwame Christian:

Even though I still feel that, I feel that, I lean toward it. I use it as a reason to lean into the conversation instead of leaning away from it. It comes down to this one simple fact. Conflict is an opportunity. Conflict is an opportunity. If we learn to see it as an opportunity, it will make it more likely for us to actually lean in and engage in a high level.

Daniel Stillman:

This goes back to the opening quote that we started with. The best things in life, I would say not often, definitely lie on the other side of a difficult conversation. There's no way that you can get what you want generally speaking without asking for it. I'm having a flashback now. When I was a kid, there was a local pizzeria and my dad would take me and my brother too. I remember I finished my glass of water. I was like, "I want some more water." My dad was like, "Go ask for it at the front counter." I just felt terrified, terrified to go up and ask for more water from talking to an adult. My dad was like, "No, you have to go and do that."

Daniel Stillman:

There's this very primal lesson of, "You will only get what you're willing to ask for." It's hard. Reading your descriptions of fight, flight and freeze, I feel like I went through all of my own physiological responses. I like how you broke it down with if you fight, you will destroy the relationship. If you flee, there's a missed opportunity. If you freeze, you exist in a false relationship. I thought that was just a beautiful laying out of all three of these options are terrible.

Kwame Christian:

Right, exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Which means that our other option is to lean into it.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh, yeah. Sorry, go ahead.

Kwame Christian:

Oh, no, it's okay. I was never very good at baseball, but I understood it conceptually. If you're going up to bat, you might have an opportunity to hit the ball, right? But sometimes you strike out. Sometimes you can strike out by swinging. Sometimes you can strike out by looking. People who go down looking feel much worse than the people who go down swinging. So, the way that I think about it is that listen, there's a chance that I miss, but I'm going to miss by trying to be proactive and taking control of the situation rather than being passive and hoping that things go my way.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. So, there's something that came up, which is interesting. It's the third part of the compassionate curiosity conversation arc is joint problem solving. What I loved about this idea of being more creative in difficult conversations is that we cannot be creative when we are stressed. I was listening to one of your podcast conversations, where you talked about bluffing. This idea that a bluff is actually introducing stress into the conversation, which means everybody's rational capacity is going to be reduced.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, this is a great example of how cognitive empathy can just give you a very clear step forward and what not to bring into the conversation. A bluff seems like, "Oh, well, what about bluffing? How much should I bluff? How often should I bluff?" You were saying, "Don't bluff, because a bluff is a threat," right? The threat reduces our creative ability, which means we can't do any joint problem solving.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly, exactly. I think, one of the things that's so important for people to understand too is that even if it's a strategy that you yourself will not use, you need to understand it, because other people will use it against you, right? So, for me, I've made a career in negotiating. I don't bluff. I don't bluff. I tell people, I offer warnings, not threats. It's an if-then proposition. But the difference is a threat is like, "Listen, I am going to do this to you, but with a warning." What you're doing is a semantic change, but it's important.

Kwame Christian:

You're saying, "This is a natural consequence of your action. If this continues, I won't have any choice but to do this. So, the choice is yours, but now you understand the natural consequences of your actions, but the ball is in your court." So, that's a different thing, because you're saying, "You have the control. You have choice, but I'm putting you on notice," right? Sometimes you have to put that barrier down, but the way that you do it is very, very important.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, so when someone does that to us, so the question is, "How in that moment do I, do you create safety for yourself?"

Kwame Christian:

Yeah, so what you have to do is take some time, take some time. Again, self-awareness, using that internally-directed compassionate curiosity. Say, "Okay, acknowledge emotions. What am I feeling? Oh, that scared me. No shame. No shame in that. It scared me." A lot of times people make the mistake of saying, "No, I feel fine. No, I'm good. I'm good." Are you mad? No, I'm fine.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, having feelings about your feelings is a dangerous spiral, but we have that.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

I get angry that I feel shame about my anger and I feel fear about my shame.

Kwame Christian:

Right. I think it was Brené Brown, who said, "It's not just that we feel bad. Sometimes we feel bad about feeling bad, which makes us feel worse. Then you spiral out of control." Listen, okay, that made me mad. All right, that scared me. Can I think very well at this point? Probably not, right? So, I said, "Why did it scare me? Well, I'm afraid I'm going to lose this opportunity." Okay, good. So, well, considering that, what can you do to make yourself feel a little bit safer, but at the same time, you don't make a strategic mistake? Okay. You go through that process, internally-directed compassion and curiosity. You recognize the best thing to do is nothing. The best thing to do is nothing.

Kwame Christian:

So, whenever somebody threatens me, I use it as an opportunity to get curious, but I'm not going to make any decisions under duress. I'm going to say, "Oh, that's interesting. Can you tell me a bit more about what you're hoping to accomplish? All right, what changed? Because last time we spoke you were saying this. Now, you're saying this. Now, I'm a little bit confused. All right. Help me to understand this." Because every time somebody makes an offer and a bluff is an aggressive offer that often is not substantiated with anything in reality, you're obligated to defend your offer. You can't just say, "Give me this. No, I'm not telling you why I need it." Just common courtesy, you have to explain that. So, I ask questions and then I get information. I use it as an opportunity to get information.

Daniel Stillman:

That was the strategy I think I adapted when somebody would throw out a number that I learned in negotiation training is that's an interesting number. Can you tell me a little bit more about where you got that? Because legitimacy is one of the criterion for good negotiation agreements. You just can't say, "That number is the number I want." It's like, "Well, tell me more about that number."

Kwame Christian:

Exactly. Yeah. It's so powerful. It's so powerful. And then the next thing too is sometimes people will push you. So, you're going to ask questions. My simple rule is I'm not going to make any decision that I wasn't prepared for. I concede according to plan. I'm not just going to do it off the fly. So, I said, "All right, listen, I'm going to go back. I'm going to talk to my clients about this. I'm going to go back. I'm going to think about it. I'll get back to you." Sometimes people might say, "No, I need an answer right now. I need you to answer right now." Simple response has never failed me. I say, "If you need an answer right now, then the answer has to be no." And then people find some patience every single time.

Daniel Stillman:

It's so interesting, because one thing I've learned is that speed is dangerous, right? It's also exciting, right? But slowing down is safe. It's slowing down the conversation. It's interesting that the compassionate curiosity is your way to slow down the conversation with inquiry. Tell me more about that. Let's dig into that. It's just for me, active listening is always a safe stance, because I can go into automatic mode and ask more questions while I'm freaking out inwardly.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly, yeah. You made a really good point, right? Slowing down is a safe thing to do, but going fast is sometimes more exciting. One of the things you have to recognize is that effective negotiation usually is boring, right? I'm not exciting to look at when I negotiate. I might throw in some jokes well timed and everything, but that's about it. Because I remember when I was learning to drive, my dad taught me a very important lesson. He said, "You're going to make more mistakes by driving too fast than driving too slowly."

Kwame Christian:

Same thing applies here in the negotiation. If I have any questions, any concerns, I'm not confident in what I'm going to say next or I'm just confused, I rely on compassionate curiosity to slow it down. If I still don't know what move to make, I just stay curious and then end the conversation. I can't negotiate without you.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, yeah, or ask for a bathroom break.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

So, I wanted to talk about vivid visualization, because I thought that it was a term I actually hadn't heard before. It seems associated with some things I might have experienced. But I'm wondering if you can just talk a little bit more about how vivid visualization is helpful in the preparation phase of going into a difficult conversation.

Kwame Christian:

Yeah, this is borrowing from sports psychology. So, when you think about sports psychology, one of the things I have the athletes do is actually visualize what happens, what could potentially happen, not just the perfect performance, but also what could go wrong. A classic example is Michael Phelps. In one of his many Olympic medal winning races, one of his goggles actually filled up with water. He couldn't see, but he had visualized not only the perfect performance, but also overcoming adversity. So, he's already been there. That vivid visualization is very, very, very powerful, like all the details. So, I think, the best example for me is the TED Talk, because I went over that hundreds of times.

Daniel Stillman:

You said, you did it backwards, which blew my mind. Did you really do that? Kwame, that's nuts.

Kwame Christian:

I literally did, because I used what's called the mind palace technique. This is an old Greek philosopher strategy. You put parts of your speech around your house, but in your brain. So, I'm just walking through my house. So, if you do it really well, you see those cues, those visual cues as you walk around your house. So, all you need to do is turn around and walk backwards. You can see those cues the other way. So, I was leaving nothing up to chance there.

Daniel Stillman:

Wow.

Kwame Christian:

Nothing up to chance. So, I would visualize getting up in the morning, driving there, putting on the clothes that I was going to wear, talking to people, walking up on stage, seeing the audience, and then going through, giving the presentation. I just saw all of it. The feeling that I felt when I was on stage was familiarity. I'd already been there. If you do that in your conversations, it will make you a lot more confident during them.

Daniel Stillman:

What's so interesting about this as we think about and where I'm probing on redesigning this internal conversation, often I find when we're looking at these fears and anxieties, we give more credence to some voices over others. It sounds like when I was reading your book that almost all of the internal voices are by default alarm bells, right? They're emergency voices. It sounds like the idea is to give equal airtime to some of the, "Well, what's the best that could happen? What are all of the things that could happen?" We're not just saying, "Here's the worst. Here's the worst. Here's the worst." It's like, "Here's a whole host of scenarios. I'm going to visualize the best and the worst of all of them."

Kwame Christian:

Yeah. On one slight edit, I would say the most likely ones too. Because our mind, my goodness, it can come up with some wild things that sometimes I find not helpful. So, I say, "All right, let me have a little worry session. Brain, go ahead. Have your fun. I'm going to let you run wild. You go ahead. Okay, that was a good one. I didn't see that one coming. What else horrible could happen, right?" I just let my brain go. And then I said, "All right. Now, what's most likely going to happen? Now, I'm going to focus on those outcomes and those contingencies." So, I have a feeling of what I do in each of those situations, but I allow my brain to go there, because it will.

Kwame Christian:

So, I think once I go through it, it helps and my goal too to avoid worrying. The spiral of worrying is I say, "Okay, I allow myself to think about it one time. I'm not going to rehash that horrible situation again that I already addressed. Okay, nope, nope, already been there. That's cool. We can move on." I think it's almost like a negotiation with myself. I don't say, "Nope, you cannot worry." No, that's not how my brain works. All right, how much are you going to worry. How are you going to do it? How can you actually make it productive? I think that's worked well for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I mean, I'm looking at the steps of compassionate curiosity. You are practicing that with yourself. You're acknowledging the experience, getting curious with compassion, and then you're doing some joint problem solving. You're like, "What's most likely? What's the least likely? What's the biggest impact? What's going to be the least impact?" I would do with design thinking strategy session, let's address things that are in this quadrant, most likely, biggest impact. Let's make sure that we've got a plan for all of them. I think that's very reasonable.

Kwame Christian:

Absolutely.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, it's also being compassionate with yourself. What are was your journey? Because on one hand, there's this active process in the internal conversation. There's also silence in conversations. It seems like you're somebody who's believed in the benefits of meditation, having some silent time with yourself. I'm wondering if you could talk about your path into appreciating and practicing in that direction.

Kwame Christian:

Yeah. Daniel, I got to the point where I just could not deny the science anymore. That's really what it was. Too many people that I respected too much said that it was beneficial. So, I started to do it. It's been really helpful.

Daniel Stillman:

Very rational.

Kwame Christian:

Very, very helpful. Yeah, I just had no choice, but it's been really helpful. I think for me, one of the benefits, the most powerful things that I did was I didn't force myself to meditate like other people, right? I recognize that okay, some people say, "Yeah, I meditate for 15, 20 minutes a day." I tried. It didn't feel great to me. I will concede that I didn't push myself to do it for an extended period of time, but I found a practice that worked for me. So, what I started to do is I blended it with two different things. Number one, gratitude, and number two, the science of neuroplasticity.

Kwame Christian:

So, with neuroplasticity, that's just the recognition that your brain changes with experience. Neurons that fire together wire together. So, the thing is if you train your brain to be resentful, that's how you will be. You will start seeing negativity everywhere and went through some tough times. I started to recognize, "Oh, hey, normal, happy Kwame isn't there anymore. He's starting to get really negative and the pattern was not good." So, I said, "No, I need to retrain my brain." So, what my new habit is, is in the morning, I go through my gratitude journal, write three things that I'm grateful for. Then I put it down and then I do a five-breath meditation, just long breath in, long breath out.

Kwame Christian:

The rule for myself is if my mind wanders during any of those five breaths, now I need to do another one. It needs to be five consecutive breaths of focus. So, it's a focusing exercise. And then I transition to the meditation but focused on something that I was grateful for in the journal. So, I smiled to myself while thinking about that, again, doing five deep breaths. So, what I'm doing is I'm really trying to savor that positivity, savoring that positivity. That's helped me to be more readily able to recognize negative thought patterns. So, I say, "Ha-ha, that feels different. Let's bring it back."

Kwame Christian:

So, again, it goes back to self-awareness and then having that practice of focus to train my mind to go to where I want it to go through meditation. So, it's a mini-meditation during the day when I recognize, "Oh, you're going the wrong direction here. Let's bring it back." That's been incredibly beneficial for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, I mean, you point out in your book that this is mental training. This is exercise for the mind. That if we put effort into it, it's going to bear fruit over time.

Kwame Christian:

Exactly.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's interesting, because this has been a really hard time to be alive. We started our conversation by acknowledging this is a very, very strange time to be alive. I'm guessing, even a stranger time to be a person of color in America. Americans seem to have noticed that the people who are White, who protest are treated very, very differently than people of color who stand up for themselves. So, this really, I think, goes 100% to this question of the legitimate fear that people of color and minorities would feel when negotiating for themselves.

Daniel Stillman:

So, there's this training on one side and this effort that you're doing, which I think is really noble and worthwhile. And then there's the fact that the stress is real. I'll just use the word 'ancient,' long standing. These are things that are in the conversation. Or if they're not in the conversation, they're hovering right at the edge of the conversation, no matter what. So, I don't know. How do you deal with that boundary and create safety for yourself with all of that going on?

Kwame Christian:

Yeah, even before we get to the conversations, I think it's important to train your mind by protecting your mind, because there is a concept in medicine called the minimum effective dose. So, it's like, "Hey, how many pain pills do you want to take?" Yeah, just enough, but not too much, right? That's how much we want to take, because we recognize there is overdoing it. When you think about being woke and understanding and knowing everything that's around you, we need to incorporate the same approach, right? We need to know just enough, but not too much. I think there's a point where we can overdo it and then it causes mental anguish. When we're under that stress and anxiety, it makes things a lot worse, more difficult than it needs to be.

Kwame Christian:

So, for me, I recognize I need to know enough, but then pull back once I get enough. I know enough to understand the situation, but beyond that, it is just a little bit too gratuitous, I'd say. So, one of the things too is that it leads to hypersensitivity to negativity in your environment. So, your system of awareness helps you to catch issues of inequity, helps you to catch issues of bias a lot more readily than somebody who is less aware.

Kwame Christian:

At the same time, it also pushes it beyond the fact that yes, there is an equity. Sometimes you start to recognize issues where they may not be. So, I think there's that really tough line that we need to straddle here in order to maintain our mental health and communicate effectively and connect effectively to make sure we're not getting false positives where they're not there. So, it's really, really important, but a tough skill to generate, being able to distinguish between the signals from the noise.

Daniel Stillman:

I think that it's important. I'll just speak to White people, because that's how I present. It's important for White people to understand that that is labor that people of color are doing. Measuring, "Wait, did he really say what I thought he said, or did he just say something that he didn't mean?" And then you go through all of the conversations, fight, flight and freeze with yourself about, "How should I respond? What can I say? Is it safe for me to say what I feel like I need to say?" I don't think many White people realize how much labor is being done. So, I think that's important for people understand that that is labor that you are all doing.

Kwame Christian:

Absolutely. The thing is the brain, like any part of your body, can get tired, right? You think about ego depletion, right? Even something as simple as, "Oh, I'm on a diet. There are cookies there. I'm not going to take those cookies," that makes people mentally exhausted. That makes people mentally exhausted.

Daniel Stillman:

I fight that fight every day, man.

Kwame Christian:

I lose that fight every day.

Daniel Stillman:

I lose that fight.

Kwame Christian:

So, people don't recognize, but studies after study after study demonstrates just how much of a toll that takes. So, it's not just, like you said, "Hey, was that legitimate? What was that about? Okay, all right. It was illegitimate. Now, what do I do? Is it worth the fight? What's the consequence?" All of this is happening made conversation that's tough. One of my professors told an interesting story. He's a White male professor. He was driving. It was a long road trip. He went to this really small hotel. He said, "Hey, do you have a spot for me and my wife." They said, "Oh, sorry, weird circumstances. We're actually full."

Kwame Christian:

And then on the way back home, he went to that same hotel and said, "You know what? I could stop in any hotel, but I'm going to try that one again." They said, "I'm sorry, sir. Very strange situation. We're actually full. It rarely happens, but we're actually full." He said, "My White privilege in that situation is that I could have the peace of mind to know that it wasn't because of my race." I know if it were me, you hear me talking. I'm a pretty chill guy, but I'm also a lawyer. I would have been like, "Oh, yeah, I'm suing you. You'll remember the day. I'm Kwame Christian. We'll get to the bottom of this to determine whether or not this was legitimate," right? It takes an emotional toll. It takes an emotional toll.

Kwame Christian:

So, you're absolutely right. It's significant. But I think the more aware people are, at least you'll start to be able to make better strategic decisions or maybe not even better, but more informed. So, you can understand why you feel the way you feel and then create personalized strategies to overcome it. But again, it's very similar to the discussion that we had about gender dynamics as well, because yes, you need to create a personalized strategy to put yourself in the best position for success in this society that isn't equitable.

Kwame Christian:

While at the same time, this bifurcated approach needs to be directed towards society as well. Society needs to improve. We need to raise awareness in general. So, we can make the changes that we need in order to make this the just and equitable society that we all want and deserve. So, we have to keep both things in mind at the same time.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, which is a lot. It's interesting. I'm looking at my notes. There's one point which we didn't address that I think is important to address is this idea that our internal voice is seeking to protect us, like that fight, flight, freeze response. Based on all of our history, we're reenacting strategies that in the past have kept us surviving. Acknowledging that work that our internal voice is doing is noble work, is important. But it sounds like it's also important to say, "I want to separate from that pattern," which seems like why meditation has been so beneficial for you to be able to have that space, even if it's a tiny crack between stimulus and response.

Kwame Christian:

Absolutely. Yeah, it's huge. It's huge. Again, it's so funny. In this conversation, we haven't had any hardcore conversations about specific strategies and tactics, because the reality is proper behavior flows from the proper mindset. Understanding the way that the brain works, these fundamental psychological concepts, helps you to make better decisions in the moment. Again, not a really difficult negotiation technique to understand, but it has a significant impact on your negotiations and difficult conversations. Waiting, simply having the mental discipline to inject a little bit of time between the stimulus and response. It plays a significant dividend during the negotiation.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, we also haven't talked about... It's interesting. I'm thinking about how the BATNA, your best alternative to a negotiated agreement. I've always thought that as a way to create psychological safety for oneself. It's like, "Well, here's what the worst case scenario, here's what's going to happen and a reality in which I will still somehow be okay."

Kwame Christian:

Yes, I love the word that you used, 'okay', because in the book, I described confidence in many different ways, but one of them is the general feeling of okayness, right? Regardless of the way things will end up in this conversation, I will be okay. I'll find a way. If you think about your survivability beforehand, you recognize, "Oh, hey, okay, this isn't that bad. This isn't that bad." One the most difficult and problematic emotions or feelings that you can demonstrate to the other side is neediness, neediness, right?

Daniel Stillman:

That's true. Nobody likes neediness in any conversation.

Kwame Christian:

No, but if you recognize, "Oh, this person needs it," what happens? Now, you have leverage. Now, you have leverage. A lot of people say the person who wants to deal the least wins. Because if you feel like you need the deal more, then you're going to concede more in order to get it. That's the reality. So, there's going to be just by taking the time to evaluate your BATNA and understanding your alternative. If you have time, strengthening your alternative, then it puts you in a better position, because you say, "No, you know what? That is not better than my alternative. It's okay. No stress here. I'm actually good with this."

Daniel Stillman:

This is why my wife and I have been doing some financial planning. I feel like this is why everyone needs to save for an emergency fund, right? The ultimate safety is, "Hey, listen, if every piece of work dries up, if this person fires me, I still have six months of running capital." That's deep core safety.

Kwame Christian:

Absolutely. I was talking to one of my professors. He was teaching a program called Law and Leadership. One of the things he said, he used more colorful language, but he said, "It's a forget-you account." If this deal doesn't work out, yeah, forget you. I'm good. I've got some options here.

Daniel Stillman:

Also, I feel like the amount of time you spend with yourself connecting to your gratitude and your humanity, that's a core BATNA underneath everything else. Even if you lose all that other things, you still have that.

Kwame Christian:

Right, right. What is the saying, what's the point of gaining the world if you lose yourself in the process? If you're okay with yourself, then you can lose the world, then you can still be okay with the outcome. I think that's really, really, really powerful, really powerful. The more time you spend with yourself appreciating yourself and taking the time through gratitude to appreciate the things that you already have, then you're going to be in a much better position. One of my favorite definitions of happiness and success is when you want what you already have.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Kwame, it's beautiful. We're running out of time. Is there anything I haven't asked you that's important to say about these topics? Any parting thoughts?

Kwame Christian:

I think we did a good job of covering it. I think one of the most important things is I named my podcast Negotiate Anything for a reason, because I think a lot of times people are too limited in the way that they think about this skill set. They think about it only in a transactional sense. Or even if they think about it in a more relationship building sense, they think about it limited to the business world. But for me, I've used this in every aspect of my life, business, personal, everything. These are unnatural responses to these situations, right? The caveman way back in the day, when somebody offended him, he didn't say, "Let me empathize." It's not a normal human thing to do. You have to practice it.

Kwame Christian:

So, with my five-year-old at home with my wife, I have a lot of opportunities to practice the skill. When I do that, it makes it a lot easier for me to do that, do what I need to do in the business world, too. So, I just suggest everybody take the time to practice. These everyday conversations can become practice sessions.

Kwame Christian:

And then one last thing, I have a gift for your listeners. If they're interested in preparing effectively for their negotiation, if they go to americannegotiationinstitute.com/guide, they can get access to over 15 free negotiation guides from standard business negotiation guide to conflict resolution to how to have difficult conversations about race, how to have difficult conversations about politics, car negotiation, all sorts of guides that will just help you to prepare effectively. So, you can have more confidence in that difficult conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, we could have had this whole conversation about cars. Missed opportunity, we'll have to have you come back on and just have the car talk version of this podcast.

Kwame Christian:

Seriously, seriously. I have a three-part series on car negotiation. So, we got a lot of content on that too.

Daniel Stillman:

That is amazing. I've just started listening to your podcast, Negotiate Anything. It is really, really wonderful stuff. I'm in the middle of your book, Finding Confidence in Conflict. Is there anything and any other place in the internet where people should go to learn more about all things American Negotiation Institute and Kwame Christian?

Kwame Christian:

Yes. So, if you're interested in negotiation training or anything like that, check out the website but then also LinkedIn. I'm always on LinkedIn, trying to post things, thought provoking things, just random thoughts. Connect with me there. I'm really active there too.

Daniel Stillman:

That's how we met. I'm so glad you said yes to the invitation to come on the show. If you can stand in for another second, we'll have some parting thoughts, but Kwame, I really appreciate you coming on for this conversation. It's really great stuff. I think these are things that will stand everybody in good stead in any difficult conversation in their lives. So, I really appreciate it.

Kwame Christian:

My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. All right. End scene.

Kwame Christian:

Nice, great interviewing. That was fun.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. Oh, man, that's such a compliment, because you're a great interviewer.

Kwame Christian:

Thank you. Tell you, it's a skill. It takes time to develop. I didn't realize how hard it was until I started doing it and realizing I was bad at it. Okay, there are levels to this game.

Daniel Stillman:

There are levels to the game. That's so true. Game recognize game as they say.

Kwame Christian:

Thank you. Appreciate it.

The Hybrid Future of Events

Season_Four_Image_stack_MK.jpg

Coming together is an essential human drive, one that not even a global viral pandemic can fully put a damper on. Many of us have been meeting *more* than ever before as workshops and conferences have gone online all over the world. With vaccines starting to be released in some countries, the question on everyone’s lips is “when can we get back together?” There are lots of guesses but no one knows for sure. If you’re planning events for mid-year 2021, I hope you have a crystal ball *and* that you listen to the rest of this episode.

Meredith Kaganovskiy shares her wisdom and experience with us. She’s a certified meeting professional, a certified digital events strategist and the Senior Project Manager of the DIA Global Annual Meeting. We talk about her herculean efforts in taking a 7000 person-strong flagship event into a virtual one with weeks to spare and dive deep into Meredith's philosophy of experience-driven events planning, as well as her “two experiences, one meeting” motto for the hybrid future on the horizon.

I feel lucky to have been able to work with Meredith and Robyn Weinick, the Global Program Officer on this project as their coach over a few very intense weeks and provide them a space and place to think and build a vision for the experience they were trying to create, working to think past the challenges and restrictions that technology placed on them.

The Hybrid Bridge

Meredith suggests that the old-school way of doing hybrid - a bridge to take questions and insights from the virtual space into the “real” space - is no longer enough. This once “wowed” audiences and helped in-person event planners expand their audiences and reach.

The Virtual-First Platform

Meredith believes that it’s now table-stakes to have a lively, interactive and self-contained virtual platform for remote attendees. The bridge between the in-person and virtual experiences used to be mostly one-way, with in-person taking the lead. Meredith predicts that the hybrid future of events means that the bridge between virtual and in-person needs to be more broad and two-way - a real conversation between equals. And that just like an in-person meeting, a virtual meeting has to provide a range of conversational spaces: from intimate opportunities to connect, to larger arenas for learning and listening, balancing curated conversations and more open-doors dialogs.

Meredith also shares her broader philosophy of event planning, how she visualizes the personality of a meeting and much more. Enjoy the conversation as much as I did recording it.

Links, Key Quotes, Notes and Resources

Connect with Meredith

More about DIA

Meredith’s *first* podcast about turning around the “ocean liner” that was the DIA global meeting:

Minute 9

We talk about how meetings have a personality
“I was always in tune with the personality of the meeting that I was doing”

Minute 11

How events start way before people walk into the doors, physically or virtually.

Minute 17

Making a decision to be virtual or to cancel a flagship meeting in June during the first shutdown in March.

Minute 20

“I'll never forget April 8th, because that's my email went out to the program committee, that this change is happening. We can no longer hold our meeting. The DC Convention Center became a field hospital. We have to go 100% virtual, don't panic.”

Minute 23

“It was important for me that when you clicked in, I started referring to this at the virtual convention center. And when you logged into my lobby, you felt like you were at DIA, even though you were sitting in your dining room, or your home office, or in the kitchen, that you felt like, "Oh, this is different. I'm not watching a recording of something, I'm actually interacting with people. There's a way to connect with people. I'm still viewing content and speakers from around the world,"

Min 31

The “old way” to Hybrid: On “the bridge” between virtual and IRL meetings

“before COVID, really, when you heard things like a hybrid meeting, it meant that there were sessions that were live streamed out to maybe the website of the company or association, and that you could log in and be a part of the virtual audience that's watching a live session happening and groups that did it, well would have that moderator, that would be typing in the chat back to the virtual audience, and during a Q&A would address the speaker and say, "I have a few questions from the virtual audience." And that would be the bridge. And that was like really fancy. That was wow, they're live streaming sessions, which is great, because they get that reach. They brought in another audience that couldn't travel, and that was it.”

Min 35

Flipping IRL and Virtual: Two experiences and one meeting

“the way I see it is that the virtual platform still has a place. It still needs to be embraced, and we need to create environments for two audiences, ... two experiences but one meeting.

And so you're going to have, when we're allowed to convene large groups. You're going to have a smaller group in person than you would have had probably a regional audience, it's going to have to be socially distanced for us.

“So I look at it like this, I have an audience in the physical space, I have an audience in the virtual space, and both audiences need access to each other, and the content that's happening in each place.”

“I want this to be, if you are on site, you are still going to have access to the virtual platform, so you can tune in to see what's happening there, what kind of networking is happening there, what sessions are being offered there, potentially watch parties, if I have, speakers that could not be physically in person, it may be the reverse. I may have a gathering of folks in an area tuned into the platform. So the reverse is happening, where the speakers are living in the virtual space, there's a virtual audience that's in the platform with them, but now I have a moderator connecting folks from a physical location and checking in with their iPads and phones, and so it's both ways, it's happening now.”

More About Meredith

Meredith Kaganovskiy is a certified meeting professional, digital events strategist and Senior Project Manager of the DIA Global Annual Meeting. Meredith is passionate about creating experiences and environments that give individuals opportunities to learn and connect with each other and has designed conferences for domestic and international nonprofit associations since 2004.

DIA is the Drug Information Association and has provided the world’s largest global, neutral stage for life science professionals to come together and address healthcare challenges. The Global Annual Meeting brings together patients, industry, regulators, and academia from all angles of the product lifecycle, from more than 50 countries.

Full Transcript

Daniel:

So Meredith, I am going to... rather I'm going to officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory. Thank you for making the time to have this conversation with me.


Meredith:

Thank you for having me.


Daniel:

It's your second podcast interview. I'm excited. So, okay, let's go back to the beginning. Can you tell me your origin story? Like how did you become a Certified Meeting Professional? Ladies and gentlemen, if you've never met a Certified Meeting Professional you're about to. So I mean, how did you find yourself on that path?


Meredith:

I fell into it. I did not know this was a path when... so you start out in college, and you decide your majors, and at that time in my life, I was majoring in marketing, and I was minoring in...


Daniel:

You can do it.


Meredith:

I can't even speak. I'm so excited. I had a minor in fine arts-


Daniel:

It is Friday, by the way, in your defense, we just talked about how yesterday felt like. What was it? Little Thursday? No little Friday?


Meredith:

Oh, Friday Jr.


Daniel:

Friday Jr., that's what it was.


Meredith:

Yes.


Daniel:

It's like dinosaur Jr. [crosstalk 00:01:36]-


Meredith:

Every day feels like a week, especially if you're working from home with your family and you have school aged children like I do.


Daniel:

Yeah. So, you're all good. As you are saying.


Meredith:

I'm all good. Look at this back on track. So I decided I'm going to major in marketing, I was going to do a minor in fine arts, Rutgers was like, "Oh, that's interesting, we haven't had that before. Not sure about that." And I said, "Well, I am. I know this is what I want to do." I was very interested in graphic design and new product development, and while I'm on campus, I'm starting to get involved in different student organizations. And when I say involved, for some reason, I can't just be a member, I end up on the board, because I'm like, "Let's do this, I have this idea," and before I knew it, I was bringing students together. I was organizing activities on site. I was drawing up budgets and defending them to student activities. I was founding organizations, we were having fundraisers for those organizations, and I did not know this was a career.


Meredith:

And then, it's that time where now you have to find a job, I am now competing with 9/11, with folks who have masters, and who are now seeking jobs, and I'm just out of college, and I started seeing event planning and meeting planning, pop up, and I did an internship for meeting planning, and it was awful. I was just booking dinners for doctors in all different restaurants, and I was like, "If this is meeting planning, I'm out." I'm looking to create an experience of some kind, and, learn about what goes into an event, and I'm just making reservations at this point.


Meredith:

So I just had to go back to my marketing roots, and I applied for a job, at an association management company, which I had no idea what that was. I just knew that I worked with a lot of student groups, and they're like associations. So I applied for their marketing position. They saw that I had a meeting internship, and said, "Hey, we have an opening for an assistant meeting manager, what do you think?"


Meredith:

And I said, "Oh, well, I really would like to have a job". So, I went in for the interview, and I had to answer a lot of questions about marketing, because I had so much marketing on my resume, and I said, "It was a great event, marketing". If you have a great experience, and you met other people, aren't you going to talk about that? So that's where my marketing side comes into the play. And nonetheless, I showed them all these floor plans that I designed and how I took over the Campus Center where I set the buffets up, how I got Q102 radio station to come on campus and be part of the entertainment and they were like, "This is great, you're hired". And I've never looked back.


Meredith:

So I've been in meeting planning for over 16 years now, I've always worked with associations and non-profit groups and I love it, I love their mission, I love that I can be a part of their mission, I found myself on medical meetings, the medical side a lot, which is really funny because if you know me, I can't get through any medical show whatsoever. I have so much respect, I could never be a doctor.


Daniel:

You can't even watch the medical shows.


Meredith:

I can't even watch it. And here I am working for transplant groups. And some of those slides are extremely graphic with those, the organs and all that, so-


Daniel:

I can only imagine.


Meredith:

-it was just ... it's really funny that this is who I'm working with. But I get to bring people together. And they're helping each other to save lives. So, I just fell in love with my place in this. And I've learned a lot since then, and I now continue my work in non-profits, where I am now, we have the full spectrum of life sciences. So I've gone from the working with medical, the medical practitioners, to now working with the regulators and the pharmacy companies and the academics, I feel like I've had the full circle now, and it's just wonderful, and I love it. This is who I get to bring together.


Daniel:

So interesting. So I mean, I want to just double stitch on that, because you mentioned it twice. It's clear that a core value for you is bringing people together. You just sort of did it reflexively in college, and now you do it professionally, which is really cool.


Meredith:

I love that. I've always felt that in a situation where there's a lot of people gathering, like in an event, for example, I always felt like I was never in the moment, I was always watching, observing, seeing the interactions that were happening, and I always felt like, "Why am I so weird?" But, in meeting planning, that's my role. There's a place for me, I get to reflect on the environment that these folks are coming to now, and design against it, and for them. And so I get to bring people together and I just love it.


Daniel:

You do this for fun top, do you like, I mean, I don't know if you remember parties, back in the day, and the before times. Did you throw parties? Are you a party thrower?


Meredith:

I do like to host. Yeah. I do like to host, I'm the person in the neighborhood who is inviting everyone over, family dinners, and for the big holidays, we do a big, we did, we used to. We would do a big Rosh Hashanah dinner, and most of my friends don't celebrate Rosh Hashanah, but they all look forward to coming to my house. We would have 20 folks at extended tables. And so yeah, I do, I love bringing people together and celebrating.


Daniel:

What is the most important Rosh Hashanah food in your perspective?


Meredith:

Oh, I might go with the kugel.


Daniel:

If you don't know, I mean, you offer, is this sweet kugel or is this?


Meredith:

Yes. The sweet noodle kugel.


Daniel:

Noodle kugel. You're making me like you're ... like there's memory tears well, they are in my eyes. If you don't like raisins, it's a hard road to hoe, but they kind of just they plump up in the kugel and they're delicious.


Meredith:

Yeah. I love a good... like the sweet cheese, and the raisin kugel with... and it has to be the extra wide noodles, don't tell my mother-in-law, because her version of it, bad. And my mom actually likes apricots in hers.


Daniel:

That's outlandish. Dried apricot?


Meredith:

The dried apricot.


Daniel:

That's a type of Jew I've never met. That's fascinating. This is like where they talk about... and this is a total side bar, not necessarily relevant to what we're talking about. But food is our central to experiences. It's a focal point. We talk about it, we talk while we're doing it, with our mouths open. I love this vision of the conversation around the kugel, and whether it's the right type of kugel too, to convene around.


Meredith:

We can have a kugel debate.


Daniel:

We can. We can have this whole, like I just turned this whole thing into a conversation about Jewish food, but I don't know about that would be really interesting, only a very small section of people. So, one thing that I heard, which I did not know about you is that you had a background in fine arts. And I heard you say something about how events are like marketing, and so this overlapped. But I'm also wondering how you feel like events are like art, what is the art of bringing people together? What is the art of creating a powerful experience?


Meredith:

And there's so many facets to that. I will tell you, I am not one to rinse and repeat for... so when I worked with an association management company, for example, I worked with a variety of different associations at the same time. So they're at an association management company so that they can share stuff. So usually they're very niche groups. They're not stand alones, like DIA where I am now. But even in DIA, we have so many niche portions of our membership, because we're the full spectrum of life scientists, even then when I worked in the specialty meetings for DIA, I was always in tune with the personality of the meeting that I was doing. And I didn't try to the [crosstalk 00:10:20]-


Daniel:

The meeting's personality, the meeting has a personality to you.


Meredith:

Yeah. It does. The people who come to the meeting, right? It's for them. So I want to gear it towards them and not make it just, oh, another meeting. There are some practical things that all meetings are going to have, right? You're going to have a place where you view the presentations, for example, but how you view them, that's where the difference is. And so I would play with things like that. I would play with... when we just talked about food and how important food is, to some groups, it's really a key thing, and for other groups, it's not. So I was always designing in mind of who was coming to these meetings and these experiences, and so, when I worked with the heart failure nurses, I would design all their food and beverage around them. So, they could practice what they preach, so we would have, instead of the traditional coffee cake at coffee time, I would have some crazy flaxseed muffins, happening with recipe cards available, to take back with them.


Daniel:

So it's the little touches that-


Meredith:

It's a little, yeah, it's the little things. I knew they were coffee addicts, which I could totally appreciate. And so, I would have funny [crosstalk 00:11:41]-


Daniel:

That's your breakfast every morning, as we established before we ...


Meredith:

It's my go to breakfast. So I'd have fun signage about coffee, like not before my coffee and caffeine and... that they would appreciate, that made sense to them that made it fun for them to be on site. If I knew there was this meeting was like a reunion to a DIA global annual meeting, it's very much like a reunion. And so we plan different elements so that you can spend time with your colleagues outside of session, in addition to being in session. And I think that's the key differences is, is knowing, you've heard the saying, know your audience.


Meredith:

But if you want to keep people looking forward to your event, before content is even released, you have to be thinking about their experience from the moment they, if you're talking about the physical event, the moment they walk in, and what their journey is going to be. If you're talking in, you really want to go a level up, then you're talking about from the moment they know about your meeting is going to happen, and what that whole cycle looks like leading... now what's the lead up? What's the build up to your event, and they get to the event, they experience the event, and then what happens after the event? Like what's this relationship look like?


Daniel:

Yeah. The whole cycle.


Meredith:

The whole cycle. And that's something I take a lot of joy in stepping back from and looking at, and thinking about what experience do I want these folks to have? Even before, they walk in through my doors.


Daniel:

I feel like this may be the artistry part is, is there's a real balance between all of these elements. If you just focus on the big picture, I feel like you miss the care that goes into crafting these individual moments. But if you just obsess about crafting the individual moments, you can lose the whole work.


Meredith:

Yeah. Sometimes you have to focus on the big rocks before you fill in with all the details, right? I had a mentor tell me that once. One of the things I love though, is when you come on site, you feel like you are in... so if we're talking about the DIA global annual meeting, you feel like you're in DIA. You walk in it-


Daniel:

Maybe we should talk a little bit about that, for people who don't know what DIA is, and what kind of work it does, maybe you can share a little background about that.


Meredith:

Sure. So DIA stands for the Drug Information Association. We are well over 50 years old. And we bring together the full spectrum of the life sciences community. That is everyone who, works in pharmaceuticals, regulatory, the academics and the researchers, the patients, all different aspects of the life scientists community. And we say we're the crossroads of science and passion and when we come together at the global annual meeting, it's just amazing to see folks who touched so many aspects of life sciences working together. So I will see the folks who are in regulatory spending time with the folks who are our statisticians, who are in the research realm or our patients, are visiting the patient track or they're going to the safety and pharmacovigilance track. They're gaining perspective outside of their own interest areas, at this meeting. So it's just-


Daniel:

Now, and can you give people a sense of the size and scope of this annual meeting?


Meredith:

We are about 7000 people, and we are out five days, that's about a five day meeting. If you count the pre meeting, short courses, that happen.


Daniel:

Which we do obviously.


Meredith:

So, there's the pre-day, but we have a big Sunday for us, we do a big opening plenary to kick off the meeting on Monday, and then we run straight through until Thursday afternoon.


Daniel:

When did you realize that that meeting was endangered by the pandemic?


Meredith:

So this meeting means a lot to our society, to the portfolio work. We have meetings that happen year round, our specialty meetings, we also have annual meetings and specialty meetings happening in other countries, we have offices in other countries, but the global annual meeting is the biggest meeting.


Daniel:

It's like the culmination of all the other, all everything sort of comes together.


Meredith:

That's what I say. I call it the culmination of all the work that is being discussed in our specialty, whether you're on this in the States or across the pond, we have had all those conversations are converging at the global annual meeting. So, end of February, going into March, it started to become a concern. Now because we have offices that are in Europe, and are in Asia, and so we're hearing firsthand from folks who are experiencing COVID, before we are. So come March, we were having some pretty major discussions on the impact this could have. And on that time, if you remember, everyone was talking about, "Oh, a 14 day shut down, and then everything's gonna be okay." It's almost laughable now. And so, June, could be a whole different picture, this is the June meeting.


Daniel:

Right. So there was some optimism of like, well, maybe...


Meredith:

Well, exactly. And, going into making decision, also like what's the convention center doing? So, our office that plans the global annual meeting is in the Philadelphia area, Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey, were being quite aggressive with their plans for protecting folks with COVID-19, which I love, you too, right? Because I'm in New Jersey, you're in New York?


Daniel:

Yeah.


Meredith:

So I was happy to see that, but DC, where the meeting is being held, they're a little bit more relaxed and getting there, DC, Maryland, we were watching very closely those states to see when are they going to start shutting down more things? Is this going to affect the convention center? Can we cancel the convention center? These are all conversations that are happening, and, we're trying to literally keep things as is in that moment, because we didn't want folks to get too wrapped up in talking about it.


Meredith:

So, we almost came to a standstill on the planning side, where we slow down the communications with the program committee, and the speakers because we didn't have answers. We were just trying to assess what is actually happening here. How bad is this? I mean, I remember being told don't wear masks, stop buying masks, the meds need it. So, we didn't have a full grasp of how serious this was. And by the top of April, it was okay, we're making the decision to go 100% virtual, which is eight weeks out from the go live date for this meeting. And at that time, we are now, what does that mean to go virtual? Did we even have a solution? You cannot do a 7000 person meeting in Zoom.


Daniel:

No.


Meredith:

I mean, we're talking about, I have over 300 sessions that take place, there's a full exhibit hall, there are networking sessions that are happening, there's all kinds of events and activities associated with this meeting. How do you translate that to a virtual experience now, at the time virtual meetings were webinars. The large streaming-


Daniel:

Which your company did?


Meredith:

We did, yeah. And we did webinars, but, webinar, I would say 200 folks maybe, to attend a webinar. But, how do you recreate what folks know and come to love at DIA in the physical sense to the virtual. We were lucky enough to have an existing vendor, who is our general service contractor, who said, "Hey, we started working on a virtual platform". And what is a virtual platform? So we, start looking at the demo, what this site does, it's basically a website that has the ability to do presentations through sessions, for example, and create session rooms and create virtual exhibit halls and kind of like a virtual concourse.


Meredith:

So we started, moving that way, and I'll never forget April 8th, because that's my email went out to the program committee, that this change is happening. We can no longer hold our meeting. The DC Convention Center became a field hospital. We have to go 100% virtual, don't panic. We are going to get through this. And, soon after that, we realized that we needed to touch base with the speakers and chairs to see can we still participate in all this? What's happening in real life right now, everyone's life's being turned upside down, there was no expectations that everybody would be able to participate, when I say everybody, we're talking upwards, 6 to 700, speakers, chairs, and so we began the process of surveying, who can still participate, from that we started to rebuild the entire program, because not everything could be translated and go to the virtual platform.


Meredith:

My committee did that within a three week time period, and we had about six weeks to build, and then execute this meeting. So there was a lot of learning and doing at the same time, and then my favorite doing then learning at the same time, because this is how I'm imagining this working, and hoping that I am guiding a lot of people in the dark right now. And asking them to trust me that we're going to recreate something in a virtual realm, that's going to be similar to what you know and love about DIA.


Daniel:

It's heavy stuff. I know,-


Meredith:

It is.


Daniel:

-it was a really intense moment.


Meredith:

That's when we met.


Daniel:

That's when we met. I mean, what was that experience like for you? I mean, I feel like the conversations that you and I had with Robin, working through some of these questions of how to design the experience, they were hard questions, there were a lot of unknowns.


Meredith:

Yes, there are lots of unknowns, the uncertainty was palpable. And if you can imagine meeting planners or type A plus personalities. We like to have everything in its place, it's verified, it's nice and ready, there's no question. And now I am adjusting to being okay with the amount of uncertainty that exists and showing my okayness so that I could reassure the folks that were following me, that we were going to be okay. And so when you and I met, I felt it helped center me, because I am flying an airplane in a hurricane that needs to be rebuilt, while in flight. And, when we would meet, you would say, "Okay, put that aside". All the technology and the translating, and you would say, "Let's talk about moments of truth," for example. What makes DIA, DIA? And from there, what can we bring into the virtual meeting? That was one of my favorite conversations, was looking at that arc, and looking at what can I not lose by doing this, and I'm glad we did that because it made the difference in this just being some kind of virtual experience to transporting people to I feel like I'm at DIA.


Meredith:

It was important for me that when you clicked in, I started referring to this at the virtual convention center. And when you logged into my lobby, you felt like you were at DIA, even though you were sitting in your dining room, or your home office, or in the kitchen, that you felt like, "Oh, this is different. I'm not watching a recording of something, I'm actually interacting with people. There's a way to connect with people. I'm still viewing content and speakers from around the world," our philanthropy project, we kept that we tied it into our exhibit hall gamification, and so that was important, because there were so much going on at once. Everything felt like it was on fire or a priority. And so this would be, I think you referred to it as, like a respite, from that.


Daniel:

Yeah. Honestly, I'm really glad I was able to, the time was a bit of a buffer, in the insanity, like you said, to slow down, and to just focus on the experience of the people. I feel like one of the biggest aha is, you kind of tipped to it much, much earlier in our conversation. I remember when we were sketching out the experience arc, and there was this idea of they have arrived and they feel like they're in the right place, this amazing moment of coming in and being like, "I'm here, and I feel like, this is where I want to be." And that's such a huge and important thing, especially with virtual meetings, because there's so many distractions, I remember, what was the thing that you all did with the tell your dog, you're on vacation?


Meredith:

Oh, that genius, that letter came from Kurt who works in our marketing team. And he wrote an open letter to his dog. And when I saw that, I wanted to give a snarky response from my cat. And I just thought it just spoke to acknowledging the world that we're now living in. We're not working at home, we're working with home. And so I loved that acknowledgement of the time that this is happening. And folks, we did accomplish, I mean, folks felt like they arrived. It's like they reached DIA, and they were cheering us on. We knew this hadn't been done like this before. We're very upfront about the newness of it and what we were trying to accomplish, and for the most part, it was achieved. It was just amazing, once we got underway, I was like this is happening. This is really happening, and then, behind the scenes, kind of felt a little normal. I mean, with the exception of the fact that I'm on three different computers and my cell phone, talking with teams, talking with staff who are monitoring sessions.


Meredith:

To me, that was almost like a sense of normalcy, because when we're on site, there's AV issues. We can't find a speaker, it was just doing it in a different way, and it felt like we were sitting in the same room somehow, even though we weren't all different places, all different states. And it was just very surreal. This was all happening, and you could see people interacting with the platform and what you created and finding their way. And for a meeting planner, when you see attendees finding their way, finding their tribes, of people that they connect with, it's like the most amazing moments, it's the super bowl for a meeting planner.


Daniel:

Yeah. Well, I mean, this is going back to the beginning, like the joy of convening, the joy of bringing people together. One of the things that I remember coming out of some of your work, I remember you brought the range of conversational spaces that you were creating this PDF that sort of showed people you brought that to one of the coaching calls, to try and communicate to people that there would be these large experiences and these intimate experiences and I feel like one of the things you did really, really well was to create so many different types of opportunities for people to connect.


Meredith:

That is my favorite infographic. I'm very visual. There's the other art side, no surprise, I like to see things. And so the infographic that we designed, it showcased all 9, 10 different learning formats that we have, but it organized it in a way that was from, we call it passive, so that it was like a large audience. So it's passive/large audience and that's your opening plenary session where you would see a keynote, for example, and you're sitting in the same room as thousands of other people. All the way down the line, to the more interactive sessions that are small, and so that would be like your round table discussions, for example, or viewing a poster presentation. Poster presentations at the very end, because a lot of times, that's a one-on-one connection that's happening. And it just shed all the range in the middle. So if you went to a content hub, it's a 30 minute rapid insight session with 30 to 50 other attendees in a casual environment.


Meredith:

So we highlighted the environment, audience size, the type of learning, whether you're going to be passive in listening or active in you're actually speaking and have a voice in that session. So that folks can mix and match and design, what met their needs. The way I learn is different than how my neighbor learns. And so we want to give you that opportunity to experience learning your way. But also, I have to say that when you have thousands of people in a convention center, it can feel lonely. Sometimes you don't know how to connect with other people or find people who have the same interest as you do. And so I became this campaign for the inroads. How do we protect inroads? How do we help people cut through the thousands of people. And that meant creating activities like the round table discussions or an engagement exchange where no more than 50 people can participate, and you're sitting at a table with nine other colleagues working on a problem together. So that's the fun part. That is, designing all these different ways for folks to engage with one another, and the content and their learning, because our meeting very much is about learning. Yeah. That's what we do.


Daniel:

I want to talk about how all of this translates into this next uncertain world that we're stepping into, the potentially hybrid world. And I feel like there's fewer patterns of what success looks like. I feel personally, when everyone is digital, it puts everyone on the same footing. And we all remember, I remember, trying to run workshops where we're all in person, and there was like one or two people who were like, "Can I call in?" And I'm like, "No, you're going to have a terrible, terrible experience. Unless we dedicate somebody to carrying you around on a laptop, and being your hands and moving the sticky notes around."


Daniel:

And that was a really degraded experience, for those people. The only way they could participate is if they got help to get access. What's so interesting about the all virtual world is that it allows everyone to participate across the world, it allows people to participate if they have mobility issues of any type, it really feels like we've made everything more accessible. And what I noticed in hybrid is that it feels like an accessibility issue. The people who are... if there are fewer people remote, and there's more people in person, the people who are remote, feel excluded, because they can't participate in the same ways. There's an imbalance in the capacity to participate. And I can feel this is, I don't mean to trigger any emotions for you. This is like, what are you thinking is going to help bridge some of these experience gaps?


Meredith:

You are right on. I too turned away folks that wanted to dial in to my workshops, because I knew it just wasn't designed for that and you would not be happy with the experience. So right there with you. And before COVID, really, when you heard things like a hybrid meeting, it meant that there were sessions that were live streamed out to maybe the website of the company or association, and that you could log in and be a part of the virtual audience that's watching a live session happening and groups that did it, well would have that moderator, that would be typing in the chat back to the virtual audience, and during a Q&A would address the speaker and say, "I have a few questions from the virtual audience." And that would be the bridge. And that was like really fancy. That was wow, they're live streaming sessions, which is great, because they get that reach. They brought in another audience that couldn't travel, and that was it.


Daniel:

And the moderator would help bring their voices into the room.


Meredith:

Right. And that was the bridge, and that was hybrid meeting and it was like, okay, they have it or they don't. Well, now-


Daniel:

Because it was sort of a nice to have.


Meredith:

It was nice to have, yeah exactly.


Daniel:

In the old world. Yeah. It was a plus.


Meredith:

It was a plus, and so with COVID-19 happening, meetings and everything just being shut down, it really pushed the agenda of this virtual realm, expanding into meetings, small and large. It was always unknown that, this was a possibility, some folks were actually doing it, limitedly it wasn't the preferred way. And the technology wasn't quite there yet. And so, I like to say, we survived the first wave of virtual meetings, we did a really quick turn, we made it through, now we have a lot of experience to bring in with us into our 2021 planning. And that's right now, we're really designing a meeting that didn't exist before. We can't, I mean, could you do the hybrid as it was? Groups are going to do that. But the way I see it is that the virtual platform still has a place. It still needs to be embraced, and we need to create environments for two audiences, but one experience or two experiences but one meeting.


Meredith:

And so you're going to have, when we're allowed to convene large groups. You're going to have a smaller group in person than you would have had probably a regional audience, it's going to have to be socially distanced for us and our research, we're working heavily with the convention center to figure out how many rooms can I run, how many people can I have on site, and I know I'm going to either offset that with the virtual platform, so that I can A, offer close to the amount of content that I traditionally offer, and B, bring in the audience size that we traditionally have, or maybe more because that reach, like you just mentioned, with the virtual.


Meredith:

So I look at it like this, I have an audience in the physical space, I have an audience in the virtual space, and both audiences need access to each other, and the content that's happening in each place. And for folks, because you can't see me on you're listening to this, I have my hands crossed, because I'm also, I'm so visual, I'm showing my hands are crossed in two different directions.


Daniel:

So you want there to be some, cross pollination between those two audiences?


Meredith:

Yes, 100%, I want this to be, if you are on site, you are still going to have access to the virtual platform, so you can tune in to see what's happening there, what kind of networking is happening there, what sessions are being offered there, potentially watch parties, if I have, speakers that could not be physically in person, it may be the reverse. I may have a gathering of folks in an area tuned into the platform. So the reverse is happening, where the speakers are living in the virtual space, there's a virtual audience that's in the platform with them, but now I have a moderator connecting folks from a physical location and checking in with their iPads and phones, and so it's both ways, it's happening now.


Meredith:

And so those are the kinds of discussions that we're having, because I need folks, I want folks to have access to everything in both places, and to feel that they can tune in to something that's happening live in the convention center, but also tune in to what's happening live on the platform, and also playbacks and different chat room opportunities and different lounge opportunities, also with social distancing, as well, we may have folks that are more comfortable sitting in a lobby or their hotel room tuning into a session if they feel there's too many people. So that's what we're exploring right now, and I'm used-


Daniel:

I'm sorry for interrupting you, because you said, one idea in two different ways. And I just want to clarify, which one do you think it is? Is it two audiences in one experience? Or is it two audiences and two experiences?


Meredith:

So, to me it's two experiences, but one meeting.


Daniel:

That, okay. Thank you. I get it now. Two experiences, but one meeting.


Meredith:

Yeah. So I need to pay homage to what is capable in the virtual platform to make it the best virtual experience for that audience, but also, for the folks that are physically in the building, we need to make their experience, great too, and make adjustments and maybe different offerings to safely convene.


Daniel:

So why bring physical back in? If it adds complexity, why not just double down on virtual and take what you've learned, and make it better? Make it bigger, because I know that the platform originally, limited the number of speakers you could have, there's no reason to have that limitation going forward. You could just make a better virtual meeting.


Meredith:

That's true. And, that's not off the table, because we are investigating all different scenarios right now for 2021. I think it comes down to, there are a couple of considerations that are at play here. One of them is, replicating the hallway track. That experience-


Daniel:

Yeah, we have a lot of conversation about that in our coaching calls...


Meredith:

yes we did! Because that is the most difficult to replicate, that feeling of I just went to a session and leaves a room and I'm going to talk to people. I'm going to see people and I'm going to share my excitement. I'm going to physically convene with someone, meet them, I'm going to go to the exhibit hall and connect with exhibitors and solution providers. Replicating that in the virtual spaces is very challenging. There's also the engagement level. You're not as immersed in what's happening at the meeting, because you didn't actually go somewhere. As much as I want to transport you, you're staring at your screen, you're interacting because your colleagues are all eye on you, your dog or cat has come into the room, a child, so you're more likely to get up, go do something else. And when you're physically in a meeting, that's less likely to happen.


Meredith:

So folks, I think, miss that, they miss taking that time away, from their everyday to day, to be somewhere else to learn, and to reconnect with colleagues. On the exhibitor side, the exhibitor experience has been very challenging. Exhibitors feel, when they are in person, and they're more connected with our audience, and this is in general, because I'm hearing from all different organizations, and what they're experiencing. And so, in general exhibitors, they miss that face to face connection.


Meredith:

They miss being able to showcase their personality, right? And how their booths are built, how they're designed, what attracts people. When they're in the virtual environment, you may have a page listing of all of your exhibitors and you see their logos, but it's not the same. They've now almost been equalized, in a sense. So that's definitely, when we are looking into making this decision, we're talking to all our stakeholders. So we're talking to exhibitors, we're talking to attendees, we're talking to speakers and planning members and leadership, because it's such a big decision, on whether we are able to go, even consider hybrid. And the other part is there's financial implications too.


Meredith:

Many organizations are contracted years out. A meeting our size, is contracted years in advance. And so, there's that as well. I would say at the top of our list is safety though. That will be its priority one, regardless. I do think that if groups aren't able to go hybrid in 2021, you will see that in '22, because I think the virtual component is still going to be with us. I think being with large groups of people it's going to take a while to re-adjust back to that.


Daniel:

It's such an interesting roadmap. One thing we haven't talked about, and we're running short on time is, the planning conversations. Talking to all these stakeholders and facilitating this dialogue, to get to agreement. Who gets to make the ultimate call? With the consideration that you need to have all these stakeholders on board. You're facilitating some pretty big conversations with these people.


Meredith:

We are. We're doing focus groups, we're doing surveys. Ultimately, we are doing, we are on the ground, talking with stakeholders. We are documenting all of their feedback, we're preparing reports, summarizing their feedback, we're doing risk mitigation plans and risk assessments, and all of this is prepared and handed over to leadership where they will continue the conversation with our board of directors, and that's where the decision will be made. I'm privy to the front line and having all these conversations and being able to factor in their thoughts and feelings into my plans.


Meredith:

And right now I'm planning for two scenarios, right now, at the same time with my Planning Committee, I'm very transparent with everything and why we need to plan this way, and, when we're looking at making decisions, and here's what we need to do in the meantime, because our timeline for content is now. This is a big moment. For our program, we are selecting sessions, that will be in the 2021 program. I meet next week with my program committee, that's 60 volunteers, servicing 13 different educational tracks, and we're guiding them into making the best possible decisions for their tracks, we've implemented caps and how many sessions they can have, which is new, but they understand that we need to have some guardrails up so that we can manage more what we have to plan with, so that I can safely do a hybrid meeting, and or go all virtual, and we're trying to plan once and not have to redo the program again. So...


Daniel:

Wow. For other people who are listening to this, any sort of parting thoughts? What haven't we talked about that is important for people to remember if they're thinking about, as I'm sure many people are, this hybrid future, that's coming up, what some sage advice from someone in the trenches, such as yourself?


Meredith:

I would say plan virtual first, even though you are considering a hybrid, you know you can guarantee the platform is going to happen. You can't guarantee that the physical meeting component is going to happen. So the way I look at it is what are my capacity for sessions in the platforms? And how can I organize my tracks, my educational tracks, and I know if it will work in the platform, I can make this work in the physical space, too. I'm actually earmarking what sessions would go to the physical space if we can make that happen, so that I'm not making adjustments to the program itself, but I would plan on what you can count on versus so make sure will work in the virtual world, with the hope that you can put some of this into your physical space and then live stream it back to the platform.


Daniel:

Plan on what you can count on. I love that. And, I'm really leaving with this two experiences, one meeting. I'm sort of what's bubbling in my mind is it sounds like you're talking about Virtual PLUS. Right?


Meredith:

Yeah. Yeah, especially I guess Virtual PLUS, I love that, because, whether you are physically in the building, or virtually attending, there's going to be the plus of connecting with one another, and the activities that are happening in another place, so, I think that adds some excitement, to what we're trying to do.


Daniel:

Meredith, I really, really appreciate you sitting down and talking about your wisdom, your experience and your journey. I'm grateful for the time.


Meredith:

I am too, thank you. Thank you for asking me to share my story and the work that we're doing that the association is doing, and I hope it does help other planners out there in their journeys to figuring out what's next for meetings.


Daniel:

I think it will.


Making Conversation with Fred Dust

Season_Four_Image_stack_FD.jpg

I’m so thrilled to share this conversation with you. Meeting Fred Dust came, as all the best things in life do, through a series of random conversations.

Fred is a former global managing partner at the acclaimed design firm IDEO. He currently consults with the Rockefeller Foundation on the future of global dialogue, and with other foundations, like The Einhorn Family Fund to host constructive dialogue. His work is dedicated to rebuilding human connection in a climate of widespread polarization and cynicism.

I will tread lightly on this introduction. Fred’s book, Making Conversation, is both a straightforward and delightfully lyrical book about how to see conversations as an act of creativity. We are never just participants in a conversation...we’re co-creators. And we can step up and re-design our conversations if we look with new eyes.

I’ll share one surprisingly simple tool from Fred’s book that I’ve started to use in my own coaching work. A director I am working with sketched out a whole script about how they wanted to address some concerns her direct reports had. After reading over the approach, I asked them:

“If you could choose 3 adjectives to describe how you want your reports to feel after this conversation, what would they be?”

They thought for a moment, and provided some words. These adjectives are the goal and the way.

“Looking over this conversation script, do you think you’ll get those three words out of this conversation map?”

On reflection, it was clear that there were some simple changes to make.

Brainstorming adjectives also allowed us to have a deeper conversation about what their goals were - what were they really hoping to get out of the conversation? Searching for those adjectives was clarifying.

This is the power of reflecting on your design principles. It’s easy to get lost in the weeds of an agenda or a meeting...but if you know your design principles, why you’re committing to the conversation and how you want someone to feel after the conversation is over, it can provide powerful clarity when you’re sailing through the fog.

Finding someone else in the world who’s taking a design lens on conversations and communication is so delightful for me. Fred’s work feels like the other side of the coin of my own. Enjoy the conversation and enjoy his book, Making Conversation, which is out now.

You can also find Fred on twitter as @FREDDUST.


Links, Quotes, Notes and Resources

Find Fred on Twitter @FREDDUST

A video trailer for the book

His book on Amazon.

The origins of brainstorming

Min 7

I don't consider myself a facilitator. Certainly, I can facilitate conversations and that's what I like to do and I like doing that, but I really consider myself a designer of conversations. What that means is it allows us to kind of step back and say, “I don't have to be the one, I don't have to be in the conversation. The conversation can be successful.” Often what I'll do is I'll design structures for conversations where somebody else entirely can run them.

Min 8

when you start to think of conversation as an act of creativity or if you don't self-identify as somebody who's creative as an act of making, so just like something that you can make, everybody's a maker of some form or another. It allows you to say, “Wait a second, I don't have to just be a victim to this conversation. I can make the construct of the conversation. I can make the rules.”

Min 11

Dining rooms became vestigial in America... Often dining rooms became offices and other things. Then not only that, gradually we put TVs everywhere and so in a world where the last thing… Not to get too intimate, but how does having a television in your bedroom affect your… If you have with your partner? The last thing or first thing you're seeing is something.

Min 20:

Have as few rules as possible

Right now I would say, what I'm finding is four rules are often even too much because I think I had a limit of four. I would say given our brain's capacity during COVID and during the political strife and just this, the social moment we're in and our fear and anxiety, I'm pretty good with two.

Min 32

Against Active Listening

The point is we've adopted active listening and put it into places it was never really intended to be. It was not meant to be the primary language of human resources, HR. It was not meant to be a boss's way of not listening to the complaints of a person who reports them and that's how we use it now. We use it as a way of signaling a subtle form of agreement but not really.

Min 49

On encouraging the world to start designing conversations...and taking time for self care!

“You can do this. Don't think you can't.” But by the way, if you can't, it's okay to just take a break and go lie down on the floor .

Min 53

On keeping a conversations notebook:

write down the conversations you thought really worked and you start to say, “What worked about those conversations?”... you start to discover in your own world, what those things are (that work)

Min 56

On Commitment:

commit to the conversation and the people in the conversation first, not your values and ideas first

Min 60

Re: Ending Principles:

“Anyone who ends five minutes early, an angel gets their wings.”

More About Fred

Fred works with leaders and change agents to unlock the creative potential of business, government, education, and philanthropic organizations.

Using the methodology in his forthcoming book Making Conversation, Fred works with the Rockefeller Foundation to look at the future of global dialogue, and with The Einhorn Family Fund and other foundations to host constructive dialogue with leaders including David Brooks, Reverend Jenn Bailey, and Vivek Murthy to rebuild human connection in a climate of widespread polarization, cynicism, and disruption.

As a former global managing partner at the acclaimed international design firm IDEO, Fred works with leaders and change agents to unlock the creative potential of business, government, education, and philanthropic organizations including the TODAY show, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Mayo Clinic, Kaiser Permanente, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and the U.S. Social Security Administration. He has collaborated with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Knight Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, and Bloomberg Philanthropies to create new frameworks for engaging with stakeholders to improve the impact and reach of their programs.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

Fred, I want to officially welcome you to the conversation factory. Thank you for making the time for this. I really appreciate it.

Fred Dust:

I'm delighted. You and I have been talking about this for, I don't know what, like a year and a half, two years so-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and thinking about it for a longer. Well, before we get really into it, the first thing I wanted to do is actually, in your book, you talk about keeping a notebook of conversations, tracking examples of conversations that triggered ideal outcomes for us. I wanted to generate some principles for designing this conversation using some inspirations. One of your inspirations is one of my favorite meetings which is the breakfast meeting.

Fred Dust:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Can we talk for a minute about why you like breakfast meetings?

Fred Dust:

Yeah, and I'm trying to think Daniel. I know we met, we've met over tea I think. But usually the way that I, my preferred way to meet and sorry to be, to wax a little nostalgic would be to go to Balthazar. Because Balthazar was sort of the, Balthazar in New York, in SoHo was sort of like the perfectly timed breakfast. I don't know if you used to go there for breakfast at all, but it's a… I'll back up [inaudible 00:01:38]-

Daniel Stillman:

[crosstalk 00:01:39] black nostalgia, go for it.

Fred Dust:

Yeah, of course. Balthazar is amazing. It's like red little booth. It's like if you've been there like a regular as I had for like pretty much 10 years, that meant that you always got the same booth that you wanted.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

I always could face the clock so I could always make sure that we were running on time. There’s a giant clock on [inaudible 00:02:03]. The wait staff there is phenomenal. They were just like there, there was never a moment where they missed a meeting and so you knew your conversation would never go more than an hour. The reason I like it is that the first 15 minutes, breakfast happens typically, people have probably done their first round of emails, haven't gotten to the real hell of their day yet-

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

That will replace like physiologically, it's a great time, our minds are quite active. That place specifically had a very lively atmosphere, but you could still hear people so you, it boosted your energy levels. Then it's like the first 15 minutes is just chit-chat like what you and I had before we got onto this recording and then there's about 30 minutes of like, “Okay, what are we doing? How can we help each other? What's the work?” Then the bill comes and you have a very easy excuse to kind of wrap everything up and you're out. I say that by all conversations, if you're lucky, you're out five minutes before it's supposed to end.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

Breakfast is just like, I think kind of the ideal circumstances. Like we actually had to remove this specific reference to that because breakfast can happen anywhere. It's like it’s-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

It doesn't have to be Balthazar. That it just happens to be the place where I've seen the magic really, really work. Maybe I can stop though. The finding of the conversation notebook is, at first it was like a conversation journal or a conversation diary and I was just like, “Yeah, not so much.” Because it's like some people are journal, there's, some people are not. It's like… I really was like, “What's the most common denominator?” It's like just a good notebook of inspiration is a really good place to start so.

Daniel Stillman:

What I loved about this idea is this idea of generating principles and taking inspiration from multiple places. The other one I think you mentioned was the symposia.

Fred Dust:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Which I really loved when I was a teenager. This is weird and perhaps unnecessary amount of detail, but I actually arranged a series of, we call them conviviums because that was another sort of format of the-

Fred Dust:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

The coming together, the sharing of… The reading of poetry and the deepening of discussions and the job of the person to spread around the wine in an intelligent way. To not over-serve or under-serve people.

Fred Dust:

Yeah. No, it's like… In essence, the book is my conversations notebook, right? Because it's basically all the things that I've drawn inspiration for but yeah. I have the good fortune of being… In fact, I was on the phone with him on Friday and will be on the phone again with him Wednesday. He's helping me with a dialogue typology or conversation typology that I'm building on crisis conflict and bridge building and between communities. But what's interesting is I used to go to his symposia which we’re in Greece and they were typically on an Island.

Fred Dust:

Like last year it was going to be in, on Samos which is a Greek Island and then you could swim across the Turkey and we would host another one in Turkey, the Turkish town there. But I always felt like the formal parts of those, because it was famous economists and politicians and whatever, the formal parts were fine. The informal parts then happened in the evening over wine and relaxing on couches and whatever, those were phenomenal and those are the pieces that he really crafted based on the ancient symposia. I think what he did that was different is he let women in, right? Because-

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Fred Dust:

Ancient symposium, we’re not allowed to have women. They were obviously, they were men of all class, interesting, in the ancient Greek Polis and artists to politicians, to the highly wealthy, and it was just like gender was not allowed. But another thing that George also does is he has children. Children and family are allowed to run around and what that does as you know is having children around does two things, it both boosts the oxytocin levels. If you've got children laughing, you have the love hormone triggered in your brain which is amazing.

Fred Dust:

Which is why children and dogs are great to have, but also he sort of believed that children were a good reminder of our future, right? If we were talking about the future of, in his case, he's a Democrat which in his context is social democracy. It's like very, very, very progressive politics. But having a child in mind as you're thinking about climate change shifts, the way you have the dialogue in [[inaudible 00:06:45] so.

Daniel Stillman:

This is how deep the rabbit hole goes in terms of being intentional about the kind of environment you're creating because of the kind of conversation that you want to have. You kind of paint this tension of many of us are maybe look at conversations as we are participants of them and instead we can be makers of them. Why is it important to you that we all see ourselves as makers or potential makers of our conversational spaces?

Fred Dust:

Yeah. I think it's really interesting and Daniel I think you and I would agree which is that, I know we've had this conversation like I don't consider myself a facilitator. Certainly, I can facilitate conversations and that's what I like to do and I like doing that, but I really consider myself a designer of conversations. What that means is it allows us to kind of step back and say, “I don't have to be the one, I don't have to be in the conversation. The conversation can be successful.” Often what I'll do is I'll design structures for conversations where somebody else entirely can run them. In fact, I've been doing that for the last couple of years by establishing the rule sets so that it actually feels fair and just and safe for everyone.

Fred Dust:

The reason I think that's important is that when you start to think of conversation as an act of creativity or if you don't self-identify as somebody who's creative as an act of making, so just like something that you can make, everybody's a maker of some form or another. It allows you to say, “Wait a second, I don't have to just be a victim to this conversation. I can make the construct of the conversation. I can make the rules.” That's true even in situations where you feel like you can't. Two things, Daniel, one is, as you know from the book, in many cases, the conversation is already scripted, right? Like by the spaces that we have in conversation-

Daniel Stillman:

By the default patterns and rules that we’re working and living with.

Fred Dust:

That's right. If I say board meeting to you, what do you think of?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, exactly. Those terrible long tables with TV at one end and that space says something.

Fred Dust:

Right. Exactly, and so that's not even, I didn't say boardroom, I said board meeting. It's like, so I wasn't asking you to describe the room but that's what you go to. That's the default. If I said AA meeting, you would probably say church basement with-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

you, know, folding chairs. I said because I've done that with audiences of 1000s of people and they were like the invariably, unless they're super, super, super like on it. That they will describe the space, not describe the rules [inaudible 00:09:24]. We often in, we go, we set ourselves into spaces where the script has already been established for the conversation based on [inaudible 00:09:34] space plays out. There’s so much we can do by just shifting a space which is what, that's why you and I talked about breakfast this morning [crosstalk 00:09:44] [inaudible 00:09:45].

Fred Dust:

Breakfast shifts the space and creates a different kind of dynamic and establishes a different agenda. The agenda is different because it's bracketed by certain things. Basically, the fundamental argument is that conversation is the most important human tool that we've had probably for the long, one of the longest. Historically, we've gotten less and less good at it and really we have gotten less good at it. There are plenty of historical examples where we’ve, we were better.

Daniel Stillman:

How do you measure or how do you… What's the yardstick for less good at it in this case?

Fred Dust:

Well, as you know in the book, I basically make an argument that at least in the United States or actually really primarily globally, many cases that's I would say Western, that the addition of television, family construct in the 40s really handed dialogue and conversation over to, from the family to the television. In the early 50s remarkable point of innovation for television, we had the TV tray which gave dinner time to the television. We got the… Within a couple of years of that which basically meant that we could skip, we can skip all the things we didn't care about. We had the introduction of-

Daniel Stillman:

You broke up there for just a second, I think it was, you're talking about the clicker, right? [crosstalk 00:11:15] yeah. The TV also changed, instead of having a conversation in the round, we're having a conversation to a wall. We’re not even looking at each other so we're breaking the circle.

Fred Dust:

Exactly, right. Not only that, it's like so we… It's why I think dining rooms became vestigial in America. It's like no longer like that. Often dining rooms became offices and other things. Then not only that, gradually we put TVs everywhere and so in a world where the last thing… Not to get too intimate, but how does having a television in your bedroom affect your… If you have with your partner? The last thing or first thing you're seeing is something.

Fred Dust:

You really have to think seriously. I get the phone thing and I get… I believe Sherry Turkle . Sherry Turkle's was a mega hero of mine, Reclaiming Conversation is like I read the whole thing, yeah. Read over the New York Times piece but it's like… But that's the end of a cycle that we started, [crosstalk 00:12:21] he was the lead, I would say, 80 years ago. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

No. Also, there's a quote I have in front of me from your book which is that the rules are the software of the conversation that can be written, tried, and rewritten and one of the biggest risks to a creative conversation is treating the rules as fixed as opposed to a set of constraints to be experimented with. I feel like what you're sort of summarizing there is the designer's mindset. That being a maker is I can make it and I can remake it and somebody has already made it, but I can still remake it even though it's already been made for me.

Fred Dust:

That's right. I'll give you an example from my more historical example of me at IDEO. I think that one of the things that was always interesting at IDEO is that first of all, people believe that IDEO had invented the rules of brainstorming. [inaudible 00:13:13] in the 30s or 40s, I can't remember but it's… In fact, the original rules of brainstorming, the non-ideal rules are way more sophisticated than the one that we know now. I don't know, have you read-

Daniel Stillman:

[crosstalk 00:13:29]. Yeah. They're good.

Fred Dust:

They're genius and he's quite specific. He’s like, “By the way…” That was really one set of rules he had. In his original rules of brainstorming, he'll say, he said, “Hey, and by the way, don't critique, don't judge ideas.” But there'll be judging. That's just going to happen later and there'll be different rules for judging-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Which is like a common critique of brainstorming, is like, “You don't come up with ideas that are well founded.” He's like, “Well, no, you critique it.” By the way, I'm going to suggest we both turn off video. I'm getting a couple of laggy moments and so just-

Fred Dust:

[crosstalk 00:14:07]. Okay. Let me do that. I'm also going to close my window.

Daniel Stillman:

Amazing. There you go. That's-

Fred Dust:

Is that better?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, we'll see. Or you can just focus on each other's voices.

Fred Dust:

Yeah. What's weird about this is that we're running my internet off my phone right now so hold on a second.

Daniel Stillman:

It's that's we've all been there. I've had to run entire workshops off of my phone.

Fred Dust:

I know. It's very strange. Okay. Now, it's getting warm in here. Okay. Where were we?

Daniel Stillman:

Well, so I want to ask about rules because you have some rules for rules in your book and I think that it's really great and I think it's worth unpacking the rules for rules. You talk about them being specific, positive, surprising, and brief.

Fred Dust:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Can we just unfold that a little bit because forming them as positive, formulating a rule as positive may be surprising for people which would satisfy the third constraint but-

Fred Dust:

Yeah. It's really funny because… Hold on, I'm actually looking for the part of my other book where that is. But yeah, it's like the… Part of the point of the inspiration for rules came from rule setting that's happening right now across America in, [inaudible 00:15:22] across the world in kindergartens. Unfortunately, I don't have it right in front of the camera, what the name of the processes. But basically, what they try to do is establish one or two rules for grade schools and kindergartens and the children come up with the rules themselves.

Daniel Stillman:

Is this [Dowe 00:15:44]-

Fred Dust:

A great example-

Daniel Stillman:

Is this the Dowe Academy?

Fred Dust:

No, it's not. Here it's called the Responsive Classroom-

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

It's like a thing that's taught and basically what the teachers will work on is how do we make rules for achievement? How do we get something that's going to be our year? It’s going to make us have a better year. Then how is it that it's not negative? An example might be like don't run. It's like so don't know running is like what it's really saying is be safe.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

Be safe is the positive of don't run because… By the way that I think don't run could be, you can have a 1,000 rules that make you feel like them to be safe which could be like, don't run with scissors, it's like don't run with an axe, that whatever.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

[inaudible 00:16:39]. But be safe is the positive way of doing that. I really believe that we need to kind of be really quite clear around that. I think what's interesting about the be specific and I think Charles Osborne with the original brainstorming rules did a really good job. Is that one of the things that I'm sure you see Daniel in your work, and I've certainly seen in my work is when we're following a rule but we don't know why that rules in place. That comes up a lot for instance in brainstorming, right? Someone's basically like, “Be wild, be un-judgemental, whatever.” There's a specific reason why Charles Gibbs for Why That's The Case.

Fred Dust:

He’ll just be like, he's like, “If you constrain yourself, you will get to less than good.” It's for instance, when people talk to me about empathy, I'm like, “Yeah, sorry.” Not so much empathy, let's go for love because I feel when you go for love, you're… Like the less good version of love is empathy. Or love or the less good version of empathy is understanding or the less good version of understanding is being willing to have a conversation.

Fred Dust:

I'm like, “Let's go out there.” But the reason why is because I know that we're going to get not so great even if we go for love. These [inaudible 00:18:00] be surprising. But I don't know Daniel, but from the book you should recognize, I think surprise is like what makes things work. Like I ran a five and a half hour Zoom thing off the back of UN Global Assembly week. It was spectacular and people were riveted for five and a half hours. I will say the reason that worked is because we had suspense. You just never knew what was going to come next.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

Literally, we'd be like, “Okay, we're going to stop now and we're going to put you in democratized bathrooms. Somebody that was like a Nigerian entrepreneur, a prime minister and me and we're like, “Okay, we got five minutes, [inaudible 00:18:44] talk about?” I just think not underestimate the element of surprise both in terms of its memorability which I talk about a lot in the book, which is what makes a story memorable is it’s surprisingness.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

Then brevity is like the opposite of what I've just done which is it's like, “We just don't need a spiel. We need like 45 second clarity on why this rule feels right.” The book has this thing where it's like, I don't know if you noticed that’s where it's like, “Do all this and then or don't-”

Daniel Stillman:

I did notice that.

Fred Dust:

Depending on the context because at the same time if things are going fine, then let's not overthink it. But it's when things are not going well that you have to stop and really rethinking.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like it's worth bringing up, what this is, are tickling in my brain is brain stuff. Because we were talking about the neuroscience aspect of some of these things. When you're talking about brevity and only having four plus or minus one rules that goes to just a fundamental constraint of the conversation which is the human mind and human memory. We can only keep a couple of things on hand at once.

Fred Dust:

I think that's entirely right. I think the notion of pneumonics and by the way that actually ties to things like space, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

One of the reason I talk about, well, the spaces you have is that pneumonic associations happen because of the spaces that we're in or related to the spaces we're in. It's why, if I say, “Where were you at 911, on 911?” You'll be able to tell me because part of your memory making was built on space, the space you're in. Pneumonics are a significant component of this. Right now I would say, what I'm finding is four rules are often even too much because I think I had a limit of four. I would say given our brain's capacity during COVID and during the political strife and just this, the social moment we're in and our fear and anxiety, I'm pretty good with two.

Fred Dust:

It's like [inaudible 00:20:53], if we have two, that then we will pretty much, I know people remember one and that's… The first one is always be brief, which is like try to stay under 45 seconds in to a single idea. I'm like, “If people can get that, then yeah, we're good.” Then we get much beyond that then… Usually, we can, I can get one more beyond that. Then and over time people will start to adopt it but-

Daniel Stillman:

We're getting towards… Sorry. Based on you breathing in slightly, I was wondering if there was something more you wanted to say about that.

Fred Dust:

No. I was just breathing in slightly.

Daniel Stillman:

I made that to mean… Yeah.

Fred Dust:

Which by the way… Yeah. Which is a good thing to do in a conversation so-

Daniel Stillman:

Right. Okay. Well, so there's the… My, and there's so many ways I can go with this because you talked about silence as a peaceful interruption. Often, if you are in a conversation and somebody is not being brief, right? They're being verbose and they're holding the space too much, there are ways to interrupt them. You talk about a couple in the book, sort of with a question, but also building those silences in. I'm wondering like how you use silence as a tool in conversation.

Fred Dust:

Yeah. Well, so just to… I'll give you a little, I'm going to backtrack a little bit and we'll go back to silence and then we’ll… But interestingly, one of the most simple ways to build, that build silence in is using it in the agenda of your meeting. An agenda just so you know, agenda comes from the ancient Latin. Agenda, this is the stuff that was cut from the book. They were like, “No one cared a lot-”

Daniel Stillman:

I care about this stuff. Conversation-

Fred Dust:

[crosstalk 00:22:28]. Yeah, exactly. But so it comes from the ancient Latin, it actually described a mass so that's why masses, not like religious mass, were actually, the original masses were called agendas. That's how they were put together. If you think about a mass or if you think about any religious service, there's purposeful silenced, whether it be prayer or something else, there is purposeful… There's singing which is, which actually triggers certain kinds of neurochemicals that are positive for us. The way a mass is put together is to build the perfect experience that you can and that's true for many, many, many religious services. It's not just Catholicism.

Fred Dust:

What’s interesting about that is that there is a good example where silence, like you might start with silence in a mass and you might have silence midway through and that's prayer, right? The Quaker services start with silence and that silence is maintained all the way through. Silence, psychologically speaking, there's a lot that studied about the kind of creative potential of silence. The psychology of… Like creativity suggests that being silent for anywhere between 45 seconds to a day will allow your mind to trigger unlikely associations, break down the barriers you have around ideas that come up in dialogue.

Fred Dust:

Which is definitely why you, we'll ask people to sleep on something. Is that it’s like often you'll kind of, it'll, they'll be triggered the next day or it's often why your great ideas come to you while you're on a hike. Like I was just down or in the shower. What you can do and we'll talk about interruption in a second, but one of the things that you can do is you can build a moment of silence into a meeting and so we often think the best time to do that is the beginning, but it can be triggered in 45 minutes in.

Fred Dust:

If you know it’s going to, it's an hour meeting and you know the critical decision making has to happen in the last 15 minutes, when might you put in two minutes of silence? Like 44 seconds, 44 minutes in. What I've found is that I do that a lot sometimes the silence is like, “Just write down some things-”

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

But it just really shifts the dynamics. By the way, everything I'm talking about is as applicable in a virtual context as it is in a-

Daniel Stillman:

Tremendously yeah. Absolutely.

Fred Dust:

But one last thing is that, then there's the people who just run on and on. Like me and so-

Daniel Stillman:

Well, this is an interview, is a little different. This not-

Fred Dust:

But I once asked a really skilled interviewer how she stopped somebody from going on and on. She was like, “I've never really learned.” I'm not afraid to interrupt, I do it all the time, so that's one thing but there are a bunch of other ways to do it. Like you can simply ask something like, “What are we talking about here?” Which is like a moment to kind of self and analyze. You can ask the person to be like, “Can you just tell me a version of this story but in 20 seconds?”

Fred Dust:

You can give them some constraints around how to do that. There's a lot of different ways to do it. I think the point there is not to be afraid to do it. We'll talk about this in a moment, but I’ll let you ask more questions but that relates a lot to even recognizing the things that are triggers for you as an individual and that make you furious with people and why silence can help you with that for a moment too so.

Daniel Stillman:

I saw in the book how you talked about building it in the two thirds mark and I think it is such a powerful thing to give people a chance to have a conversation with themselves.

Fred Dust:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

That’s [inaudible 00:26:31].

Daniel Stillman:

To make that room for, “Well, what do I think on this? But heard a lot of stuff, 45 minutes is a lot of time. Now, let me collect myself before we just go headlong in for the last...” It is slowing down the pace of the conversation which you talked about. Like having that variability, having some surprise and this fast paced society slowing down is definitely a surprise.

Fred Dust:

Well, and that's also really interesting. Yes, and it's like I'm a big fan of… What I often say is like… Right now I'm working with an institution and we're dealing with two things which is the financial sustainability of the institution and then the question of diversity inclusion which actually shifts as far as restorative justice in the institution. When I was sort of saying is like we'll have two kinds of conversations and the conversations that are about the sustainability of the institution and how we're going to survive, those are going to be fast and non-inclusive.

Fred Dust:

Sorry, 200 people, you're not going to be able to hear everything that we're doing about that because that's about making sure this institution continues to survive. Everything that's about culture, diversity, inclusion, race, ethnicity, restorative justice, any of those things, those are going to be slow, public and deliberative and that's because we do not want to get those wrong. Really, we have, we vary paces. It's like… But I'm a big fan of slowing down in crisis. I think crisis triggers as you know that the fight or flight syndrome and we don't actually make great decisions in that context. We just run and run. It's funny because it was Halloween recently, I just was watching some horror movies and it's like all people do is run.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Never a good idea, wait and get an axe. That's-

Fred Dust:

Yeah. [inaudible 00:28:25] just drive the car to them over and over again, whatever. It's just like so… Anyway, there's [inaudible 00:28:31] but I do think [inaudible 00:28:33], I cannot tell you if there's one simple tool just to use [inaudible 00:28:38] silence, that's it’s powerful.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I feel like the flip side of this… There was something else that was surprising in your book to me, it was a term I hadn't heard before. I think of, I think about working against that fight or flight response in myself in difficult conversations. Active listening is one of my safety valves. Like I have the active listening script and I activate it and I, it helps me slow down the conversation. But you talked about how… I love that you mentioned Eliza which was like… I'd only read about it. I love the fact that you actually had a conversation such as this with this digital fake therapist who just basically active listens to you but has nothing to say and has no opinion.

Daniel Stillman:

That you contrast active listening with creative listening which is about stepping into people's stories. I'm just wondering if you can just paint a little bit, especially since we're talking about designing our conversations and being a creative maker of them, what does creative listening mean to you? Why is it important do you think for people to be aware of this as a different option?

Fred Dust:

Yeah. It means the world to me. To be honest that the chapter on listening was the first, it was the chapter I wrote to sell the book and to be really honest, everyone was like, “You should just write a book on listening.” I was like, “Yeah. I got more to say.” But it's like… But it isn't in essence one of the most substantive elements of the book. Let me be clear, I'm not against active listening everywhere. I'm against active listening in the workplace. I'm against active listening… Well actually, I might be against it most everywhere.

Daniel Stillman:

Let me rephrase, no active listening.

Fred Dust:

However, I will say the origins of active listening have really, are really smart. Where they were originally intended, they were, they're kind of genius. As you know from the book, Carl Rogers who invented Rogerian Therapy, invented active listening, I would say like in the 40s and 50s, it was one of many of the tools that Rogers used. He was a therapeutical genius. But his premise for it was, in the dominant context where psychology really was either dominated by Freud or Young so it really was psychoanalytic. Carl Rogers didn't believe that a universal theory could solve the secrets of our cognition. He just didn't believe that it had to be Freud or Young.

Fred Dust:

What he did is he basically, he built Rogerian Therapy which is really a form of active listening, which was like you saying something to me. Like, “I'm not feeling good today,” and me saying, “Why are not feeling good?” You saying, “I'm not feeling good because I feel like I'm not achieving my goals.” I'm like, “Well, why aren't you achieving your goals?” I'm never really answering the question. I'm never really responding to you and the reason I'm doing that is I'm trying to unlock you. I'm trying to unlock your ability to understand your solution.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

Because he basically saying like, “I'm not sure I can do it.” By the way, this was not his sole form of therapy. He had other forms of-

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

Of [inaudible 00:31:52]. He didn't believe it… He set and reset the rules based on where a patient was. That’s actually, that we suspect that most modern therapists are like that. They’re kind of like talking through. I think it gets a little bit weirder when you get into the coaching therapist space and then to be [inaudible 00:32:14] honest, I have a therapist that is like, she's Rogerian, but she's also just like, “Yeah, but you got to just call your mom.” [inaudible 00:32:22].

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

It's like… The point is we've adopted active listening and put it into places it was never really intended to be. It was not meant to be the primary language of human resources, HR. It was not meant to be a boss's way of not listening to the complaints of their… Sorry. A person who reports them and that's how we use it now. We use it as a way of like signaling a subtle form of agreement but not really.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

You're like, “Well, this person has been mean to me.” They're like, “Uh-huh”. It's just like, but you're not really listening. That became really problematic for me when my teams had stopped listening and these people were design ethnographers, anthropologists, psychologists and suddenly we'd be in meetings with people that were actually their users and you would hear this. Sorry, you got little bumping, but you could hear the typing, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Yeah.

Fred Dust:

Which was note-taking. By the way, written note taking, phenomenal. It's like…. Or doodling, phenomenal. Great ways to listen. Or knitting, great.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, yeah.

Fred Dust:

But taking notes on a computer is not listening. I made the mistake of being like, “Well, who's a great listener in my life?” I thought of my mother and I was like, “I want you all to listen like my mother.” That didn't really work because not all mothers listen very well. We basically had to build a new psychology in script around why we should think about creative listening. The book however is like a hybrid between that work at IDEO, my own research into Quaker listening, gossip, secret telling, my great-grandmother's ability to tell incredibly short, powerful 20 second stories which I call illuminations and my mother's ability to listen and the fact that my mother had, it was work.

Fred Dust:

My mother was raised in a family home where her uncle was deaf so she basically was raised in silence for most of her life and so she was a phenomenal listener, like really highly in tune. There's really that chapter. When I finished the book, my publisher was like, “It's 200 pages but it's kind of sprawling.” I'm like, “It's kind of this sprawling because it covers everything.” Again, just covers all kinds of things. But that chapter is really a combination of that. The fundamental premise, sorry, is listening should be joyful. Well, while we're listening to somebody, to your point, we should also be listening to ourselves.

Fred Dust:

The Quaker concept is, if God is talking, God has always been talking and it's actually why women were allowed to preach in the 1600s, like the first women because why not? God could be talking through anybody. It's like the visual cues of listening really matter, like really seeing people understanding, it's why I think, “Well, I'm having a great communications with my dog right now. It's like brilliant.” We’ve never had better interstitial communications and it's also why we love listening to gossip or we love a secret. A secret is like a non… It’s like a, it's the [inaudible 00:35:55] version of a tweet. It's like a secret is just like this little 10 word story that's just like no scintillating. It captures our attention.

Daniel Stillman:

What I'm hearing you saying, not to actively listen to you but what I am hearing is the mechanistic approaches to listening of like that listening is taking notes. Whereas what they're really doing is filtering through their own mental model and tagging, right? They're not slowing down and connecting which is a different… I suppose I'm just pretty willing here. It seems like in the same way that we should design our conversations in general, we should be specific about the types of listening that we need to do and maybe it's good to have one researcher who's in the room doing all the tagging.

Fred Dust:

That's totally right and there could be a moment where it's like it's good to have somebody who's just active listening or it could be good to have somebody who's just witnessing. One of the last hardest symposium I was at, I was a witness and it fell apart and then they were like, “Okay, you and Kemal, you guys were the witnesses, tell us what happened.” We had to be like, “You guys are, you need to go drink.” It's just like [inaudible 00:37:10] I think Daniel, the… Well, first of all, let me just stop. How do you feel about what I just told you? Does it make you feel conflicted? Does it feel-

Daniel Stillman:

No. It's actually, what I'm remembering a story.

Fred Dust:

[inaudible 00:37:25] to me.

Daniel Stillman:

As you probably have, you have to teach these principles to people and I remember a facilitator who I worked with who would do three rounds of, you put a group of three together and they would do some empathic interviews with each other. In one of the rounds, he asked, he made it so that people could only ask one question and then listen for the whole rest of the, it was five or 10 minutes and people were flabbergasted. They were just, there's a shock. We talk about surprise in the rules. It's like, “Well, you can only ask one question.” They're like, “Well, how can I possibly get good information about this if I only ask one question.”

Daniel Stillman:

Then the experience of it is, “Wow. I just could just relax.” I knew that I didn't have to formulate my next inquiry. All I could do was sit there and nod and how liberating that can be because you used the word witness and I was like, “Witness. I don't think we think of as a necessary component.” Like, “I'm just going to sit here and I'm just going to absorb everything you're going to have to say I'm, it's my job to uh-huh and to keep pestering you with additional questions.”

Fred Dust:

Yeah, and there's so many unique forms like that. It’s like there's the Quaker Clearance Committee which is one where it's like somebody just talks and really all you're allowed to do is take notes and then ask questions that are clarifying. Then if you're a good note taker, then those notes are a gift to the person who you listened to. As you know in the book, I talk a lot about a surprising question, so a great example that I've used recently is, I just met somebody who was dying of prostate cancer on this Island and he, his last night on the Island or to, last of second night on the Island, second last night and we were having a conversation and he kind of opened up about it.

Fred Dust:

He hadn't really talked to anybody about it. Instead of me talking about like a latte, “How does it feel to be almost dead?” or like, “You must feel terrible,” or, “I'm so sorry.” I basically was like, “Well, what's one funny story you have that you can tell in 30 seconds about what you've experienced as you've been diagnosed with cancer?” Then he loved it and he told a really funny story and it opened it up and it allowed us to have a much more broader conversation. Finally, in the end allowed me to make an introduction for his last night on the Island to a psychoanalyst who has been struggling with cancer for four years whereas he's just been diagnosed and I was like, “Let's go have dinner with her.” We did and that was really amazing so.

Daniel Stillman:

We're getting towards… Is a timeless way of building.

Fred Dust:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to just draw a circle between the way I think about there's this idea of like we are designing conversations, generating principles and then there are these really specific, we could call them designs for conversations, specific patterns that are just can be eliminations to use… Was it your mother or your grandmothers? Your grandmothers-

Fred Dust:

It was my great-grandmother yeah-

Daniel Stillman:

Your great-grandmothers approach. These inversions of common rules that become patterns that we can create living spaces then ask a surprising and positively oriented question.

Fred Dust:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

Right. Building silence. Not surprisingly, you described your book as sprawling. I think it's a delightful romp. There's another way of classifying it, but-

Fred Dust:

[inaudible 00:41:19] adventure.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, exactly. It's like there's the [inaudible 0000:41:23] and there's a whole thing. Anyway, that and I don't suppose many people mention a timeless way of building in their books in general. My editor was like, “Why are you bringing this in towards the end?” I'm like, “Because it's important for people to understand that a pattern language matters.” But I don't have a background in architecture, I have a background in industrial design. I'm hoping maybe you can just talk about why or how your design background comes into the way that you're looking at and thinking about the world-

Fred Dust:

Yeah-

Daniel Stillman:

As designable.

Fred Dust:

[crosstalk 00:42:00]. It's really interesting because as you know like Christopher Alexander's book of pattern language, breaks down, just for those of you who are listeners who might not have read it or heard it or seen it, it's a quite a tome that I often give to people when they first started thinking about design. Because what he does is he looks back at the historical precedent for 1000s of years of history for why things get built in certain ways. It's everything for, what's the role of an Inglenook? Which is like a four person little table by a fireplace that's kind of embedded and why have an Inglenook and then all the way to what's the role of the beer hall to what's the role of a town square?

Fred Dust:

It just kind of gets bigger and bigger and bigger. What's interesting about that is that it both relies on history, but it suggests that there are cultural patterns. I would argue cultural patterns that cut across cultures which by the way matters. The power of sitting in a circle with no table in front of you, on the floor is as powerful in Western culture for different reasons as it is in indigenous Western culture, as it is in African culture, as it is in South American. There’s different reasons why that circle holds power. For us, it might be because we learn that as a child because we, our favorite conversations were in kindergarten cross-legged on the floor with a beloved teacher.

Fred Dust:

For indigenous people, it might be that their most spiritual experiences happen in a circle or it might be that the most political experiences happen sitting in a circle. Really, it varies wildly and yet we can see that the pattern persists and that's a good thing. We need those patterns. It's weird that you said it because I have another notion, I have two other notions for books but one is to basically do a pattern language. Like that's quite literally a more broken down version of this. That's like… Because as you know I really liked my chapter, like my little subsections to be no longer than two to three pages.

Fred Dust:

Often, [inaudible 00:44:15] rules and I'm like, “I don't know why we couldn't break it down to paragraphs, everything from like one-on-one or to you alone or frankly you and your dog.” Because it's like I really do believe in interstitial communications especially with… You alone, you and your dog, you and your friend, partner, person you hate person, person you love whatever, all the way up to countries and the world so I feel like I'd be really interested in doing that. That's one book on my plate and the other is the community kit which is just basically how fast can you jumpstart community? Because I believe you can do in minutes if you need to.

Daniel Stillman:

If you're sourcing timeless waves of building.

Fred Dust:

[crosstalk 00:44:59]. Exactly. It's like… We moved to an Island, this Island two months ago and we had built a community within days of… Like that never happens on this Island. Like it takes years to do that.

Daniel Stillman:

What was your approach? How did you design your-

Fred Dust:

Our approach was very simple. It was like go to the town store, there was only one town store and, but it was owned by an artist because I went to go buy cups and instead I bought a piece of his artwork which was a great compliment to him. He wanted us to meet other people and so it's like literally, he kind of became the host. Then we also, I was like, “We're going to hire a caretaker,” and we were like, “We're going to hire a woman lesbian caretaker,” the first on the Island ever. It turns out everybody was like, “That was the best hire ever.”

Fred Dust:

Like, “She's our most beloved community member.” Like, “We've known her since she was four and watched her struggle through all these things.” It's like… That was me hiring the way I've hired in real life. It's like that's like, I always just focused on like, “Let's get the black gay person.” It's like, “Because we need the different voices.” Ironically, what we did here is no different than what I do when I built my team for making conversation that the business, it's what I did when I used to make teams at IDEO. Is just you just plan it in the same way so.

Daniel Stillman:

Also, Fred, our time for this particular conversation is growing towards the end very rapidly and I want to kind, there's one more sticky note that I have here for my notes. There’s lots more in the book that I didn't take out and put on this piece of paper to be my guide, but there's this quote where you talked about, I want this book to give you the hope I found. I thought that was a really beautiful sentiment. I know that a lot of people look at the current conversation in America and we're recording this on the eve of our election, can you, what is the hope that you found for the future of conversations for us?

Fred Dust:

Well, I'll tell you a little surprising funny story which is that I was, that I had talked about a school for severely addicted children in the opening of the book. Then I was doing an interview, it wasn't really, I didn't need to do it because I was done with the book, but one of young women who went to the school asked if I would interview her so I did. I interviewed her and it was fascinating and so revealing and stuff I would never put in the book because it's just like it was so personal. Yet at the end she was like, “Can I ask you a question” I said, “Yes, of course you may.” I’d interviewed both her and her mother, and she was like, “The question is, are you cured?"

Fred Dust:

I was like, “Well, I wasn't sick.” It's like was my first response and then I was like, “Wait a second. I was absolutely sick.” It's like… Because I was, when I started the research I was like… Originally, the book was to be why we lost conversation in the world and halfway through I'd pivot it to be like, “No, it's about people who actually do have the hardest conversation of their lives and they do make it through using creativity.” I realized that I was cured and so what I thought wasn't going to go in the book that is in fact as you know it's like the final paragraph of the book is that story.

Fred Dust:

But what's interesting is that I did that by being like relentlessly seeking out people who were normal every day, people who somehow had a conversation they never thought they could have and they did it through creativity even if they didn't realize they were being creative. When you spend three years, because that's really what it was doing that, you're like, “We can do this.” I will say to you and your listeners, our job right now in the wake of an election that we don't know what the outcome is but in the wake of a year that we know is going to be continuously to be tumultuous and hard if not worse than that is for us to be unrelentingly good about retelling the stories of when conversations have happened that were good and had good outcomes and where everyday people did it.

Fred Dust:

That's my job. That's my sole purpose right now is like, “You can do this. Don't think you can't.” But by the way, if you can't, it's okay to just take a break and go lie down on the floor like and [inaudible 00:49:49]. But it's like it's our job as humans. It's why we're here, is to discovering the people. Daniel, as you know it's like, I think you can do that with your Trump or Biden voting neighbor. I think you can do that with your… Your job is to do that.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's our human job to do it.

Fred Dust:

It's our human job.

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

There is really nothing more important I believe.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I'm wondering if there's anything left unsaid. Is there anything else that-

Fred Dust:

Yeah, I will say this because depending on when you're going to drop this, people are going to be heading out home to Thanksgiving and whether that's virtual home or not or they're going to be headed home to high holidays and some sort. It doesn't, that doesn't really matter what it's going to be. I would say that my one piece advice to you is if you can't talk, and there are many reasons you can't talk, it could be things we have fraught conversations while we're cooking because of weight issues in my family. Or it could be I have a Trump voting or a Biden voting relative who I know, voted that way.

Fred Dust:

It really can range wildly. If you can't talk, then just do together. Just be together and do something together. I have a young woman who just reached out to me to say that, after hearing me lecture, she went to her father-in-law and she was like, “I don't want to have a conversation and I don't really want to learn how to play golf but why don't you teach me how to play golf?” Their bond has just been profound through that. She was like, “It's been good enough,” and that's all we need right now. I would keep that in mind.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is almost like the equivalent of the person who knitted in their meetings to help them, to help her stay present, just to help her stay connected. It’s-

Fred Dust:

That’s right.

Daniel Stillman:

It's the third object in the conversation.

Fred Dust:

[inaudible 00:51:55]. The whole book is like that, which is like it's like, “Do it or don’t.” It's like force the conversation unless you feel like you can't and then just make together. It's like this is an alternative to if you can have a conversation. It's exactly right. It's just like figure out what's working and then lean into that and then get better and better at figuring out how to make that work more.

Daniel Stillman:

It's such a gentle approach to design, right? It's not didactic, it's not imperialistic, right. It's you're saying like there are some principles but you will find your own principles and practice.

Fred Dust:

That's right. It's also that recognizing that forget the methodology of design and forget the methodology of… This book is anti-methodology. As you know it's like it's why it's like a little hard to pin down because I'm like, “Yes, but not until you say no” But it's just like, “Just make. Just create, make, figure it out, steal from other things you've seen. That's all. Okay.” That's all creativity.

Daniel Stillman:

This is maybe a question for myself is that I feel like the current status of maybe just the world in general is that people do want answers. People call me as I'm sure they call you and they want tips. They want tips and tricks and their tips and tricks are plenty, but this question of experimenting and being present and connecting, there's no formula in that case. I feel like that disappoints people a little bit or that is the formula and that's not enough for them.

Fred Dust:

Yeah. It's like… The book is like jam packed with tips and tricks. It's like, “Borrow what you can borrow and then, but if it doesn't work, steal from something else.” It's why I love [inaudible 00:53:43] started with a conversation notebook because what happens when you start to kind of write down the conversations you thought really worked and you start to say, “What worked about those conversations?” Is you start to discover in your own world, what those things are. It's like and then… I will just go really quickly to this, a black woman finance person in HR in a really big… She asked me, she called me up.

Fred Dust:

I know she was in a lecture and she asked me the question which is like, “I find myself getting triggered. What do I do?” I was like, “Just pause.” Because it's like because I was thinking about all the moments where I get triggered and I had a very specific story about being triggered. I remember being triggered and having a situation where I was like, “Wait a second. I can jump down this person's throat and just tear them a new one or I can pause.” I paused and then I just stopped and I was like, “Is this the conversation you want to be having in that person?”

Fred Dust:

That person was like, “No, it's not. I was like, “Okay.” Then we became like, it was great after that. There’s all kinds of places where, just be quiet for a moment, works in a triggering moment. You can basically say, “Wait, how do I do that? Is this the right way to approach this or do I need a moment?” That they apply everywhere but you have to kind of find the ones that work for you in the right situations.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Asking the question, is this the conversation you want to be having? Then if they say no, being able to walk away takes a tremendous amount of personal self-control, like to be able to walk away from that intense moment. It’s non-trivial.

Fred Dust:

It's not trivial and yet it's like… But I think that's great because as you know the opening chapter of the book commit and basically like commit to the conversation, but that means commit to the conversation and the people in the conversation first, not your values and ideas first so that's counter for many people. What I say is like, “If you can't commit, then don't and the conversation will be better for not having you in it.” But if it's like, “Let’s get… Like a work context and then boss we can stop whenever.”

Fred Dust:

But there's like a, in a board meeting, when you're… I'm on a lot of boards and there's always somebody who's always the naysayer and is always like, “Well, I don't really believe in the organization, but it's important that I'm there because I'm like the one who's keeping the truth on.” You're like, “Yeah, no, not really.” If you're not committed to this organization, then just get off the board. It's just like, “We don't need you. We're fine.” I guess I would just say like there's a lot of ways we can kick this stuff around.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, have you had that conversation with that person to ask them to make their choice? Like, “Do you want to be here?”

Fred Dust:

Invariably. What's weird is like, I had this recently with a friend of mine. This is a very specific kind of solution but I mean all the time. First of all, with all my teams, I've been like, “You guys don't want to show up, no problem. Or you want to show up and just cry in the corner, no problem.” That's actually fine. During this moment, I'm like, “You have a red flag day, don't even worry about it. Don't show up.” But in more serious circumstances, yes. It's like the person who told me that, about the board that she was on, but I was sitting with my friend and I, and we were both immediately… My friend is like the opposite of me.

Fred Dust:

She's like very wealthy 65 year old woman, very wise in the way of dialogue and conversations and we're both like, “Yeah, you should just get off that board.” She was like, “But I love that board and I gave all my money to it because I like…” Whatever, and we're like, “Yeah, but you should still probably get off that board.” What she did is she didn't get off the board, but she actually recommitted. She was like, “Okay, well, in my role as such and such, I can finally, I could, I can fire the CEO because I can get the board to get behind me on that.”

Fred Dust:

She did that, got a new CEO, built a new strategy with [inaudible 00:57:57] new CEO built strategy and suddenly was an organization that she believed in, but she had committed. She had committed by getting rid of the thing that was the biggest obstacle to her commitment. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

It's just interesting that accepting that you can leave can make commitment easier.

Fred Dust:

Right. Isn't that fascinating?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Fred Dust:

It's like just knowing that she wasn't showing up well because of her lack of commitment and then realizing that commitment looked like something different, had this huge impact on her ability to think about the way she was going to be instrumental to the organization.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. We have choice. I think often we think we don't have a choice, which goes back to where we started here which is we can design the kind of conversation we want to have if only by leaving.

Fred Dust:

No, exactly. That's it's like for instance I had somebody hunting on my property the other day and I went down and his truck was covered with Trump stickers so I was kind of nervous about it. But I was like, “If I can tell a prime minister that they can either get on a call or not…” It's like… Or I mean literally, I had to be like, “Yeah, you're going to get on Zoom.” “Then I shouldn't be afraid to go and talk to my hunter who's a Trump voter [inaudible 00:59:14],” and we had a great conversation. I had a great conversation with him and his son.

Fred Dust:

It's like, and I was like, “You can keep hunting until six, but you just have to like in the future let us know if you're on the property so that we know, ” and he was super polite about it and we had a really lovely conversation. Then I know his name and now he knows my name. I just thought that was a little bit about like, “Yeah, why not?” Again, granted, I'm in a place where hunting, no one's got AK47s when they're hunting-

Daniel Stillman:

Right.

Fred Dust:

It’s like they’re hunting with rifles or bows. I might feel a little different if I were in a place where we're AK47s were the common way to hunt.

Daniel Stillman:

I just presume you went down and said you started with hi, not what the hell are you doing here?

Fred Dust:

I said, “Hi,” and “What's your name?” Like, “My name is Fred. I own the property and just wanted to talk to you because…” I said hi to his son and I was just like, “You can see, I've got like four adolescents just running around. These kind of four dirty kids. I'm not just like please watch them,” and he was like, “We're really good and we've hunted this property for decades.” I'm like, “I totally trust you.” Then we just kind of chatted. By the way, I have no construct of how he really will vote. I don't really care, but at the same time it's like, there's no, just because he's got Trump stickers doesn't mean that that's where he's voting but I, it doesn't matter anyway.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, so I feel like we've highlighted good ways to connect as humans during a conversation. We're just talking about how to connect as humans is a great way of starting a conversation. Since we're here at the end, what's the best way to end this conversation in the most human way possible? What are some ending principles?

Fred Dust:

Yeah. My ending principles are-

Daniel Stillman:

Because there's nobody to give us a check Fred.

Fred Dust:

Yeah. I know. My ending principles are kind of awesome. They're there which is like, “Just stop,” which is [inaudible 01:01:17]. Basically, I also have like it's like anyone who ends like two minutes early which I think we didn't do it, but that's fine because we knew it would kind of happen, is like a genius. Anyone who ends five minutes early, like an angel gets their wings. But I would just say for you and I, we can just sort of say, you know the conversation is not over and you know what? You and I have been in some form of spiritual conversation in some way or another all through so this will continue even if we're not talking so.

Daniel Stillman:

I really appreciate you saying that. It is such an important idea that we are talking about because as you say, conversation is so precious and so human and to do it on purpose as opposed to by accident is a gift and so I'm really grateful for the work that you're doing Fred,

Fred Dust:

Likewise, your work and thank you so much for… Thanks, by the way for reading the book, that's kind of you.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, thanks for writing it. I appreciate it and I like… We can talk about what that, the pattern language of conversations Bible should look like. I think that's amazing.

Fred Dust:

Yeah, and I need your book actually. I'm going to send you my address if I haven't already-

Daniel Stillman:

Well, Fred, thank you for your time. We'll call scene.

Fred Dust:

Scene.

Facilitating Breakthrough with Adam Kahane

Adam Kahane Cover.jpeg

Today I talk with Adam Kahane, a Director at Reos Partners. Reos is an international social enterprise that helps people move forward together on their most important and intractable issues. Adam has over 30 years of experience facilitating breakthroughs at the highest levels in government and society. His own breakthrough facilitation moment came with an invitation to host the Mont Fleur Scenario Planning Exercises he facilitated in 1990s South Africa at the dawn of that country’s transition towards democracy and the twilight of apartheid. 

He’s gone on to facilitate conversations about ending civil wars, transforming the food system, and pretty much everything else in between.

He’s also amazingly open and honest about his growth and transformation as a facilitator, and his own failings along the way. It’s encouraging to hear him talk about feeling a little like a cobbler without shoes. Shouldn’t a breakthrough facilitator be able to facilitate the conflicts in their own lives with the same ease? It turns out, it’s not that simple.

Adam is also honest and open about how he looks back at his past books and sees them as not just incomplete, but sometimes dangerously incomplete. So, read Power and Love, Collaborating with the Enemy,Transformative Scenario Planning and Solving Tough problems (all amazing books) with a grain of salt while you wait for Adam’s 2021 book, Facilitating Breakthrough, to come out. It’s all about 5 key pairs of polarities in transformational, collaborative work and it’s an eye-opener.

I’ve had the opportunity to read a draft copy of the book and I’m really excited for you all to read it and learn about how to, as Adam says, “Fluidly” navigate these polarities in your own transformational work.

Just a side note: The opening quote for this episode is actually two quotes that I’m juxtaposing. I loved this simple summary of the book as a fluid navigation of polarities alongside the sentiment that the only action you can take is your next one. You make a choice, and see what happens. Designing conversations can become as static and dangerously waterfall as any old-school product design team’s backlog. Being agile and responsive in the moment requires clarity on your core values and principles...and Adam’s book and ideas can help us develop our own core north stars as we navigate complex and collaborative change.

Learn more about Adam’s work at www.reospartners.com , www.reospartners.com/adamkahane and find him on twitter at @adamkahane.

Links, Quotes, Notes and Resources

Learn more about Adam’s work at www.reospartners.com  and www.reospartners.com/adamkahane 

Find him on twitter at @adamkahane.

Talks by Adam: 

Adam Kahane at Ci2012 - "Transformative Scenario Planning"

Power and Love: Adam Kahane at TEDxNavigli

How To Change the Future - Adam Kahane

Polarity Management by Barry Johnson

Adam’s Father’s Favorite Book: Science and Sanity

Barry Johnson’s work, which provided a foundation form Adam’s new book: Polarity Management


+Adam’s Gifts as a facilitator: Listening, Articulation and Calmness and the origin stories of them.

+The four types of speaking and listening and how to transition between them. Suspension is a key shift to enable debate, and redirection allows for dialoging. Below is my sticky note from the interview...

1.jpg

And here, another diagram for this model

2.png


Diagram from Adam’s article in System’s Thinker.

The Math of Collaboration: What options are there?

3.jpg

From Power and Love: The Generative and Degenerative (Shadows) aspects of each.

4.jpg

A preview of Facilitating Breakthrough: A summary of the five key questions and the 5 key inner gestures

5.jpg
6.jpg

Key Quotes

Min 2: On his formative experience facilitating the Mont Fleur Scenario Exercises in South Africa in 1991

I experienced, like a thunderbolt, this possibility that people who look at things very differently and have been pretty well at war for a long time could talk to each other and be creative and figure stuff out and change the world as a result of that

Min 15: On learning from mistakes and through reflection via writing

Most of the important things I've learned, I've learned from making mistakes or at least those are the ones that stick with me. It's always the same sort of thing. It's that I think I know what's happening and I act on what I think. I bash my head into a brick wall and I fall down. Then whether it's a few minutes or a few months or a few years later, I pick myself up and I go, "What happened there? What was I not seeing that was there?" That's my thought process....Part of what I'm trying to do in my writing, it's not very complicated but I think it's important, is to show that process of learning by failing. I mean, there may be other ways to learn, but it's been a big thing for me. I want to demonstrate that it works and that you can survive and that you can learn...So, I've just had a disaster. Let me at least try to get a book out of it or if not that a book chapter.

Min 17: On being in the present (ie, your next step is the most important)

as a facilitator and everybody else, we really can't do much more than the next step. I think you talked about design in conversations. I like making process plans for the next three years or the next three months or the next three days, and that's fine and it's useful. I think it was Eisenhower who said plans are useless but planning is essential.

I think the real skill in facilitating and in writing and in living is that you do something and you see what happens. Then you decide what you're going to do next. It doesn't really matter what you're going to do after that. You'll see when you get there.

Min 19: On understanding the choice in Collaboration:

a crucial thing to understand about collaboration is it's not the only option. If I said in the following way, it's not possible to collaborate with everybody on everything. So, I think that's pretty obvious. So, the question is, on what do you need to collaborate with other people and with whom and for how long? For me, it's no use getting into how to collaborate, which is the basic subject of all of my work and all of my writing, how to collaborate, until you understand that collaborating is just one of the options.

More About Adam

Adam organizes, designs, and facilitates processes that help move people forward together on their most important and intractable issues.

Adam Kahane is a Director of Reos Partners, an international social enterprise that helps people move forward together on their most important and intractable issues.

Adam is a leading organizer, designer, and facilitator of processes through which business, government, and civil society leaders can work together to address challenges. He has worked in more than fifty countries and in every part of the world, with executives, politicians, generals, guerrillas, civil servants, trade unionists, community activists, United Nations officials, clergy and artists.

Adam is the author of Solving Tough Problems: An Open Way of Talking, Listening, and Creating New Realities, about which Nelson Mandela said, “This breakthrough book addresses the central challenge of our time: finding a way to work together to solve the problems we have created.” He is also the author of Power and Love: A Theory and Practice of Social Change, Transformative Scenario Planning: Working Together to Change the Future, and Collaborating with the Enemy: How to Work with People You Don’t Agree with or Like or Trust.

During the early 1990s, Adam was the head of Social, Political, Economic, and Technological Scenarios for Royal Dutch Shell in London. He has held strategy and research positions with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (San Francisco), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (Paris), the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (Vienna), the Institute for Energy Economics (Tokyo), and the Universities of Oxford, Toronto, British Columbia, California, and the Western Cape.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

All right. Well, so welcome to the Conversation Factory, Adam Kahane. I really appreciate you making the time to unpack some important topics about changing systems and leading conversations with me.

Adam Kahane:

My pleasure.

Daniel Stillman:

So, you've had a really unique path. I mean, I suppose everyone has a unique path, but coming from science and living in this world of the expert to coming into the world of the facilitator and valuing collaboration more. I was looking at the litany of blockbuster books you've written from Solving Tough Problems to Transformative Scenario Planning to Power and Love to Collaborating with the Enemy and now your upcoming book. What's the through line, what's the story that you connect your evolution through these books?

Adam Kahane:

Well, for me, I guess I don't know if that's the right term, but the origin history or the hinge story was my experience when I went to South Africa in 1991. It's the hinge because all of my academic and professional training up to then had been to be an expert. To be somebody who figures out the answer quickly and argues for it vociferously. I had a role like that at Shell in London in a scenario group and was starting to facilitate, but facilitate within that very, I guess I'd say, intellectual corporate culture. At least that part of the corporation. I was invited to go to South Africa to facilitate a scenario process where the participants were not Shell people, but were people from across the society and political spectrum, black and white opposition and establishment left and right, just in the middle of the transition away from apartheid.

Adam Kahane:

That's when I experienced, like a thunderbolt, this possibility that people who look at things very differently and have been pretty well at war for a long time could talk to each other and be creative and figure stuff out and change the world as a result of that. Yeah. I was pretty young then, 30 years old and everything changed. I've spent the last 30 years almost to the day actually, no 29 years to the day, thinking about what does that mean and what's the significance beyond South Africa and beyond scenarios. So, the through line is, how is it possible for people who need to work together but think they can't to do so and to make a difference?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. It's interesting you used the term origin story because I wanted to go a step further back because you've talked before about your gifts as a facilitator. What you bring into the room of listening, articulation and calmness. I'm wondering where do you feel like you learned those skills? And for those of us who want to bring more of those approaches into our work, how do we embody those gifts?

Adam Kahane:

Well, for me the big aha was this idea of gifts. I worked in the late '90s in Guatemala and one of my friends or one of the members of the team who became my friend went to work at the Jesuit university. I don't think he had a Jesuit education, but he went to work as a dean or something at the Jesuit university. So, he got a crash course in Jesuit philosophy, which is pretty rich. One of the things they told him, which he told me, is the whole thing about a gift is that it was given to you. So, it's not something you should be proud of or conceded about. On the contrary, the thing about a gift is that you're lucky to have gotten it or you're blessed to have gotten it or whatever and the mistake is not to use it.

Adam Kahane:

I found this a very liberating notion, not that I'm especially modest person but I think I had this idea that I mustn't show off too much because it could be boastful. This was the opposite idea, which he said if you have gifts, you really have an obligation to use them. In that respect, I mean I guess everybody has different gifts, but I know what mine are and liberated from the need to conceal them, I can use them. For example, well you might agree or disagree, but I've been told that I speak very clearly. To me, I know where I got that. It's imitating my father. I speak like my father. Anybody who met my father would recognize the resemblance. That's an example. It's very useful in facilitating to be, it's not the only possible gift, but it's a useful gift to be able to articulate, to be able to understand, to be able to put things together. These are all gifts. They're not things I developed or created.

Adam Kahane:

Similarly, sometimes a wound can be a gift. For example, I think I'm, in some ways or in some circumstances, maybe rational or over-rational. But in South Africa, coming in the midst of the turmoil to be able to say, I mean I didn't say exactly these words, but to be able to say to people, "Thank you very much for sharing the story of your incarceration and torture. Who would like to speak next?" I mean, I didn't exact say those words, but I thought the fact that I was so dispassionate, which in some circumstances could be a real limitation, in that context was a gift. That I could be calm and reason and not anxious amidst anxious and worried and agitated others. So, it's not that my gifts are the key ones. For me, the crucial I guess we've all got gifts and we better use them because this is difficult work to do. We need whatever we got.

Daniel Stillman:

Have you ever been in a situation where you feel like you've needed to grow, not from your gifts, but maybe in terms of transforming that wound or expanding your capability and your potential as a facilitator, as a designer of holder of space of conversations? In what ways have you tried to grow and sort of buy yourself some new gifts?

Adam Kahane:

So, it's a good question. Some of the things that come to mind is I think I have managed to grow my capacity for empathy and intuition. Or I guess now that I say that, I think I do have a gift for empathy and intuition, but I didn't know I had it and I didn't think it was very important. So, it's more about uncovering something. I think well like many people, but there's lots of circumstances when I get reactive, certain kind of person who always sets me off or a certain context. Often a competition with a man my age, for example and to recognize, "Oh, here I go again. This really is not useful. Why don't you tone that down?" Saying that to myself. So yeah, and also how to work with people who have complementary gifts. So, I have colleagues who are more friendly particularly or more creative or more outgoing or whatever and how can we, as a team, have the range of capacity that's required.

Daniel Stillman:

You're highlighting something that's so powerful, which is one, the role of self talk and growth. And another which is just knowing yourself and maybe knowing your limits and spotting some of your blind spots. None of these things are trivial by the instruction and imagination.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. Blind spots, yeah absolutely.

Daniel Stillman:

One of the things, and this conversation can fold over itself in so many ways, but I have two sticky notes here. One is about shadow. So, there's two quotes I want to read you. They're yours. I kind of want to hold them in maybe paradox. I'm not sure. Both are places where you were sort of openly admitting your limitations, which I really appreciated. It was very humanizing to me looking at you and your body of work. In Power and Love, you talk about your pieces in Solving Tough Problems being the key to creating new social realities is to open ourselves up to our current context and what it demands of us. I was like yeah, that's totally yeah. That's a thing that we have to get people to do, and you describe it as half right and dangerous so. I was like, wow, that's an amazing place to start with your new book which is in a way just looking at some of your previous work as dangerously half right which was an amazing concept.

Daniel Stillman:

There was another quote where you were talking in Collaborating with the Enemy about your own concern about your ability to deal with ordinary conflicts in the way that you deal with extraordinary conflicts as a close-in participant in these conversations in your own life. As opposed to a convener and the holder of those spaces. I don't even know what the question is here. I looked at those two quotes and I said, "Here's somebody who is looking at themselves very strongly." That just seems to be a part of your process.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. It is, and I'm writing a new book called Facilitating Breakthrough. It's going to do the same again of saying Power and Love is good but it's not the whole story and dangerously so. I think I'm trying to do two... There's two things going on. Partly, I love writing as the chance to reflect and to derive theory from practice. I like that as a creative act and as an intellectual act of trying to... In particular, the thing I love is what's the simplest way of explaining something that I think is important? That's part of what's going on.

Adam Kahane:

The other thing that's going on is, I don't know if other people are like this, but most of the important things I've learned, I've learned from making mistakes or at least those are the ones that stick with me. It's always the same sort of thing. It's that I think I know what's happening and I act on what I think. I bash my head into a brick wall and I fall down. Then whether it's a few minutes or a few months or a few years later, I pick myself up and I go, "What happened there? What was I not seeing that was there?" That's my thought process.

Adam Kahane:

Part of what I'm trying to do in my writing, it's not very complicated but I think it's important, is to show that process of learning by failing. I mean, there may be other ways to learn, but it's been a big thing for me. I want to demonstrate that it works and that you can survive and that you can learn. Yeah. That's at least one dimension of growing.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel like it may come from... My first degree is in physics as well and I think there's this mindset of well let's experiment. We learn through trial. But when I was a younger man, I think I had the idea of well we only learn what doesn't work through failure. We only learn what works through the magic of success, but I don't know if that's necessary... I don't know if I believe that anymore because life is a series of experiments. I think in another interview you said that the only move that matters is your next one. We're constantly failing or moving forward through life as a world. That's not a question. That's a statement. You can respond as we go to that.

Adam Kahane:

I think I hadn't thought of this, but I was brought up... my father was an engineer and was very interested in science and Korzybski's book Science and Sanity was his favorite book. So, I think I brought up with this idea of being scientific, but it's more at least the way I experience it is that's just what's happening. That I'm failing all the time and for me, I'm trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. So, I've just had a disaster. Let me at least try to get a book out of it or if not that a book chapter. So, I feel better. Yes, yes, I did mess up there and that didn't work, but it really helped me figure out another part of this puzzle. It's a pretty big puzzle, so you can go on finding additional pieces for a long time.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. I feel like... Oh sorry, go ahead.

Adam Kahane:

Sorry. But the other part of that is I do think, both as a facilitator and everybody else, we really can't do much more than the next step. I think you talked about design in conversations. I like making process plans for the next three years or the next three months or the next three days, and that's fine and it's useful. I think it was Eisenhower who said plans are useless but planning is essential.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Adam Kahane:

So, that's fine, but I think the real skill in facilitating and in writing and in living is that you do something and you see what happens. Then you decide what you're going to do next. It doesn't really matter what you're going to do after that. You'll see when you get there.

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting because I feel like you've broken, maybe it's the physicist in you breaking things down into very clear narratives if you will. I have a drawing of your decision tree and what I would call the math of collaboration. You talk about the math in Power and Love in another talk. We were like okay, well can you change it on your own? Yes, no. Can you live with things the way you are? Yes, no. It's like a very straightforward logical approach to what are your choices and can you live with your choices which is a very irrational approach to the question of will I collaborate or will I not collaborate.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. Well, partly what I was trying to say in that part of that book, which is Collaborating with the Enemy, is I wanted to... For me, a crucial thing to understand about collaboration is it's not the only option. If I said in the following way, it's not possible to collaborate with everybody on everything. So, I think that's pretty obvious. So, the question is, on what do you need to collaborate with other people and with whom and for how long? For me, it's no use getting into how to collaborate, which is the basic subject of all of my work and all of my writing, how to collaborate, until you understand that collaborating is just one of the options.

Adam Kahane:

That was the purpose of that decision tree. I don't really use it to figure out what to do except maybe intuitively, but I wanted to make that point particularly both for people who think that collaboration is the only way, which to me is a nonsensical statement. Or on the other hand for people who think it's very fuzzy and doesn't make any sense. I'm trying to show no, it makes sense logically, but in a very particular set of circumstances. I argue that that set of circumstances is becoming more and more common but most of the time we do other things. We do things on our own or with our friends and colleagues, not with strangers and opponents.

Daniel Stillman:

Right, but if we want and I presume that if we want true breakthroughs in really complex systems as you say, that option of not collaborating becomes less available to us.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. Well probably but I'm not trying to argue that the only way to do it is the way I do it. I'm practicing and writing about a particular approach, but I'm not saying you can never do things unilaterally or by force or by getting your coalition to make it the way you want it to be. Or that it's never sensible to just adapt to things as they are. Like probably 90% of the day, we adapt to things as they are. You can't do anything about it. Sometimes the third option is sometimes you just have to exit. You can't make it the way you want it to be. You can't live with it as it is, so you leave. You quit your job or you emigrate or you get a divorce or whatever. Check out in some way. I don't really care whether the number of circumstances you need to collaborate on is 1% or 10% or 50%. I'm just arguing it's more than zero and if you want to collaborate, here are some principles and here is what doesn't work in collaboration.

Daniel Stillman:

When I look at those four options or the fifth if you bring in stretch collaboration to conventional collaboration, you point out really aptly that in our daily lives, we're constantly presented with these options. I think we take certain options by habit. It's sort of baked into our operating system. Some people will just say their best alternative to negotiate agreement, they just think I'm just going to exit. I'm never going to "collaborate with the enemy", of which there are some people who will always want to go and force their way. I think this is maybe where we can talk a little bit about the paradoxes and the dilemmas of transformative collaboration because I think Power and Love is one of these polarities that you've explored and there are several others that you're exploring in this new book. It's really interesting to look at these inner tensions that we as facilitators and collaborators need to contend with to create real change.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

That was less of a question because I'm looking at... I don't know to what sort of depth you want to talk about what's in the new book because I'm looking at this chart of these inner moves and outer gestures and these sort of poles of vertical and horizontal tensions. I guess that you would say that each of us is contending with in how we approach these complex situations. For me, it was really interesting to look at you lay it out there so cleanly and plainly that these are the choices.

Adam Kahane:

Well, thank you. I mean, I'm happy to talk about it. That's work in process, so it's already changed since the version you saw-

Daniel Stillman:

Oh wow.

Adam Kahane:

... and what it was last Friday. It's changed a little bit, but yes, I am. That chart is the summary of the new book. So yes, I am trying to make a general theory of facilitation and I'm arguing that there's five polarities that facilitators have to deal with over and over and over throughout any process, whether it's a day or a week or a decade. Where I've gotten to is that the crucial thing is they're not choices, they're polarities.

Adam Kahane:

Here I'm building on the lifetime of great work by Barry Johnson who has written several books on polarities and has a way of thinking about them that really works for me. His main point is that oftentimes people think they have a choice between two things but that's a misunderstanding. The simplest analogy is that that would be like saying you have a choice between breathing in and breathing out. So you have to do both and you have to do them cyclically or alternately. So, I'm positing in this new book that facilitation involves working with five polarities. Let me see if I can remember my own five polarities, but anyway, you can read them off the chart.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, I can.

Adam Kahane:

You have it in front of me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, yeah. Telling and asking, concluding and advancing, mapping and discovering, directing and accompanying, man I can't pronounce that word today. I'm going to skip it. Being apart and being a part.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. So yes. I'm arguing that underneath the technique, underneath the agenda design is working with these five polarities and each of them are not choices. We need to do both of them. I'm suggesting that if you can do both of them, if you can do these five pairs of things fluidly when they're required, then that's the gist of facilitating breakthrough. So, now I've saved you having to wait until August 2021 and spending 18.95. That's the summary.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I don't know. I think the denouement is still very lively. I've been contending with this, and as I said reading the advanced book it's overwhelming because there's a lot in there but also the comments were pretty intense. This process of working out loud, I'm curious just as a writer, how you're finding this process of sending out this Google Document and having some people pour over it. I went through my own experience with it. It's fascinating. What's it like for you watching people sort of walk through this nascent work of yours?

Adam Kahane:

I think it's just great. I have no hesitation about it at all. For me, it's the same thing about experimenting. If there's a problem with the book or if there's a flaw or if there's something unclear or if there's something that doesn't make sense, I'd really much prefer to know it before it's published. To me it's that straightforward.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Adam Kahane:

So the fact that several hundred people are willing to read it and give me their comments, I think it's very generous on their part. I really appreciate it. So yeah. I guess it's a little bit embarrassing when I realize this thing I thought was right is not right. But as I say, I'd much prefer to find it out now than when the book is in print. You can't do much about it then. So, it's a great experience for me. What I find interesting, it is a little overwhelming to look at this Google Doc with hundreds of comments, but what I find most interesting is the commenters are talking to each other. Well the substance of what they're discussing or arguing about or agreeing on is interest to me as the author. But the fact that they find that interesting and worthwhile, to me, is also a revelation that people seem to enjoy being involved in this process.

Adam Kahane:

I don't want to exaggerate, but I realized it is a kind of facilitation that I'm doing or in particular, it's the mapping and discovering, the telling and asking. That I put something out there and we come to a substitutive point about facilitation. I don't think it's ever just about being a blank slate and saying, "Tell me what you think we ought to do." So to me, it's important that as a facilitator or a stakeholder, you almost always have to put something out there and say, "Here's my thinking about this subject or here's my thinking about this agenda or here's my thinking about what we ought to do next. What do you think?" That's the basic polarity, in this case in telling and asking, and that's what I'm doing with the book. I'm saying, I've been working on this for a year. This is my best thought. It's not as though I'm sending you all blank sheets of paper and saying, "Will [inaudible 00:30:36]." But I am saying, "This is as far as I've gotten. What do you think?"

Adam Kahane:

I don't want to exaggerate. This isn't a co-creation. It's not a co-authored book. I'm writing it, but I am genuinely suspending my thinking. This image that Bill Isaacs, at least I learned it from Bill Isaacs that the crucial step in dialogue or technically speaking, the crucial step in moving from what Otto Scharmer calls downloading to debating, the crucial step is suspending. This image that Isaacs uses that you take your idea and you hang it as if from a string in front of you so that you can see it. I can see it. You can attack it without attacking me. You can question it without questioning me. Maybe at the end, I'll still think what I thought before or maybe I'll see it differently.

Adam Kahane:

That's what I'm doing with this manuscript. I'm suspending my thinking. Half the time I'll say to people, "Thanks for your feedback, but I'm going to stick with the way it was." But the other half of the time I'm going to say, "No, it's great. You've really seen something I was missing and this is going to help me improve it." So, I'm going on because this goes back to the experiment I did. If I wasn't willing to experiment, then I'd have a book that's only half as good.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. So, it's interesting because when you talk about the inner gestures associated with working through some of these paradoxes and these tensions, teaching people to suspend is nontrivial. When you're talking about some of the very challenging conversations that you've facilitated, getting people to suspend doesn't come for free. You have to, I presume, lead them towards that space of suspension to get them to be willing to move from debating to dialoguing.

Adam Kahane:

Well actually, no. I don't think it's very difficult if you set it up well. Suspending in the Scharmer model is the move from downloading, which is when I say the truth of the matter is to debating where I say in my opinion. That's the first shift. That's what he calls suspending. I had a colleague in South Africa, Louis [inaudible 00:33:11], who used to say to people, "When you're really sure about the way things are and when you find yourself pounding the table saying the truth is, just put in my opinion at the beginning of the sentence. If that doesn't work, try in my humble opinion." Actually, I find that people get that pretty easily. Then there's very simple technical things that go along with that. For example, to take a really simple example, writing things on Post-its. So, I use a lot of Post-its in my facilitation. Somebody once accused me of having shares in the 3M company, which I don't have.

Daniel Stillman:

I know. They say that to us all the time and we should, but we don't.

Adam Kahane:

It's why Post-it is interesting because you write something on it. You don't know exactly who wrote it. You can move it around. You can put it next to something else. You can crumble it up and you can do that over and over. So, this is this process of iteration, creativity through iteration. It's one of the most important things and it's not difficult to learn and it works really well. It really works well. So, no, I don't actually think that's one of the harder things to do.

Daniel Stillman:

That's so interesting I mean because I feel like it is easy for people to slip back into debate. That there does need to be a reminder to hold space to suspend.

Adam Kahane:

Well and that's where the shift from debating to dialoguing in the Scharmer model is called redirecting. So, it's where I see things from the perspective of the other. Again, there is a simple way to learn that or not sort of easy but simple which is, do I see this other being as a person like me so that I'm not prepared to just defeat them, but I have a genuine curiosity about gosh, they keep saying this thing. Why is it that this is so important to them? Why do they see this thing that I'm not seeing, et cetera?

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. I'm curious. You mentioned facilitation is this adaptive challenge. There's this human aspect too. There is this technical component to it and there's two things that came up in a few of the stories I was reading about your facilitation that I wanted to just get you to sort of explicate a little bit. One which was the discussions in Colombia being over 10 days over the phone. I think a lot of people who are listening to this like me love sticky notes and certainly in this moment of the global pandemic, we're not doing that in-person where it is very easy and fluid to do. But a lot of people have been facilitating, as you have, complex transformative scenario planning conversations over the phone over multiple days with a broad variety of stakeholders. I mean, this is down the weeds question like, what does it take to make a multi-day phone conversation with this broad of a spectrum of stakeholders work?

Adam Kahane:

Well, it's a great example because I had forgotten until recently that I'd been doing this virtual facilitation for whatever days, 25 years. That particular example, it wasn't everybody on the phone. It was a group in-person but in that process which involved-

Daniel Stillman:

It was hybrid. That's even worse. Most people would, you know.

Adam Kahane:

Let me tell you that story. This was a process in Colombia in 1996 during the middle of the war. It was a process thinking about the future of the country and it involved business people and politicians and NGO people and peasants in trading, et cetera. At the time, there were two armed left wing gorilla armies, known by their Spanish initials the FARC and the ELN. So, these are illegal armed movements, rebel movements. The organizers of the project had got permission from the government of Colombia to give these people safe passage to come to the nine days of workshops, but they had refused because they thought it would be too dangerous. So yes, those four people participated by telephone; the FARC from some secret location in Costa Rica and the ELN from a prison cell.

Adam Kahane:

So yes, they participated in this very complicated process by speaker phone. It was very dramatic because the people who were in the room at the hotel were frightened of these people on the phone because they were the scary gorillas. When we started the process and when we would take lunch or coffee breaks, the participants in the meeting room would physically walk to the coffee break but staying far away from the speaker phone as if they could get hurt. Then after a few hours or a few days, people would bring their coffee to the speaker phone and have coffee with the people on the phone. So, it was very dramatic because it was literally a life and death situation.

Adam Kahane:

Sorry for the long information, but the answer to your question, why did it work, for me the answer is very simple, and this is the most important thing to keep in mind. It worked because those people wanted to be in the conversation. That's the only reason. That's the answer to most questions about facilitation and process is it'll work if it's important to people. In this case, those rebels really wanted to be in this conversation with the legal actors about what was happening in Colombia and what could happen and they were remarkable.

Adam Kahane:

We would have these presentations in the room where people would present the results of small group work. They'd be 20 flip charts on the wall which the people on the phone couldn't see. This wasn't video conference. This was a speaker phone, and the guy in the prison would say, "Well, I'd like to comment on the fourth bullet on flip chart number seven." Well the only way he could know what the fourth bullet on flip chart number seven was is because they must have been writing it all down as it was being presented verbally. So, the amount of concentration and seriousness to be able to participate under those circumstances is extraordinary. Why did they do it? The reason is obvious. They did it because it mattered.

Adam Kahane:

So, I think there's a lot of things that are difficult in facilitation or impossible in facilitation if people don't really want to be there and think it doesn't really matter. It's all a big joke and they prefer to be doing something else. For me, this is not an interesting challenge. What I'm interested in is what do you do with people who really want to work together and how can you help them do so in spite all the difficulty.

Adam Kahane:

So, thanks for reminding me of that. I think in a way it's an example of the most basic principle of all which is again about these choices. If you don't want to collaborate, if you want to do it by force, which is of course what armed gorillas are trying to do. They're trying to gain power by force of arms. But if you've decided that or if you think that maybe you can't get what you want on your own by forcing, adapting or exiting, then you might need to work with these other people, even people you don't agree with or like or trust. Then roll up your sleeves and let's try.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I agree that if there's will to keep going, then something can happen. I feel like many people struggle with the question of the person on the phone isn't writing down every bullet point. They're doing their laundry and walking around their house and checked out-ish. That's a much harder situation, ironically harder situation to change when it isn't life and death, when it isn't about the future of your country to get people to actually wake up and start to pay attention.

Adam Kahane:

Absolutely. One of the most basic ground rule we encourage in our workshops is be present. That is, it's easy to not be present when you're on Zoom or whatever. So, it is a basic issue. But my solution to that is very simple which is to try to only work with people who are really trying to do something they care.

Daniel Stillman:

It's good advice. I have one more incredibly logistical question to ask you because you talk about contribution, connection and equity and justice is sort of part of that. I think a lot of people struggle with creating a quality of contribution partly because people over talk. I feel like I was reading one story where you were a bell to really time to limit people's check-ins. I feel like very often people are nervous or hesitate to do something like this especially with high level people, especially when we're talking about really real stories and intense situations. This is way on the ground level, but managing the amount of time that people are speaking when they're speaking really, really truly important things. Doing something as intrusive as a bell or a visible timer, I think some people block out, but it sounds like you've done that in the past.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. So, let me say a couple of things about that. Firstly, there is a way in which one of the core variables or the core aspects of the facilitator plays with his time. So, time is a big deal.

Daniel Stillman:

Because it's limited.

Adam Kahane:

And knowing when to slow down and when to speed up and when to stop and when to just keep going, I think this is an important aspect of the skill. We use the bell in a very particular, and it's not useful all the time. I have stories about when it disastrously didn't work or was disastrously inappropriate. But we have used the bell often in the very first session of introductions and the principle is democracy of time. The principle is that the CEO isn't more important than their subordinate. And because the pattern is set at the beginning in everything, then the pattern you set in the first half and hour really matters. So, we found that setting this pattern which says everybody who is here is equally important and we're going to ring a bell after a minute for the CEO and the subordinate equally, dispassionately is a very dramatic signal especially in cultures, organizational cultures or national cultures, where that's not the norm. So yeah, but I think to underline principle is democracy of time.

Daniel Stillman:

I agree with you so hardly.

Adam Kahane:

And respect.

Daniel Stillman:

And I love the way you're stating it. It's such a clear way of you establish the principle, but it sounds like you don't hammer on it the whole time necessarily. That you release it when the context calls for it further into the conversation.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah, but that's not easy. It's not an accident that most arguing between facilitators and groups are about time. But I guess the question you have to ask is are people saying they don't have enough time because they want to listen to themselves more? So yeah. So, I think it's related to respect and not forcing.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Adam, speaking of time, we're coming up against our time. Is there anything that has been unsaid that we should say? What haven't I asked you that I should ask you?

Adam Kahane:

Well, you alluded to it and I'll just mention it as a teaser more than anything else, but I wrote a book called Power and Love. What I'm trying in this book, one of the things I'm trying to do is to explain why those buy themselves won't get you anywhere. And that this question of purpose and direction and justice is the missing ingredient. That's one of the things I'm trying to articulate in this new book. I think it's true and I also think it's topical.

Daniel Stillman:

Very much so. I'm really excited to make my way through the rest of it. I feel like in a way, the diagram of Power and Love is the torch versus the bonfire. In a way, I've been trying to understand the vertical and the horizontal. It seems like that's the analogy that I'm tacking onto that it seems like these other paradoxes I'm looking at them through the lens of that bonfire and the torch.

Adam Kahane:

Yes, that's true although mathematically if you will, it's the opposite of what you might think and that's why it's a little hard to explain because the vertical, the hierarchical is the one where love dominates, where the whole dominates the parts. That's opposite to what people would guess.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, it's very interesting. I'm contending with those two terms and I'm enjoying the process. I'm grateful that you're writing the book. It's a really great book so far. I'm excited to see the final version of it.

Adam Kahane:

I'm enjoying it and please make your way through. We're waiting for your comments. Deadline is next [inaudible 00:49:49] days.

Daniel Stillman:

I'll get on it. I was so nervous to try and get... I was like I couldn't get through all of it before this. So, I'm grateful for this conversation, Adam. Thank you for the work you're doing and for sharing your ideas so generously with the world and your time here.

Adam Kahane:

My pleasure. Thanks.

Daniel Stillman:

So just with our last seconds, you tell me if anything felt out of place or believable.

Adam Kahane:

Oh no, wonderful. I appreciate it. I enjoyed it.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. Thank you so much, Adam. I'm glad we could talk about some of the big and these tiny, tiny little details that say so much about what facilitation is.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. Well, I've also made notes, things that I want to make sure to get into the books. So, thanks for reminding me also of this story about the phone.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Do people act as their hands as well I would imagine?

Adam Kahane:

No, no. Well I guess. I don't remember. I guess so. I guess when they presented, somebody else would write on a flip chart. But it was really something. I mean, these were scary people and were scary for the participants and yet they participated very thoughtfully and sincerely. It was a really big deal.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and we really didn't get to talk about this, but I've heard you speak in some other talks about the 16 year arc of seeing it bear fruit and of the whole country going through these scenarios in process, in sequence.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah. That's the kind of weird thing about it. That is, I don't quite have the explanation for that because scenarios are not predictions and four scenarios put in a report are never intended to be enacted sequentially, but by some weird synchronicity they were. At least that's one interpretation of those 16 years of Colombian history. So, the whole thing took on a bit of a mystical. President Santos said, it was an act of prophecy. That's a pretty interesting word.

Daniel Stillman:

It is. I mean, I also think that you laid out really the four fundamental possibilities and they tried them all. They tried all the easy ones until they got to the hard one.

Adam Kahane:

Yeah, I guess so.

Designing Design Leadership

Season_Four_Image_stack_DR_2.jpg

Today I talk with Demetrius Romanos, SVP of Design & Development at Ergobaby. Demetrius has been my boss, my client and is also my friend!

Demetrius has worked on leading design on products of all shapes and sizes, from chocolate bars to medical devices and from laptop bags to baby carriers...and everything in between.

I’m excited to share a deep conversation about design leadership.

We discuss how to invite more of the behaviors you want in your team, how to lead with humility and how working across the whole organization to build a design system can get the whole team to think more deeply about what they deliver...and more importantly, why they deliver it. So many people come to me asking me to help their team develop a shared vision and a shared language of problem solving...Demetrius shares his insights on how to do just that, gently and relentlessly, over time.

When I teach teams about problem solving, I often break down the most famous of Design Thinking tools, the “How might we” statement, into 3 key parts.

Might indicates possibility...it’s not about how *must* we or how *will* we solve this challenge...Might, in this way, helps make problems “huggable” (as an old business partner of mine liked to say).

We indicates that we are in this challenge, together. It’s not about how Must You or how Should They solve this challenge.

Demetrius embodies these two aspects in his design leadership: Possibility and Togetherness. But it’s the first word of the phrase that (surprisingly) does the most of all:

How implies that a solution can exist if we put effort into it. The core truth of the design mindset is that a solution is possible, that design can get us out of this challenge. It’s optimism

Everything around us has been designed, usually by someone else, in the past: our offices and digital tools, our calendar and clocks. Our financial structures and org structures. Choosing to look at the current state of affairs and *not* throwing your hands up in despair, not blaming whoever came first, but rolling up your sleeves and getting started, believing that design, that intentionality can make a difference, is the essence of design and the essence of leadership. I’ve learned a lot from Demetrius over the years, but in this conversation, I am reminded of the power of warmth and optimism to lead change.

Enjoy the conversation as much as I did!

Links, Quotes, Notes and Resources

Min 1: Design to me is about facilitating change in a meaningful way. It's not just about aesthetically making something better or focusing on this one aspect of a user experience, but really taking into account a big picture and a small picture, and doing it in a way that makes sense.

Min 9, on the value of doing the work to create a design system:

the end benefit was that we got so deep into who we are and recognizing the values that our brand makes for our products and for our end users. It just changes now how people talk about what we do internally.

Min 13, on how to build alignment through design:

Small wins, I think is the best way to put it. My career, especially the last, probably 15 years has been very much about driving organizational change with through design, but I don't do it in a silo. It's all about collaboration, but you have to bring people along on the ride...People can say, "Hey, I see the value in this." It's simple as that. It's not about me, it's about the process. If they believe in what the output was and what they got out of it, if they felt better afterwards than they did going in, then I've done a big part of my job. By the time I got them to this design language workshop, there was still uncertainty, but they were comfortable with me being their guide along the ride.

Min 35 on Design Leadership:

You lead with what's the big vision. What are we trying to achieve? You lead by giving them a safe place to explore, you lead by assigning sub leaders, making people feel empowered to do what they do, and to come back and surprise you with something you might not have asked for. I think it's a bigger role, frankly. Bigger in the sense that you're not just the facilitator that's going to ask the questions and create the worksheets and all that stuff for like a finite period of time. You're really teaching skills and you're encouraging things that are different. It's forcing the folks that you assign as sub-leaders to really be that. I think it's helping people grow faster.

Min 44 on Humility and Respect in Leadership:

I was always taught to respect ... you've heard this kind of stuff before, respect the janitor just like you respect the CEO. We're just all people. At the end of the day, we're just all little creatures on this earth trying to do our thing to move the ball down the field a little bit. So, if we just all have a little bit of humility, work well together, no one has to be best friends at work, but we sure work better when we like each other, and then we see a bigger reason for doing what we do. Getting people to sort of rally around that. Be honest and open. Say, "Hey, this is not my thing, but that's your thing. Or maybe if this isn't for you, try something else." I don't know. It's just a comfort in my own skin and trying to live through that. I think people respond to that, especially your younger designers when they see the boss say, "I don't know that, but I know this guy that knows that so we're just going to go ask him," and it's okay.

More About Demetrius

Demetrius Romanos is a business-minded, brand experience evangelist. A consummate design diplomat, he’s been preaching the gospel that “everything matters,” from his time working in renowned consultancies to his present role SVP of Design & Development at Ergobaby.

For over 20 years, Romanos has applied his creative leadership, strategic thinking and deep empathy to help companies use design strategically to change corporate culture and drive top and bottom line growth.

A graduate of the University of Cincinnati’s industrial design program, Romanos has been published in numerous magazines and newspapers, as well as being included in the Cooper Hewitt Design Museum’s first Design Triennial.

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

Amazing. Wow. Okay. Demetrius Romanos, welcome to The Conversation Factory.

Demetrius Romanos:

Thank you so much. It's awesome to finally be here, honestly.

Daniel Stillman:

We've known each other-

Demetrius Romanos:

I watch these, I listen, and it's really cool to finally be on.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, that's really nice of you to say, man. We've known each other a long time.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, it's been a bit.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I really would love to start with what design means to you.

Demetrius Romanos:

Oh man. You want to like dive in with the most loaded question first.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, I do. I do.

Demetrius Romanos:

No, I like that. Design to me is about facilitating change in a meaningful way. It's not just about aesthetically making something better or focusing on this one aspect of a user experience, but really taking into account a big picture and a small picture, and doing it in a way that makes sense.

Daniel Stillman:

You've worked on, when you talk about the big picture and the details, you've worked on the design of such a broad variety of things, and also the things around things.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

The ways we work and things like that.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes. To me, it's about full ecosystems. It's not just the object. It's the object in context, the object within a system of things, how people interface with all of those and what it means from a brand perspective and what are you trying to drive ultimately.

Daniel Stillman:

Who does design belong to?

Demetrius Romanos:

Ooh. Who does design belong to? Design belongs to the masses. Maybe that's a bit too much of like a proletariat view with flags and Trotsky and all that good stuff.

Daniel Stillman:

No, it's great.

Demetrius Romanos:

No, I think ultimately, it's for the masses. We do for them. We do for others. It's more philanthropy than it is anything.

Daniel Stillman:

Wait, let's unpack that. What does that mean to you? Philanthropy, it's a gift?

Demetrius Romanos:

It is. It's a gift. If you do your job right, it's not about a shiny, beautiful object. It's about appropriateness, it's about guidance, it's about giving people the things that they need and doing it in a way that is beneficial to the environment while still helping your companies flourish enough that they can provide the next thing.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Is it different when you're doing chocolate versus baby care? Is it different? What's the same, what's different.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes, there's still an emotional hook.

Daniel Stillman:

Just picking two random things that you've worked on.

Demetrius Romanos:

No, it's true. It's a totally similar emotional hook. With chocolate, it's a craving, it's a flavor. There's a different kind of emotion that you're trying to tie into. With the baby product, you're talking about the most precious thing in a person's life, which is the growth of this new little human. The output and the level of complexity might certainly be different, but in terms of what you're trying to touch in someone's heart, I think is very similar.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. When's your talk? Is it next week?

Demetrius Romanos:

No, it's the 17th, I think.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay, so you've got some time.

Demetrius Romanos:

I should probably know that, yes.

Daniel Stillman:

You don't have to know the date. You just know your time.

Demetrius Romanos:

[crosstalk 00:03:23].

Daniel Stillman:

I just want to jam with you a little bit, because I know that you're still sketching it out. This is about design systems, but really, it's about leading and building how the design organization interacts with the rest of the organization.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes, absolutely. I've got the good fortune of many gray hairs and years under my belt to figure this out, screwed up along the way, and finally gotten to something where I believe that, a design language system, however you want to look at it, is much, much bigger than just making a series of things all look similar. It has such a greater impact on an organization and how it's created and what the output is long-term, that I just can't wait to really talk about that.

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting because like, when I was in design school, I remember this idea that was first introduced to me that the logo and the letter head, that everything involved in the company should feel like it comes from that company, like it all has the same flavor. Why is that important, do you think, for a company to have that kind of consistency maybe?

Demetrius Romanos:

Yep. Well, there's a handful of reasons. First is recognizability, so that when some random person interfaces with your product or service, they have seen it before and it stands out. There's differentiation, which is different, so that's differentiation both within your category against competitors, but also within your own product portfolio if you want different things to have different reasons for being. Those are sort of the key drivers, but the overall creates a consistent brand impression. It ups your brand value. When you've got things that look like they go together, it appears and is purposeful, which means that there's a deeper thought that goes into what you do.

Daniel Stillman:

What is that?

Demetrius Romanos:

It's like when you match your belt and your shoes. It shows that you cared

Daniel Stillman:

I love how you bring it back to fashion. What you don't know about Demetrius is that he is always dressed impeccably.

Demetrius Romanos:

Well, that means a lot coming from you, Daniel. I'll never forget the purple pants.

Daniel Stillman:

I knew we would get to the purple pants.

Demetrius Romanos:

I hope you still have them.

Daniel Stillman:

They faded with the years, man. Do you know like when you have a favorite pair of pants that you stop wearing as much? Because you can see that they won't last forever if you love it as hard as you would love them. This is a whole separate question about where are the cool pants for guys, but that's not what this podcast is about.

Demetrius Romanos:

No, that'll be a different one.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's a different one. In our pre-conversation, you talked about how you had to bring all of these different stakeholders together to really collaborate on not just what the look and the feel of your product line was, but what ... you used the word soul.

Demetrius Romanos:

I did.

Daniel Stillman:

Let's unpack that. A, the process of building that collaboration, and B like, what does it mean for this thing, this system to have an easiness, a soul?

Demetrius Romanos:

Yup. Great, great, great questions. I will say that Daniel did not ask me to plug him, but I've been with this company a little over 18 months, and there was a period about what? Late last year? Where Daniel came in and helped me introduce innovation practices. Now, this was not just done for my design team, but we brought in sales and we brought in marketing. It was really about establishing a new way of thinking and a new way of working together and seeing a bigger picture of what we're trying to do. That I thought set a fantastic foundation for what I sought to do the next with design language systems. Again, like I said before, a design language system is not only an externally about recognizability, but creating a look and feel that vibes for your brand. But the soul that comes from who your brand is and why it exists and who you're working to serve.

Demetrius Romanos:

What we did, I brought in a guy that I worked with before, Brandon from Play And Co, a fantastic partner in this. We looked at getting to the root of the brand, which starts with the brand pyramid. Again, typically these things are just to call out your points of difference and sort of the essence of what the vibe is. But people think about those things very verbally. It just sounds pretty. When it sounds pretty, it sounds like it reflects us. That's great, but sound and physical are two totally different things, which brings in then this question of like metaphors. How do you get these verbal and visual metaphors to come together and align on those? Let me tell you, when we started this activity, I think the designers kind of got it, the marketing folks did not get it at all.

Demetrius Romanos:

Like, why am I in this three-day workshop? I have no idea what you guys are talking about. But when you really unpack what our brand is versus our sister brand, find these commonalities and differences verbally and then start associating attributes, like what does that feel like? What does that sound like? What do you think of when you hear the word "quality"? What do you think of when you hear the word function? And start taking these verbal cues into visuals and creating then this foundation that everyone goes, "Oh my God, I never really thought about it that way." It just changes what you're trying to do. We went in with the intent of, we want our products to have a consistent look and feel across our portfolio, but also, when someone's walking down the street, they know that's ours and not our competitor X, Y, Z.

Demetrius Romanos:

As simple as that, but the out or the end benefit was that we got so deep into who we are and recognizing the values that our brand makes for our products and for our end users. It just changes now how people talk about what we do internally.

Daniel Stillman:

For people who aren't familiar, how do you build a brand pyramid? What are the components of the pyramid that you're trying to get people to go through? It sounds like there's a framework you're working through.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, there is a framework, and we typically, the brand pyramid starts at the bottom with your points of parity and your points of difference, and who is your target? Why do you exist and who are you there to serve? Then it ladders up to more kind of fluffy feelings of what are the feelings you're trying to communicate? What are the things that they interface with and actually feel? What are the things that you're trying to say from a verbal standpoint? Then, depending on if it's product related or brand related, it might have different kind of outputs. Then there's always this essence that guides the whole thing. This lofty sort of, almost like a mini mission statement for the brand, that's what everything is grounded at. But again, it's all quite verbal. You can envision lots of nice photography and copy and things like that, but nothing that then takes that and translates it to the physical world, which is what industrial designers are often tasked with.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Just to be clear, we're talking about baby care products, which are about as physical as ... They interface directly with your skin, with your baby's skin. There's a tactility. It's a very primal kind of a product.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, absolutely. It is. There're certainly practical aspects to it. But again, like I said before, you're dealing with the most precious thing in most people's lives, especially for our target, which is first time moms. Making sure that she feels safe, that she feels comfortable, that she understands how to use this thing, and that it does everything it says it's supposed to do, both for the physical of the baby, but the physiological. There's so many benefits to baby wearing and baby carrying that are not really thought of typically from an end consumer perspective. How do you drive that into what it is that we make?

Daniel Stillman:

Let's look at that three-day experience. You said, at the outset, some people were confused about why they were there or what was expected of them. In terms of like designing the whole arc of the conversation, resume out from where you started to where you want to get to, how did you get them to commit that kind of time to that dialogue?

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah. When we go to our company mission statement of making sure that we can help families bond, grow and thrive, there's so much to that if you unpack it. It was a fantastic place for us to start. What does that mean? What does bond, grow and thrive mean? What is the bigger picture of that? You get into these environmental discussions and political discussions about what's going on currently, what's happened before, where are we going next, post-COVID world. It's so much there, but if we just truly focus on who we're trying to serve and why, there was a lot of content, a lot that we can really dig into. Like, why do we exist? Our founder isn't part of the company anymore. There are people that have worked here for a long time that still have that route, but really just zoom way the hell out and say, why do we do what we do? Then focus back in.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. As a design leader, how do you facilitate that dialogue to get those people who are maybe on the edge of that conversation to fully engage with where you want to take them to?

Demetrius Romanos:

Small wins, I think is the best way to put it. My career, especially the last, probably 15 years has been very much about driving organizational change with through design, but I don't do it in a silo. It's all about collaboration, but you have to bring people along on the ride. Again, even back to your workshop, that was a simple commitment for my team and for a couple of other teams to come together, it's a day and a half, but you're going to see the benefit out of that. I was setting up the foundation even before that. Little wins. People can say, "Hey, I see the value in this." It's simple as that. It's not about me, it's about the process. If they believe in what the output was and what they got out of it, if they felt better afterwards than they did going in, then I've done a big part of my job. By the time I got them to this design language workshop, there was still uncertainty, but they were comfortable with me being their guide along the ride.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. You had really built a lot of trust, and I'm thinking back now to some of our ... This is back when there was traffic in LA, everybody. Demetrius and I had some long ...

Demetrius Romanos:

I don't miss that.

Daniel Stillman:

We had some long conversations going into the city about building this collaborative language because I know when you came into the company, there can be this big mission of where we want to get to. Everyone just, I call it like a bucket of puppies, just everybody just frolicking and gambling. There's a long road to get there. Being a new design leader, trying to build that coherent soul of a company and to have design be really the glue for all of it, where did you start? When you think back to the beginning, what was the sort of like, okay cracking my knuckles, wiggling my fingers, sitting down to the keyboard, where do you think somebody should start if one should find themselves in that similar situation?

Demetrius Romanos:

I always say the best place to start is ask a lot of questions and never be afraid to raise your hand. For me, it was really tough. I say it still, this was the hardest industry I've had to work in because I came in pretty blind and naive. I worked on soft goods before and office products, and carrying a laptop is not the same as carrying a baby, even though the products might have a similarity in terms of construction, they couldn't be more different. For me, it was really about making sure that I am open and honest with what I know and what I don't know. I feel like I've got the benefit of not having kids so that way I can look through a true, open empathetic eye as opposed to designing for myself, and relying on those around me that know more than I do and complimenting their skillset.

Demetrius Romanos:

And also showing them a way. Saying that it's okay to play, it's okay to experiment and try things. Use me as the naive guy. I might suggest some things that are crazy. Maybe they'll work, maybe they won't, but that's okay. I think asking the right questions and creating a safe space for people to play and try things.

Daniel Stillman:

It seems like there's a tension, I would imagine a tension between, and I've heard this from other leaders, of the humility to ask a lot of questions, to the sense that you should know what you're doing and you should know everything. How do you tap into that playfulness?

Demetrius Romanos:

It's a great question. I know what I know, and I know what I don't know. It just has always driven me, because I don't have to be the smartest guy in the room. I have to know the smartest people to compliment me and go seek the answers that I need, but it's impossible to be a wide T and a deep T. I think was Idea that invented the T system anyway. I'm pretty wide and shallow in a lot of things and deep in design leadership from an organizational level. But I don't have to know everything. I think it actually makes you a better leader when your team feels like, oh, I actually know more about my boss in this specific thing and he's okay with that.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. For people who aren't familiar with the T model, do you think about the T when you're hiring or building teams? Is that-

Demetrius Romanos:

I do. Yeah. The T model is just about like ... Are you wide in your breadth and shallow or deep in your knowledge of a specific space? If you are a highly competent individual contributor, that's like a principal designer, your team might be quite narrow and quite long. If you are a Jack of all trades, you might have a very wide T that's a little short, but maybe deep in a very specific area. If you're a general contractor versus a master plumber, for example.

Daniel Stillman:

Right, and the idea is we need people with deep experience in something so that they can contribute something that the rest of the team doesn't necessarily have.

Demetrius Romanos:

I worked in the agency world for a long time, which is where you and I met originally. You do form a wide T in that, because you get to work with so many different kinds of clients and industries, you learn a little bit about a lot. Having then parlayed that into a corporate role, my last job, and then continuing in this one, I finally I've started to deepen the T and the category, but it doesn't change necessarily what I choose to know and choose not to know about what I'm contributing to that business and to that category.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Do you feel like design leadership has changed in this fully remote and also deeply stressed time?

Demetrius Romanos:

To a certain extent. I find myself not being able to just be the head over the shoulder and swing by a designer's desk and say, "Hey, what are you working on? Let's check out some things that you're doing," and just provide some of this impromptu guidance. I find that I'm becoming a weekly cheerleader. Just to keep everyone engaged and to know that they're cared for, and that they're not just working on their little silo, that we still are a team. I think reinforcing sense of team becomes really challenging.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. How are you doing that cheerleading and that teaming in this way?

Demetrius Romanos:

I send out a lot of emails. I do like a Monday and a Friday email just to check in with everyone to talk about weekends, to talk about what you're doing. So, kind of more light-hearted, not as business related. We do Zoom cocktail hours. We do our design reviews, where each person can come in and share what they're working on, so it's a little bit more like loose a way of sharing and getting feedback. We use rose thorn buds. Bringing in these little techniques and just sending random things is all we can do.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, so you're pumping the system with energy and with specific conversations at a specific cadence.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes. I'm finding that, it's not just me. A few of my teammates will be doing the same thing, and it's cool when that becomes just part of the culture.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What have you been doing to take care of yourself? I think facilitating and leading, it's an energy in sort of ...

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah. Taking care of myself has been harder. We tend to travel, my wife and I tend to travel a lot. We're not able to do that.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Oh my God. You're right. That is totally your happy place.

Demetrius Romanos:

It's totally my happy place.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh man.

Demetrius Romanos:

Not being able to get on a plane, it sucks, but we take day trips most, every weekend. That's expanded to further a radii in terms of mileage, but we get out.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, you went all the way to Napa a couple of weeks ago.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, we've done Palm Springs, you name it, throw in a good audio book and just go see something. Aside from that, I do a lot of Zoom conversations with friends. I'm just trying to stay connected with people. I've found that I've been connecting more with old contacts and old friends now than I had before. I don't like phone calls. I'll be the first to admit it. Forcing that dialogue is not easy, but now that I'm doing it, it's just been another way to connect. I think at this point I've sort of settled into the new routine. I'm not forcing myself to question every day, when is this going to be over? It just is. We're just okay with that. But it's hard to really feel creatively energized, I'm finding.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I really appreciate the way that you are curating, nourishing conversations for yourself. This is a huge thing that people really do need to do for themselves. I feel like, often when I work with people, they cultivate their network as the last resort. They're changing jobs, and so they start to reach out to people that they haven't talked to for umpteen years, but there's so much value to cultivating your community in a continuous way, which is what you're doing.

Demetrius Romanos:

Absolutely. Yeah, trying my hardest. I did a presentation recently about macro trends, and one of the key things is really taking time to feel in this moment. It's too easy to get caught up in the race and not really feel what's going on around you. It is a good time to stop, take stock of the things that matter without trying to over chase happiness, and be okay with that. It's empowering, I think.

Daniel Stillman:

It is. Well, because it's taking some ownership over ... Instead of saying that something has to be different than it is, it's empowering by taking control of saying, this is where we are, this is where things are happening right now. I love this idea that you are not questioning, when will it change versus this is the way it is.

Demetrius Romanos:

It will end. It's bound to end. It's going to be different, then some things will carry on as they were, other things will return to what a normal was. Human nature is to like consistency, and it's to like whatever normal is. We will find a way to get back to that. Every big thing that's ever happened, we go back generally to what we did before with some slight changes. I'm optimistic that that will be the case. It's just unprecedented in how long it's lasting.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, it is extraordinary. One of the things that like, I feel like when we were talking way in the beginning of this, one of my concerns, and one of your concerns was, as a physical product company, physicality is such a big part of what you do, the fittings and also like talking to customers around interacting with the product, doing home visits and doing research. How have you adapted some of your workflows to some of that?

Demetrius Romanos:

Well, it's summertime, but just generally, I think we are fortunate in Southern California to have four months ... sorry, four seasons of great quality weather. We can do things outside, which is where I was going with that. So, just last week, in fact, we had to do fittings of one of our new products, and we set up an easy popup tent on someone's driveway, and we had 10 different moms come with their kids, and we kept our distance, we wore masks. We did the fittings in the best way possible, which was a little bit different, but we made do, and it worked. I think a couple months ago, it would have been a bit more challenging, but I think as people have gotten more comfortable with how to handle hygiene and how to live within this situation, I think we're just a bit more comfortable doing it.

Demetrius Romanos:

Now, it certainly raises issues when, in terms of not being able to travel to the factories, for example, and work on things there, but fittings internally, it's actually ... that was one of the last hurdles that was difficult. Now, we seem to have figured out a solve for that.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh my God. I'm so glad. It's so important. That's feedback you really need.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes. I think for me, the bigger thing is not being able to do innovation workshops in-person, because I've run now a handful of them remotely, and you can do, I think, high level, and again, more strategic, more verbal things in quite successful way. We've done a couple, even two-day and three-day ones. When it gets into rough prototyping, like let's do a co-creation session where we're like duct taping things together, it just doesn't work. It's like I'm almost thinking, could I set up somehow an outdoor innovation space? So, you actually could bring people together. I haven't given up on that.

Daniel Stillman:

You shouldn't give up on it. I'm also really curious, what advice would you give to other people who are trying to do innovation workshops remotely? What have you learned? Because I know this is not how you work. You would bring ... you'd throw the team together for three days in a room, and we can't do that anymore. What's changed? What do you feel like is best practice?

Demetrius Romanos:

What's changed is that you're forced to try to figure out different things that might replace or replicate what you've used before. I think it requires a little bit of patience with ourselves to say, you know what? It's okay to try different tools. I've used MURAL, and no knock on MURAL. It's fine if you are comfortable with it and for certain applications. I personally, just don't love it. I've done a lot more PowerPoint templates and assigning a head of each breakout team and say, "You will be filling out this template," and try to make it, not necessarily prescriptive, but as self-guided so that when I get the output back, that there's some value to it.

Demetrius Romanos:

The benefit that I've seen is I don't have to fly people in from different parts of the world. I can have now workshops that aren't just my North America team, but we can include people from Asia, we can include people from Europe, and so it becomes more diverse, more participatory, more representative. We wouldn't have thought to do it that way if we didn't have to.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and when you talk about the collaborative language and building into a framework, it seems like that's the thing that really is effective. We have a framework, and there's a linguistic process and you're guiding us to think together through that process.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes. I will say that one of the things I've seen is that teams naturally just work within their own silos. When you are working remotely, I believe that everyone has had to step back and say that we're in this for something bigger. It's no longer, what is the marketing team doing? What is the design team doing? It's what is Ergobaby doing to move X, Y, Z. I feel like this greater sense of team just really blossomed.

Daniel Stillman:

Also, I want to highlight, when you were talking about bringing everyone together for this brand voice and soul workshop, you were appealing to the core values of the brand as your starting point.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes, at our mission, our values, all about loving the brand, loving who you're working for, who are you making things for, and what are you trying to get made for them? What are you facilitating through your products? What are you enabling through your products? Digging into that. We had the luxury, frankly, of doing that workshop in person. This was before the crap hit the fan. Would it have been as successful? I don't know. There's some value to ripping and tearing magazines and putting together these boards that give you a vibe that feels more organic than if I would curate, here's 15 images that you guys can pull five from to create your little PowerPoint slide. It could be done. It just would lack, I think, a little bit more of the organic nature that's required to create a soul.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I think tearing magazines to pieces is definitely a fun experience, but I will say I'm going to be bringing somebody back from the facilitation master class, who we do these little spotlight facilitation sessions, each person in the masterclass gets to run like a little facilitation experiment. I say a little like it's not important, but it's a short facilitation experiment, and this one particular woman did an image based facilitation where she had people go, and on MURAL, you could ... there's actually an image search tool in it. You can also copy and paste an image from the internet, where she asked people to go find an image that represented, I think it was like commitment that they were talking about, what commitment looked and felt like to them. I don't know, man. Maybe my pushback is like, I get The New Yorker, which doesn't have a lot of pictures in it.

Daniel Stillman:

I know this happens when I'm like, I need to get some magazines with pictures, and I always have this ... I don't have like a buildup of cosmopolitans. I get Martha Stewart Magazine, for some reason, Janet's mother somehow. I don't know why we keep getting it. Nobody's paying for it as far as I know.

Demetrius Romanos:

Who knows.

Daniel Stillman:

But I love looking through Martha's calendar every month. It always tickles me. But yeah, getting ... I'm just saying there's an infinite number of pictures online, but I agree with you 100%, I've done those workshops where there's something ... you're tapping almost into people's subconscious when they're sort of like they rip one and then in like an eyeball from one thing goes on top of the mouth of another, and they're really doing something like something clicks. That's a very special moment.

Demetrius Romanos:

It is. I mean, you're riffing off of each other in a physical way that's almost subconscious, and it's really hard to replicate that through a Zoom meeting.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Challenge accepted though. I think the way that we're tapping into people's subconscious and collaboration, I'd be curious to see what can be done because I think it's an important part of the process where people kind of get into that. I think before Clay and Legos, I don't know what people were doing to replace that, because there's people who that's ...

Demetrius Romanos:

No idea. That's their whole thing.

Daniel Stillman:

That's their whole thing.

Demetrius Romanos:

We've had people bring in images in advance, like here's kind of a prompt, here's a little bit of a homework assignment, there's some somewhere it's on the fly. In other instances, it's been okay, we're going to capture kind of the verbal vibe, and then the design team is then going to go back and fill this out with imagery and then represent that for feedback and just to triangulate. And it's still working, it's just different. I think it's going to make us all better though once we do have the opportunity to go back to physical environments, because we'll have just new ways of doing things.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. In a way, the default was we'll come together and do three days. Now the default is everybody can come if we can make it in a time zone that people can come. Now, we just have one more modality to work with. What I love, what you were talking about is like intentionally, in a way, breaking up the arc of the conversation. I was saying like, okay, well, here's the verbal part that we know everyone can participate in, and now let's take the visual part and do that offline, slow down, let the design people marinate on that, then bring it back, and then have another cycle of feedback and iteration. It's like, it doesn't all have to be done in one go.

Demetrius Romanos:

Correct. I think there's a side benefit that we wouldn't have considered, is that doing a two or three day workshop with everybody involved is a big time commitment.

Daniel Stillman:

Huge.

Demetrius Romanos:

But if you say, hey, marketing team, we need you for three hours to do this, and then we're going to go away for a week and then get you in for another hour, it's amazing. You get really committed contribution and valuable feedback.

Daniel Stillman:

Maybe this is, as our time winds down, it's really thinking in terms of inputs and outputs.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes, and knowing that you can break things up as you need to. You've even done your own masterclasses. One was around specifically just warmups. You're going to join this, you're going to learn about warmups and practice some. I loved it. I found it valuable, and it didn't have to be more than that, which was great. How can you get the most out of someone's time knowing full well what you're trying to achieve as an output?

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting, because I feel like that's one half of the spectrum is like inputs and outputs specific contribution, and then the other is, everyone altogether and stretching. The marketing people are stretching themselves to participate more into the design, and the design is really stretching itself to really understand the brand voice. There's some value to both of those poles, if you will, of how you're going to design the conversation. It sounds like you definitely ... where we've always been, like the strength is of design is let's get all together, and you, as the lead of design, will lead this conversation where everyone is coming together. What does design leadership look like now that we are starting to break up these conversations into smaller chunks?

Demetrius Romanos:

Good question. You lead with what's the big vision. What are we trying to achieve? You lead by giving them a safe place to explore, you lead by assigning sub leaders, making people feel empowered to do what they do, and to come back and surprise you with something you might not have asked for. I think it's a bigger role, frankly.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Say more about that. Bigger in what way?

Demetrius Romanos:

Bigger in the sense that you're not just the facilitator that's going to ask the questions and create the worksheets and all that stuff for like a finite period of time. You're really teaching skills and you're encouraging things that are different. It's forcing the folks that you assign as sub-leaders to really be that. I think it's helping people grow faster.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, because you can't possibly do it.

Demetrius Romanos:

Right.

Daniel Stillman:

You use one of my favorite words, which is surprise. I used the word surprise in one of the opening sentences of my book, this idea that a transformative conversation will surprise us, that we have to walk into, even the most difficult conversations, with the willingness to be surprised. Otherwise, there's no ... what change can possibly happen? Can you talk to me a little bit about what surprise means to you in your work? Because it's such an interesting idea.

Demetrius Romanos:

We talk a lot about surprise and delight for our end users, and it's been just ingrained in me forever. I don't even know where it came up. It must've been a P&G thing, but we don't really think about surprise for ourselves. We're always thinking about who it's for, this aha moment. But I do find that there's been surprise. I do find that we've gone into an unknown world where we're seemingly just discombobulated overnight and having to find new ways to do things. When there's an output that you go, holy shit, I didn't know it could be that awesome. Pardon me if you have to beat that out. But wow, I've seen a lot of fantastic output in my workshops that honestly, I don't think I would have gotten the same if it was done physically.

Demetrius Romanos:

So, there is a level of surprise, almost no question like, well, geez, we do go back. What are this? Should I really keep? Just because it's better versus how I did things before. Who's stepped up, who's really shown a level of engagement? Because they're feeling more alone, otherwise they might have agoraphobia. In a big setting of a hundred people in a workshop, they might just freak out. There's these fantastic little side benefits that I think are cool surprises.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I love that, and I think the willingness to be surprised and enjoying people, bringing something to you, that is different than what you would have scoped or expected, is a really powerful mindset to have as a leader, and non-trivial at all.

Demetrius Romanos:

No, I mean, I'm a kid at heart, and when I manage my teams, I always use analogies like, listen, I want you ... When you teach children how to bowl and they put those inflatable things in the gutter so that way the ball won't go in there, I'm that. I want you guys to just whale on the ball and just try stuff, and I'll be the one that takes the hit, and I'm totally okay with that. That's the only way we're going to move the needle, and it's the only way people are going to have fun and surprise themselves.

Daniel Stillman:

So, you're the gutter guy.

Demetrius Romanos:

I'm the gutter guy. It's okay. I'm responsible and I'm the gutter guy.

Daniel Stillman:

That's amazing. I think having a playful attitude towards that is so interesting, and a really much more delightful way to lead, because I think sometimes it can be, what if they screw up? It's on me.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yes. Trust obviously comes into play, but if I build my team against our values, if I build them against T system, if we work together a lot of times and get to know each other, these little motley crews start to really surprise you, and why wouldn't we do it that way?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, and well, we haven't even talked about is how you design a design team so that you can trust it. Obviously you've done a lot of work to build up the team over the time that you've been with them.

Demetrius Romanos:

I like scrappy teams, and I've always tried to build my teams like these protagonists, like Oceans 11, where there are these crazy masterminds. There's the guy that orchestrates the whole thing. There's these little specialists, there's a weird guy.

Daniel Stillman:

You're George Clooney.

Demetrius Romanos:

I'm like the less attractive George Clooney that tries to build these teams that still solve-

Daniel Stillman:

You got the salt and pepper thing. I'd say it's working.

Demetrius Romanos:

I try. I used to tell my wife I'm like the Greek George Clooney. She had no idea what that meant, but apparently now you do. I actually did a presentation at IDSA in New York a few years ago. It was all about this kind of protagonist path, and about having people come together to do their parts, but do it for a greater picture. So, if you can set a vision, if you can give people the tools, if you can trust each person's expertise and make them feel safe to try things without fear of reprimand, then I think you'll be successful. It's certainly worked for me. I don't have all the answers, but I'm just going with what works for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Is that presentation anywhere on the interwebs?

Demetrius Romanos:

It might be. I certainly have the written copy I can send you. I don't know if it was videoed, it's got to live somewhere.

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting because thinking about the team and the project as a narrative, as a story that you are constructing together, it's so powerful, especially when you think about, what will the story that the whole organization tell about the experience? You are all building that story together.

Demetrius Romanos:

That was sort of the intent. I'm a big fan of Joseph Campbell and The Hero's Journey, but I sort of took a twist on it and called it the protagonist path. It's really about how I build organizations that work well together for wins.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh man. We're almost out of time. My general question of like, what else haven't we talked about that we should talk about? Can you just tell us a little bit about the protagonist's path? How do we facilitate a protagonist path as leaders if we want to step up?

Demetrius Romanos:

The protagonist path, it's when you think about the guy that might not ... it's a little bit of an unsung hero, for example, Han Solo. He's not the guy that you would ride in on the white horse, but he's definitely an awesome guy that's got a little bit of a rough side to him. But little wins, it always starts with like, how do I build trust? How do I show that what I'm talking about actually works? Then building on that. It's all about bringing people then in together to see a bigger picture, or to action on it together, to set this goal and to divide and conquer.

Daniel Stillman:

Sounds exciting.

Demetrius Romanos:

It is exciting.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, and people need to feel like they are part of this inciting action in a story. There's a moment when Han and Leia get thrown together and something happens, like there's forward movement, and it feels like that's what you're trying to always facilitate and lead.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, and I try to tap into who people are. What's your purpose? Yeah, you got up in the morning so you can get to work, but why do you do what you do? What is your purpose in life? What's the bigger picture, and how can we harness that so we can do some great things together.

Daniel Stillman:

That's amazing. All right, closing thought. What is your purpose, Demetrius? Why do you get up in the morning?

Demetrius Romanos:

This is not to sound lofty, but it's to bring people together to do great things, to make change for other people.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I would love to know how to be more like you. I'm not even ...

Demetrius Romanos:

I want to be more like you. We all want to be more like Daniel.

Daniel Stillman:

Not true. Demetrius, how do you bring the lightness? You bring a light touch to things. You don't do it heavy, you don't do it hard. You do it light.

Demetrius Romanos:

I don't know. I was always taught to respect ... you've heard this kind of stuff before, respect the janitor just like you respect the CEO. We're just all people. At the end of the day, we're just all little creatures on this earth trying to do our thing to move the ball down the field a little bit. So, if we just all have a little bit of humility, work well together, no one has to be best friends at work, but we sure work better when we like each other, and then we see a bigger reason for doing what we do. Getting people to sort of rally around that. Be honest and open. Say, "Hey, this is not my thing, but that's your thing. Or maybe if this isn't for you, try something else." I don't know. It's just a comfort in my own skin and trying to live through that. I think people respond to that, especially your younger designers when they see the boss say, "I don't know that, but I know this guy that knows that so we're just going to go ask him," and it's okay.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, modeling. Modeling that behavior that you want to see in other people. So powerful.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah, I suppose so.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. How would you describe it? What word would you use for it?

Demetrius Romanos:

Well, I guess it's a level of humility in what I don't know. It's a level of confidence in what I do. I've done this, I've got the battle scars to prove it, I'm still going to learn along the way. I don't have all the answers, but I love going to people that do. Getting to work with you, getting to work with lots of other smart experts in their fields makes me better, and exposing my teams to those people makes them better. So, if you could ground them in those kinds of specialties and then come back together and say, okay, now what can we do? What's our superpowers? This little fantastic eight or 10 or 12, or however big your team is, that's what you do, and this is why, it's your purpose. It's fun

Daniel Stillman:

I want to be respectful of your time. Is there anything else that we have not talked about, you want to make sure that we go on record as saying?

Demetrius Romanos:

Anything in particular? Geez. I mean, I certainly had questions for you, but I want to be mindful of your time too.

Daniel Stillman:

Questions for me. This is not how this works.

Demetrius Romanos:

It's not conversational.

Daniel Stillman:

Touche.

Demetrius Romanos:

Yeah. No, I'm just trying to do my piece to make things better. I think, again, there's a lot of stuff that we watch in the news right now that is so focused on a specific subject, whether it's positive or negative, that we sort of lose sight of the bigger picture. It really is just let's try to do what's right for the world. I did a workshop earlier this year that was specifically around corporate social responsibility and how can we channel that and be better for our end user? It boiled back down to something as simple as like, we got to focus on the environment, because if we don't have a happy planet, how can we have happy families? Everything comes back to something bigger and simpler. To remember that, I think we'd be better for what it is that we do.

Daniel Stillman:

That is an amazing place to end this conversation.

Demetrius Romanos:

Awesome.

Daniel Stillman:

Demetrius ...

Demetrius Romanos:

Fantastic.

Daniel Stillman:

I am thrilled that we're able to get this on tape.

Demetrius Romanos:

Me too.

Daniel Stillman:

It's not tape, but you know what I mean. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.

Demetrius Romanos:

It's absolutely my pleasure to be here, Daniel. Thanks so much for having me.

Daniel Stillman:

End scene. That was awesome, man.

Draw to Win with Dan Roam

Season_Four_Image_stack_DR.jpg

“Stop thinking about drawing as an artistic process. Drawing is a thinking process. If you want to think more clearly about an idea, draw it.”

This is the simple essence of Dan Roam’s message. Dan has written five best-selling books about visual thinking and storytelling. Back of the Napkin was one of my seminal texts, Show and Tell is a blockbuster if you want to learn how to tell better stories...and who doesn’t? And you have to love the title of Dan’s book “Draw to Win”...maybe the most direct distillation of Dan’s perspective. Drawing is thinking...and thinking helps you do better work. 

Who should be drawing when many brains are involved in a complex project?

What Dan helped me wrestle with in this conversation is how drawing helps groups think, together and how he, as a model-making expert, can help push the thinking of a group. 

We talk through the yin-and-yang of a top-down approach of model making (with someone like Dan pushing the edge of excellence *for* a group he’s working with, vs a group hammering out a new model, bottom-up, doing visual synthesis together.

Both are powerful ways to lead a conversation. 

Making a framework for a group can shape their conversation profoundly - the right visual tool can frame a conversation and ease the progress of a team’s thinking: Drawing a classic 2 X 2 creates a frame, a container for a conversation. I’ve always found that, even if someone finds a case that falls outside of the framework offered, they speak about their ideas in relation to the framework - the conversation has been anchored - which is one way to think about what I am calling Conversational Leadership.

There is power and danger in shaping conversations. Leading the conversation can mean that we’ve prevented something else from emerging - something organic, co-created and co-owned by the whole group. This is the IKEA effect...even if something that Dan makes might be technically better than what a group can make on it’s own, they may value what they’ve put their hands on more.

As with all polarities, the middle path, approaching both ends flexibly, is the most powerful. I know from experience how transformative it can be when your client picks up the pen and adds their ideas alongside yours. Who picks up the pen first can shift the direction of the conversation profoundly. Stepping back and offering the pen to the group is a choice we can all take to shift a conversation.

Drawing is how to win in the broadest sense. If you’re the only person drawing in the conversation, you will anchor the conversation and lead the conversation. If you get everyone to draw, the conversation will be a win-win and led by anyone willing to take up the pen.


Links, Notes and Resources

Dan on the Web (learn about his award-winning books and his work and more…)

Dan’s Online Learning space: Napkin Academy

Dan’s favorite, most fundamental drawing:

status quo.jpg

Some of my favorite visuals from Dan that you can find on the web...

The Power of Visual Sensemaking as an organic process:

The Power of Visual Sensemaking as an organic process-.png

How to think systematically about being visual:

How to think systematically about being visual-.png

The simple shapes of Stories:

The simple shapes of Stories- .png

Other books to learn more about visual thinking:

Gamestorming

The Doodle Revolution

One of my favorite quotes from this interview:

Data doesn’t tell a story

As I always like to say, data doesn't tell a story, people do. And Dan breaks down how to do that, in detail. As he says: 

"A good report brings data to life. When we do a report right, we deliver more than just facts, we deliver them in a way that gives insight. It makes data memorable and makes our audience care." 

More About Dan

Dan Roam is the author of five international bestselling books on business-visualization which have been translated into 31 languages. The Back of the Napkin: Solving Problems with Pictures was named by Fast Company, The London Times, and BusinessWeek as 'Creativity Book of the Year.' Dan's newest book, Draw to Win, was recently published by Penguin Portfolio, and debuted as the #1 new book on amazon.com in the categories of Business Communications and Sales and Marketing. 

Dan has helped leaders at Google, Microsoft, Boeing, Gap, IBM, the US Navy, the United States Senate, and the White House solve complex problems with simple pictures. Dan and his whiteboard have appeared on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, and NPR.  

Full Transcript

Daniel Stillman:

I'll officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory. Dan Roam, have you always been a Dan? I know this is a strange place to start the conversation but as a Daniel, I'm always curious about Dans.

Dan Roam:

It's funny, you should ask that, Daniel. By the way, a pleasure to talk with you this morning. I'm officially Dan. As far as I remember, I always really have been but when I was very young, when I was in trouble, when something was serious, my parents would refer to me as Daniel. It wasn't a sign that oh, you've done something terrible and you're going to be disciplined. It was just, this is a more serious thing.

Dan Roam:

In my mind, I've always associated the name Daniel with that which is a little more serious than just Dan. I have always been Dan.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is exactly what I was hoping we get to because when people call me, Dan, and I'm not a Dan, I take it as a compliment because I think Dan is a fundamentally nicer person. Easygoing guy. Dan, Dan's a great guy. Daniel is a little more serious. I've never been a Danny. I'm assuming you've never?

Dan Roam:

Danny is a no fly zone. We're not going to Danny. When Danny comes out that means someone needs to be spoken to.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, there's major misalignment. In that case ...

Dan Roam:

Yes, no Dannys, no.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay. I'm glad we're ...

Dan Roam:

This is a no Danny zone.

Daniel Stillman:

This is a no Danny zone. Danny's like he's a good guy, but there's not a lot up top. If there's any Danny's listening, I apologize, but prove me wrong. Come at me.

Dan Roam:

Yeah, yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Dan, for those of the world who somehow are unaware of who you are and what you're about, what's your origin story? You've written a lot of books. They are all amazing. People should read them but if they haven't, if they're unaware your existence. If we were to just have a quick napkin sketch, if you will, of Dan Roam, what's your origin story? Was there nuclear waste involved? Radioactive spider?

Dan Roam:

There were several nuclear meltdowns involved.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

Yeah, Daniel, thank you. That's, that's lovely. I am the guy who you all know, many of whom you are, who loved to draw back in school, especially in the early years of school, kindergarten, first grade, second grade. I drew all the time. That's what gave me a lot of pleasure.

Dan Roam:

Then, by about second grade, the teacher said, "Okay, it's enough with the picture books. It's enough with the drawing now that you know how to read let's take the pictures away and get serious, let's really educate ourselves." I was just heartbroken. Because to me, it was the drawing that was the mechanism by which I learned things and understood things and made sense of the world around me.

Dan Roam:

Then, they kind of took it away, but I said no, and I just kept drawing all the way through. My first job out of high school and then out of college was in graphic design. Drawing or sketching is really the core language of graphic design, you just map something out on a piece of paper to try to figure out what it might look like. The fact that I was drawing made sense, but then I moved into management consulting, and I was the only person in the room who still drew because management consultants, by and large, have to had the drawing trained out of them, not only at second grade level, but certainly all the way up through university.

Dan Roam:

It's not something typically that you do. That would be really the essence is I was the business person in management consulting, who did not understand what most of the people were talking about. In order to understand it, I would go to the whiteboard, if there was a whiteboard in the room, or pull out a sheet of paper if there wasn't, and just draw some very simple little stick figures and boxes and arrows. As I was listening to what people were describing and play it back, show it to them and say, if I understand properly what I think you just said, it might be something like this little model that would be on the whiteboard, how does that fit with where you are?

Dan Roam:

Every time I would do that, Daniel, the conversation would totally change. People would say, technically, "Oh, my gosh, I have never seen what we've talked about described that way." The conversation would shift towards ... politics would drop away, the sort of the unspoken who's leading in the meeting would drop away, who's right who's wrong with drop away.

Dan Roam:

What would happen is you'd have a really genuine thoughtful conversation around the picture, the drawing, that was emerging on the board. That's the story. Just never stopped doing that.

Daniel Stillman:

Do you feel like a doodle revolution has happened? I know you had, and we're going to dance all around. You have this amazing platform, The Napkin Academy. I've just started exploring all your draw together videos of two of my heroes, Dave Gray and Sunni Brown and amazing seminal texts as back of the napkin was, for me ... is more drawing happening in the corridors of business? Is it your fault?

Dan Roam:

Yeah. Great question, Daniel. We won. We won. It's been a decade. It's been a decade since my own book back, The Napkin came out, which was probably one of the first business books that was really intentionally and totally about the act of drawing as a way of thinking in a business setting. Many others were right around the same time. Whether it was Dave gray or Sunni Brown, Alexander Osterwalder with Business Model canvas doesn't explicitly talk about drawing but he uses drawing.

Daniel Stillman:

He uses a visual framework to organize thinking.

Dan Roam:

Absolutely. One of the greatest, frankly, over the last decade.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

There was this moment starting 10 years ago and I think the fact that it paralleled really the rise of social media and our ability technologically to send images to each other, we could always do that through email and things. Now that you think about Instagram or Pinterest or even Facebook, the incredible amount of attention that is given to simple images. There's good and bad on that. This notion of using a picture, whether it's a photograph or a drawing or a sketch to help amplify or clarify an idea has never been new. It's been with us for a long, long time.

Dan Roam:

Many of us just helped push that forward. I think, in a way, we succeeded.

Daniel Stillman:

How does that feel?

Dan Roam:

I don't go into a meeting now where people don't draw and that's not true of 10 years ago.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

I mean, every time I go into a meeting now, someone's drawing something, which is great. Yeah, I think, it's been successful. Now, knowing that, it's time to push forward on what might be the next evolution of using the visual mind and what have we learned from social media in particular, that maybe isn't quite so beneficial, related to the power of the visual. Because it can be used for good or for not good.

Dan Roam:

I think it's time for us to reflect on a bit what have we learned about the power of the image? How can we use that as we move ahead?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I want to loop back because the question I wanted to ask you around top down versus bottom up visual thinking, I think, Alex's diagram was clearly hard one. I think he followed the dictums of ... well here, I'm going to I'm going to pause there, I'm going to loop back around. Do you have a favorite drawing of yours like an iconic like this is Dan's most favorite sketch ...

Dan Roam:

I have two. I have two. Yeah, Daniel, I probably have two. It's a great question, it makes me think how do you pick your favorite after having drawn 50,000 drawings? How do you pick your favorite?

Daniel Stillman:

At least.

Dan Roam:

At least. Whichever one I'm working on right now? No, but there's an answer. The simple one would be the simplest possible smiley face, has become the emoticon. In a way, if you think about it, there are versions of the simple stick figure smiley face all the way back onto the walls of the caves of Lascaux and some of the most ancient written communications by humans that have ever been found are Essentially stick figures.

Dan Roam:

The stick figure smiley face would be my favorite because you can go anywhere with that. There's one more, which is a little more elaborate drawing. It'd be interesting for people listening, if you can, not if you're driving. If you could just close your eyes, just try to visualize with me for a moment, we're going to draw a picture together. What I'd like you to do is just take a sheet of paper and there's going to be three simple shapes on this sheet of paper. Pace yourself accordingly.

Dan Roam:

You're going to draw from left to right. Over on the left, I'd like you to draw or imagine just a square, maybe a couple of inches on the side, just a square, square. Imagine that. Draw it in your mind. Then, to the right of that square, about the same size, draw a triangle, a pyramid, with a point at the top. Then, moving one more space to the right, draw a circle of about the same size.

Dan Roam:

Now, you're going to have three shapes in a line. You're going to have a square, a triangle with the point pointing upwards and then you're going to have a circle. A square, a triangle and a circle, and they're all of about the same height. What I'd like you to do is in between that square in and that triangle, put a little plus sign. It's almost as if we're making a mathematical formula here. Then between the triangle and the circle, put a little equal sign.

Dan Roam:

What we have is a little visual formula that says square plus triangle equals circle. I'd like you to just see that and now let me explain or share with you why I think it's important and what it means. This is probably my favorite go-to drawing of all time to explain and represent the power of a simple, simple picture. The square can be used to represent the world as we know it today. It's square and there's a lot we can go into, Daniel, about really, Carl Jung and the understanding of these sorts of shapes psychologically, what do they seem to mean to the collective mind?

Dan Roam:

A square seems to be a shape that represents something that is known and pretty well understood and stable. That square that we drew represents the world as we know it today. A triangle. Daniel, when a triangle appears in a formula, you just like physics. What does a delta mean? What does a triangle mean? What does it represent?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, delta is the Greek symbol for change. Usually, if you put one side a little thicker, that's like, yeah.

Dan Roam:

That's very fancy.

Daniel Stillman:

That's what makes it a delta.

Dan Roam:

We'll talk more about that. The triangle represents change. Now what you've done is you've drawn a picture that says there's the world as I know it, and I'm going to add change to it. When I do that, when I take my square and I add change, do I end up with another square on the other side?

Daniel Stillman:

No.

Dan Roam:

I do. I end up with something else. What might I end up with? Probably something quite different than where I began, a circle. This little drawing, the square, which is known, the triangle representing change, and the circle, which represents what's going to happen on the other side of that change, is a really lovely way to introduce almost any concept of change in a management consulting meeting.

Dan Roam:

Anytime someone's got a problem and you want to try to work with them to help them clarify it, you can start with this picture and say, what do we know about the world as it is? How well defined is your square? Great. You can write a whole bunch of things or draw other pictures and say, my business is perfect. It's highly optimized. Or, I know I'm losing revenue or I'm gaining market share, whatever it is, these are things that are known.

Dan Roam:

Okay, now let's talk for a moment what do we know about change? What's entering into your mind space or into your market space that might be causing you to think about things differently? There's a whole lot you can write there. There's no change in my industry or there's massive change or now that we've got COVID-19, everything's upside down, what have you.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dan Roam:

Then, on the other side of that, the circle. Say, okay, so now, let's brainstorm a bit. On the other side of that change, what might our world look like? What does that circle represent? You can write or draw. I've gone on for a little longer than I meant there, Daniel. It's simple picture. My favorite. Incredibly rich, no words required, just those three images. What do you think of that?

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, it's interesting because I drew that with you when I was sitting in your workshop at the CIS conference, which was like, again, super fun to draw with you. I'll be honest, at the time, I was like, okay. Now that I'm drawing it with you, I'm like, whoa, because, as I was drawing the circle, and maybe it's because I was just listening to your interview with Dave Gray. I think I learned from him, maybe I learned from you is that the idea of a circle being what's in and what's out, right, that's probably a little washed out.

Daniel Stillman:

The circle is really a fundamental idea of like, what is the whole that we're creating? What's not in that whole? It's just drawing a boundary, just drawing a circle is just ... it's strange how profound it is to say, this is what we're doing. Then, everything else we're not doing. This is and everything else is not.

Dan Roam:

Might we, Daniel, push that a little bit further?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

This could be a little philosophical but it's interesting, isn't it that planets are the shape of a circle? They're a sphere with three dimensional circle. Cells in the body tend to be generally circular if left ... anything in zero gravity, that is a liquid or a shape that has the ability to form itself is going to form a circle or a sphere, a three dimensional circle.

Dan Roam:

The circle really is the element of life. It really is. It represents a thing, an organism. By definition, that means there's something inside it and then there's everything that's outside it. It's really this most binary model of all. That's why I intentionally put the circle as where we're going because it's so open. It could be anything, anything.

Daniel Stillman:

The reason I wanted to ask you that is like I have two drawings of yours that I have doodled on here that were very seminal for me. Then, I'll loop back around to the Alex Osterwalder question because the look, see, imagine show diagram that you did in The Back of the Napkin. I don't know if that sparks in your brain, if you can see what I'm seeing of, here's just the world which is all these little shapes and many, many little ... there's disarray.

Daniel Stillman:

Then, seeing is finding order in that, imagining what could be where the white spaces are. Then, making an effort to show somebody what you're seeing. On the flipside of that drawing is the collect, layout, establish fundamental coordinates and visual triage diagram, like those two diagrams I've kept written on my heart for 10 years. The thing is that bottom up sense-making is really hard. It takes groups of people a lot of mental work to establish those fundamental coordinates and to practice visual triage and to make sense.

Daniel Stillman:

Top down is when somebody like you or Alex says, here are these four buckets, let's fill those four buckets. You help somebody's thinking. I think there's this fundamental tension I have as a consultant with people of getting them to create their own thing that they own and they really believe in. Because when they establish their own fundamental coordinates, they are bought in and they get it and it is theirs. Versus here's these four elements, let's get started.

Daniel Stillman:

I hold them in tension because Alex's Business Model canvas does not say, let's have a conversation of what you think the fundamental components of a business model are and let's really think about it and let's come up with your own framework for that. Then, let's change them. He's like hear the nine everyone, strap in, we're going for a ride. In Draw to Win, you're like, here are the four buckets, here's a PUMA, let's get going.

Dan Roam:

What a fabulous, fabulous insight. I would add a couple of thoughts to it. It has been my understanding learned that as the author of a book, the expectation is you provide the top down framework. That's what a book is. A book is not a conversation. A book is a lecture or a magic show or a presentation or a vaudeville routine, whatever it is. The book is you as the expert or you as the authors having a point of view and prescriptively telling the rest of us, here is a way to think about the world, that's what it is.

Dan Roam:

If you choose to take the path of writing a book, number one, you're going to need to have a point of view. Number two, you're going to need to have that framework, that top down. I hadn't thought about it in this way. I think your example, Alexander Osterwalder could have written a completely different book about how to build a business model canvas but he did not write. He said, "Myself and my friend, Yves, Yves Pigneur, have spent the last decade researching how businesses operate, business models, and we have come up with the co-authorship of many, many people around the world, this framework, it works, trust us, use it." He's turned out to be geniusly right.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dan Roam:

I want to talk just for a moment about frameworks, because that ... you were mentioning coordinate systems, coordinate systems frameworks to me. What I did not share with you when you were asking about my origin story is I have always built models and frameworks. As a kid, I built model airplanes. That was a way to interact with the world and make sense of it. That all I do to this day is really the same thing, building models of what we hear people talk about our systems within a business or an organization.

Dan Roam:

We're building a framework or a model. Often, I make them and I have some skill in doing that. You're right, because a truly interesting conversation workshop or problem solving session is where we do say let's create the framework together.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I think, there's something magical in giving somebody those fundamental coordinates. Because when you draw, the four story arcs in Draw to Win, really, you're not telling somebody about how to do every piece of their presentation, but you're saying here are these four fundamental ways that you can draw the arc of a conversation, right? That's helpful for people.

Dan Roam:

It is. I had feedback. I'm constantly, as you are, constantly revising the tools and doing presentations and collecting feedback. It's always an evolving process. I've recently, Daniel, started working with another client, a giant technology company here in the Bay Area, and introduced this idea of visual thinking as a problem solving tool with a 30-minute Zoom session that was very, very well attended and very, very well received and feedback was great.

Dan Roam:

Then a week later, additional feedback as people have reflected even more saying, "Hey, Dan, could you please have been more prescriptive?" "Could you have please just told us what picture to draw when?"

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dan Roam:

It's interesting because as all of us are so busy and so engaged in whatever it is that we need to do, our life, the problem we need to solve, the thing we need to move forward, it seems often what we're looking for is not necessarily someone to tell us what to do. Certainly, someone to give us another possible way to think about what to do, so we can put it in our toolkit and imagine, of all the things that I've been shown that ways to solve this, what would be a good one right now?

Dan Roam:

A tool, a hammer, doesn't normally present itself to you and say, how would you use me? A hammer says, this is how you use me. There is a specific act in your building of a house that's going to require a hammer. There's another act that's going to require a screwdriver and another act that's going to require a saw. Now, this is getting super philosophical, but that is what ... What I often hear from people who have a task to get done is, Dan, the best thing you could do is tell me which hammer to use and show me how to use it.

Dan Roam:

Again, it goes back to what is your role as an author? I think, Daniel, let me turn the question back around to you.

Daniel Stillman:

Sure.

Dan Roam:

You are a conversation starter and facilitator and guider. When you think about the difference between a top down solutioning mindset or a bottom up solutioning mindset, what is the essence of the question that you're after, do you think? Tell me a little bit about your thinking on the difference between those two? Because there's a framework right there.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, yeah. Exactly. I mean, I think, I came to design from physics and in industrial design, I discovered that I was much better at the research and the talking to people part. When I was working as a consultant, we had to make meaning, we had to tell a narrative we had to explain to our customers, here's what we're seeing in the market. Here's what we think people are doing.

Daniel Stillman:

To me, it feels more honest to look at the data and to enliven it. I actually have a quote here from your book that I think is, "A good report brings data to life. When we do a report right, we deliver more than just facts, we deliver them in a way that gives insight. It makes data memorable and makes our audience care." That takes work to do to hammer out data into information and insight. It's not data anymore. I think the IKEA effect is that people care about the ... we put the energy in and so we care more about it.

Daniel Stillman:

I've always found getting my clients to pick up the pen is profoundly impactful. I guess the question I have for us is, as consultants and educators because you do some of both, some of it is teaching and evoking and other times it's like it's getting them to pick up the pen. It's like, well, why are they paying you if they're doing the drawing? There is that sense of like it's all coming from them, the best stuff does come from them. That's what I love about the bottom up and to ask as much as possible to be an active listener.

Daniel Stillman:

At the same time, I think their intention, I don't think it's an either or. It's like at some point, it is helpful to be like, yes, and let's ... maybe if we push it in this way, it will help the conversation. I don't know if that's answering you but ...

Dan Roam:

Daniel, this is triggering something in my mind, I want to talk if you don't mind about another framework, because it does create that tension of we work from frameworks ... What I'm loving about where we're going with this and this is new thinking for me right now, is there is one act which is the act of distilling and creating a framework. Then, there's a second distinct act which is filling the framework in. Both are very valid and both have a different role to play.

Dan Roam:

Thinking about that, listening to you, what occurs to me is if you think about what Joseph Campbell did in his life, the uncovering and sort of the clarification of the monomyth, frequently referred to we all know as the hero's journey. It is in many ways, at this point, everybody's familiar with the hero's journey. It's become quite a trope. It's a really good one. It is the framework that appears to be very parallel in many, many of the great myths from all of human history. Not all of the myths, but many of those that have stood the test of time and continue to inform the stories we do now, we tell now.

Dan Roam:

It is a very, very simple framework and it is kind of an immutable framework. There are a series of steps that take place in a hero's journey. The beauty of that is we could either rework the journey, which is an interesting exercise that many people do. Or we could accept the journey, basically as articulated by Campbell and many others, and use it as the framework by which we create our story, which is of course, what everyone from George Lucas to JK Rowling to J.R.R. Tolkien knowing it or not knowing it, did.

Dan Roam:

They all follow exactly, their greatest works all follow exactly the same storyline to the letter, to the character, to the tee. Here's the thought. When you are telling a story, how often or when you are telling the story, Danielle, how often do you fall back upon a known framework of telling a story and just use that as a way to tell a great story versus how often do you fall back on rewriting the structure of the story? That's a question for you.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Right. That's a great question. It seems like what's the business of the moment, right? When it's about creating fresh insight and building something truly new, which some teams do, it's really important to, I think, start from the bottom and build up. Then, maybe the second phase is where you really want to have that fundamental physics of good storytelling. You don't want to necessarily reinvent storytelling unless you're a storytelling consultant.

Daniel Stillman:

Or you maybe want to iterate within the storytelling framework. Yeah, you just want to get down to the business of let's write a story, not, let's not think about the essence of a story.

Dan Roam:

It's funny because you're triggering me, you had quoted a little bit from the book Show and Tell which I wrote six or seven years ago now. What was really fun about that, the core framework of that book, you mentioned this thing called the PUMA, the presentations underlying messaging architecture, that's the acronym, the PUMA, the underlying architecture of the story you choose to tell. I worked and worked and chipped away. Again, in the creating of a framework, and it's kind of a framework of frameworks said, there are effectively four stories that you can tell.

Dan Roam:

Yeah. Anytime you make a blanket statement like that or you come up with a framework of frameworks, it's only going to come ... it's quite a rule, it's only going to cover 80% of the stuff. There are infinite number of other storylines you could tell but they do tend to be a little bit on the fringe. For the purposes of people who are going to buy and read a business book, they're looking for prescription, generally, they're looking for the hammer.

Dan Roam:

Here they are. You mentioned, we have a report, that's fine. Reports tend to not drive a lot of change in your audience. A report might as well just be a written document that's a pre read or something. There's really no point in presenting a report not much interesting is going to happen. Then, you have an explanation, which is really the telling of a story for the intention of specifically teaching someone how to do something. How to sail a boat? How to tie a knot? How to cook an omelet?

Dan Roam:

The steps are pretty well known. There is a series of steps that you can go through. It's not necessarily emotionally exciting, but most stuff that we just need to learn in order to know it isn't always very emotionally exciting like math, there's a series of steps. Then, the third one would be the pitch. The pitch is kind of interesting because what the pitch is it says, hey, we have a problem. I think I have a solution to it. Let me toss you this ball and see if you can catch it and if that means something to you. Do we agree that that was a great way to do it? The pitch is obviously the sales pitch type thing.

Dan Roam:

Then, the fourth framework is back to this monomyth. I just called it the drama. The drama is the ultimate presentation storyline to evoke someone's emotional response. It is exactly, it is Joseph Campbell's monomyth. If you want to evoke an emotional response, an essentially guaranteed way to do that is to tell a story that says, this is us and everything's pretty good today. Boom, some really terrible thing has just happened and because of that, we have stumbled and fallen.

Dan Roam:

As we are falling, as inevitably happens, we accelerate downward and things get worse and worse and worse. Until finally, we're at this point where everything is so bad, we might as well just die. It's all over. It's finished. At that moment, in that pit of despair, some voice comes back into our mind out of a mentor, perhaps a spiritual guide, perhaps it's an ancient memory, something comes back that says, not today. Today, I'm not going to let this thing kill me.

Dan Roam:

It is that moment, that reflection, that spark from inside or from out that allows us to get a foot underneath ourselves and start to stand up again. As we begin to stand up, we begin to accelerate back in the opposite direction, back towards the surface, back upwards. As we do that, one good thing falls into alignment after the next after the next. Before we know it, we push, zoom, come right back across out of the surface and fly higher than we ever were at the beginning.

Dan Roam:

Even Daniel, I'm done. Even telling that, just like that as generic as it was, I'm giving myself goosebumps.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I'm re-watching half a dozen Pixar movies because there's always that moment ...

Dan Roam:

All of them. Always. All of them, all of the greats, yes, yes ...

Daniel Stillman:

When all hope is lost one tiny glimmer explodes into ...

Dan Roam:

It's that little spark. That is that ...

Daniel Stillman:

Is that teachable? Do you think? I know this is what you profess as some of what you do is to teach people that, the ability to create drama is obviously an important skill for a leader, a facilitator, anybody who's trying to create change. It is not a trivial skill. Do you think that even if you give somebody the framework, the fundamental coordinates of drama, can they follow the instructions and create drama?

Dan Roam:

Absolutely. I can say that with 100% confidence, Daniel, because that is one of the things in my workshops that I do is working with typically fairly senior people in large organizations, sometimes small organizations. The funnest thing that I've ever done in facilitating or training or working with teams is showing people that drama framework, which I didn't make up, nor did Joseph Campbell.

Daniel Stillman:

It's physics.

Dan Roam:

You're right, it's underlying physics. The physics of narrative when audiences ... it's like revealing the ultimate magic trick. It always works. It always works. It always evokes an emotional response. Yes, to your question, is it teachable? Absolutely. You can break the hero's journey down into a discrete number of steps. You can identify the archetype characters that you probably want to introduce at each one of those steps, the typical turns of the story, and you can reveal them relatively easily. We're all familiar with some of the same really great tales and movies.

Dan Roam:

I have seen business audiences for whom, yeah, this is another facilitation session, I'll check the box, I've done my learning and development, my professional education for the quarter. When you have shown people this drama map and ask them to take a business problem that they have, a business problem, I can't figure out the code to finish my game or we're running out of money or we need to reallocate resources or we need to create a new organizational structure.

Dan Roam:

Tell it to me in the form of a drama. Oh my gosh, people do not want to leave the room. That's all they want to do is tell that story and then allow them to share it. There were tears, people are crying over the story of the installation of a new ERP system. Actually, that makes sense because installing a new ERP system always makes people cry.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a fundamental human drama retold.

Dan Roam:

Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a timeless tale.

Dan Roam:

I really appreciate your question because I just feel the passion coming up in me. Yes, the hero's journey, the monomyth, the drama is absolutely a teachable skill. It is once taught something people never forget and extraordinarily powerful.

Daniel Stillman:

This is really interesting because I want to reframe this because you as a facilitator and a trainer, I'm looking through these four types, the report, just A to B, the explanation, the pitch and the drama. It seems like at least three of those four might need to be alternated and pulled from your toolbox over the course of one session with a group that you sometimes do need to explain and maybe sometimes even pitch an idea to them and to lay out the drama for them as well. I don't know if that's a question. I just realized that.

Daniel Stillman:

I've been thinking about the components, the elements, the fundamental jobs of a facilitator. I had never thought about explaining this dramatic role is really critical. You can deliver that drama. It's a skill you have. You can explain things clearly and succinctly. I quoted a part of a book that you wrote seven years ago and it came out if you like nothing. It's clear to me. What other fundamental coordinates are there, do you think that you think you're drawing from as Dan Roam the facilitator and an educator and consultant, what are your fundamental coordinates in terms of how you're showing up in the room?

Dan Roam:

Yeah, what a fabulous question. It is an evolution from me. I'm trying really hard to improve this. I see it in your work. I was looking through some of your Medium posts and looking through your website and some of the tools you offer. I see this reflected in there as well. The trick for an author is that as we were talking about what is the purpose of a book, a box of knowledge is you must have a point of view. You must be opinionated. You must provide a framework. That's what the book does.

Dan Roam:

By virtue of doing that, it does become about you. There is not an author on the planet for whom the book is not about them. The fundamental question is as a facilitator, are you positioning yourself as a teacher or as an instigator or as an enabler, they're all legitimate. There's a time for every one of them. What I'm trying to do is really think through perhaps better than I have in the past, it really isn't about me. I'm in the room because I wrote a book or have a reputation for something that someone might find meaningful. That's the reason you're invited.

Dan Roam:

You have to keep that in mind. I have seen facilitators who come in and say, okay, what do you want to do today? Tell me what your problem is. That's fine. That works. To me, that falls a little flat. Wait, we already know why you're here. You're here to elucidate us. That's why we've asked you to come. The needle that needs to be threaded by the thoughtful facilitator is the balance between when is it about me and the message I want to share with you? When does that shift to it really being about you and the value you are going to get from this for yourself?

Dan Roam:

It's not easy and there's no great answer. That is the space that I'm really trying to work now. To balance being a good speaker and an even better listener and to have that be true, is really hard. That's the work for me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I feel that. I struggle with this too because expertise is what gets you in the room. Pulling things out of them is what widens it up for me. Tell us exactly how to do it.

Dan Roam:

Then, add into that. I hear you Daniel. I think you're right. I think there's a third stage there. You're invited in because you've got expertise so share it with us. Now pull out of us, says the audience, our work but leave us with us feeling that it's truly ours and something has changed in our life. To shift it from being about the presenter to truly being about, we'll call it the participant, but the attendee.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Dan Roam:

Who's then going to leave that meeting or that workshop and hopefully go do something different that's valuable for them and pass that along. That third step is the trickiest one and yet when you do it right, as the facilitator, I will share one story with you. I do a lot of full day workshops at substantial organizations. I would think they're paying me and sometimes as the facilitator, you think it's kind of like you're being paid by the pound. How much knowledge did you leave on the table today? You're right for that.

Dan Roam:

I'll tell you the thing that was interesting that was the big breakthrough, probably five or six years ago, was the more time you spend silent in the latter half of a workshop, the better the workshop is. In the opening quarter or the opening half, you must provide the content. That's why you're there. Once you've provided it, provide less than you think you need to and intentionally design the second half of the day to be one in which you say almost nothing.

Dan Roam:

If you do that, your ranking as a facilitator is going to go up. It's the weirdest thing. You think, but I didn't even say anything in the last half of the day and now I'm getting fives across the board. Yes. I'm talking a lot, but it's the same idea that the best interview is the one in which you get the interviewer to talk about themselves. It's so funny because we all think that we were listened to really well and that's very valuable.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

That's what we want. We want to be listened to really well.

Daniel Stillman:

Dan, we're getting close to the end of our time. There's two questions. I don't know if we'll have time for both of them. One is what haven't I asked you that I should have asked you. Also like, how can people find more things Dan Roam, your live sketching, your next book, I want to hang out for that. Did I say that correctly? People can hang out and draw with you while you write your next book?

Dan Roam:

I am. I'm writing a new book. It's called the Pop Up Pitch. In two hours, create the 10 pages that will transform your audience. It's a cookbook. It's another framework. It's a very specific framework. I'm writing it together at this point with about 180 other people that have joined me online and we get together once a month. It's called Draw with Dan season two on thenapkinacademy.com.

Dan Roam:

If anybody's interested in pursuing that, napkinacademy.com, Draw with Dan season two. We're not co-writing the book. I'm writing the book, but along the way, everybody else is writing their book too.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah.

Dan Roam:

It's quite fascinating. I really appreciate that, Daniel. I'm going to have to roll off here too.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, it's time.

Dan Roam:

I so appreciate your time and letting me share some of my thinking. If we wanted to have one, should we do one closing thought? What have you not asked that would have been great to talk about?

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. For our next conversation.

Dan Roam:

We'll leave it for our next conversation is hey, Dan, what is the 10 page pitch? Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Okay.

Dan Roam:

We'll leave that for next time because it is the ultimate framework combining to your earlier point, all four of the different storylines. Combine them into one storyline to rule them all. It is the infallible. If you don't know how to tell your story, tell it like this and it will work.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Dan, thank you so much. People should definitely check out The Napkin Academy. It's shocking how much great stuff there's there without even having to pay you anything. There's also some great courses. I'm taking your online meeting magic and I'm enjoying it.

Dan Roam:

Good. I'm glad. Thank you.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you.

Dan Roam:

As we've all locked ourselves at home during this COVID time, it's been a great opportunity for those of us that are ... all of us content creators to take more time to create more really, really, really good stuff because what else have we got to do? It's been, in its own way, a good time. It's a lot challenging but it's given us some good opportunity.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. No, I agree with you. Dan, honestly, it's a real privilege. It's a joy. Thank you so much for your time and sharing so much of your hard won visual triage wisdom.

Dan Roam:

Thank you for listening, Daniel. I really appreciate it.


The Future of Work

Season_Four_Image_stack_DM.jpg

Diane Mulcahy is an advisor to both Fortune 500 companies and startups, is a regular contributor to Forbes and is the author of the bestselling book “The Gig Economy: The Complete Guide to Getting Better Work, Taking More Time Off, and Financing the Life You Want”

Diane was early to the party: When she started teaching MBA students a course on these ideas, some people thought she was talking about Computer Memory. But what made me really want to talk to her was how she decided to go deeper into the topic via teaching - one of the most powerful ways to learn anything! And then to learn more about how she helps organizations work with these trends, rather than against them - I wanted to learn about her approach as a coach and advisor. And you can see, her secret is slowing down conversations.

The future of work is more than gigs on Lyft and Uber or Taskrabbit. 

Barbara Soalheiro, of the consultancy Mesa, in our conversation on the podcast back in season three posited that the best and the brightest wouldn’t want a full time job in the future...which is why she’s designed her innovation sprints to be one week - to help brands bring the best brains in for short sprints.

This is why Diane finds tremendous opportunities to coach and advise organizations to adapt to and survive this transition in what people want from work.

Traditional orgs need to put significant effort into shifting their cultures on:

Trust in Management- Facetime isn’t the same as work (ie, Clock and Chair Management doesn’t work in this new world - for more on this, check out Diane’s Forbes article on Trust)

Projects over Jobs - Define clear outcomes and break up jobs into clear projects and deliverables.

Processes and Systems - Internal systems have to adjust to be more nimble and customer-grade.

We talk about the importance of slowing conversations down when there’s internal resistance:

Diane relates her sense that Orgs seem to be saying.

“We know these things are happening. We know we have to respond," 

...but then it turns out, they want to respond without really changing anything. Diane points out that that's not possible.

The way through is patient conversation, and Diane gives me some deep pointers on shifting challenging conversations with silence.

We also reminisce about travel and I try to get her to tell me what her next forward thinking, trend-setting MBA course will be on...spoiler alert: It’s about the future of food, a critical industry, ripe with challenges that were laid bare at the start of the pandemic.

Learn more about Diane at dianemulcahy.com where you can find links to her other books (she also writes about venture investing) and to many of her online articles.

Links, Quotes, Notes and Resources

More about Diane on her site

Diane’s excellent book on the gig economy

Diane’s Interview with Nayla Bahari on Career Resilience

Nancy McGaw from the Aspen Institute on Powerful Questions and Powerful Silence

On the tension between knowledge and action in orgs...and the need from internal champions:

14:47

“We know these things are happening. We know we have to respond," but then it turns out, they want to respond without really changing anything. That's not possible.

15:52

There's really an opportunity within most companies to step up and be the person who becomes the intrapreneur, the person who says, "Look, these are the trends that are going on in the world. Here's all of the data that suggests that moving in this direction, hiring independent workers, opening ourselves up to the idea of remote and distributed workers, can bring enormous benefits.

19:50

On silence and getting the best details from people if you let them finish their arc

I have always been like that. I think it really comes from, one, being an introvert, somebody who is quiet perhaps to begin with and, two, I was a psychology major in college and I've always just been really interested in other people and hearing what they have to say. I love hearing people talk about issues that are important to them. I like to let them … People do talk in an arc, and if they aren't interrupted, often the best information comes at the end. If you're willing to just, again, sit in silence and let the answer play out, it's a much better answer often.

27:35

On the importance of taking time away from work

I did one year in college. I did one year in my early 30s, just dropped everything and went off to travel around the world in both years. I've also taken shorter periods of time off to do other things that were interesting to me, but I feel like those are the times when you put yourself in a position to absorb a lot of new information, gather a lot of new input, connect new dots, understand new frameworks. When you come back, you're much richer for it. Your thinking has expanded. It's more creative. It's refreshed. It's rejuvenated. It has new input in its current input. I think you're the better for it. I feel the better for it.


Full Transcription


Daniel Stillman:

Well, then, I'll kick things off. I will officially welcome you to the Conversation Factory. Diane Mulcahy, he thank you for making the time. I really appreciate it.


Diane Mulcahy:

Thank you for having me.


Daniel Stillman:

I want to start at the beginning like way, way back, because I feel like when people ask you about your book, The Gig Economy, it starts with the MBA course, but I want to know, how did you decide to do a course about that? What was emerging for you at that moment because that was a long time ago?


Diane Mulcahy:

It was. In the life of The Gig Economy, it was back at the birth. If you want to go all the way back to the beginning, I think the idea of The Gig Economy had been floating around in my mind without a label, really since I started working. Like a lot of college graduates, my first job was in consulting. I remember thinking, compared to college, I really did not enjoy many things about traditional office-based work and I always had in mind that, "Wouldn't it be great if there was a way of working that looked a lot more like college in the sense that you could have variety, you could be working on different projects, you could be challenging yourself in different ways? Wouldn't that be more interesting than having one steady job that you went to everyday?"


Diane Mulcahy:

That idea took hold very early on and just got parked on the back burner until much later when I was reading an article and I came across this term, the gig economy. I have one of those moments where I had little goose bumps on my arms and I just felt like that is the thing that I have been thinking about since I started working. Really within a week, I had a draft syllabus. The reason that I went in the direction of a syllabus is that it was a completely new and nascent trend. There was nothing out there on it, right? There was nothing to read. There was no source to go to.


Diane Mulcahy:

I had been teaching at the time and I thought, "Wouldn't that be a great way to iterate on this idea, like be in a classroom, be interacting with students, be in a university setting? What a great way to evolve my thinking about this topic?" That's how it all started was just creating this class as a way to further explore the idea that was very, very new.


Daniel Stillman:

That's so interesting that that was your … I think that's my response sometimes as well. It's like, "Okay, let's learn about it together, learning by teaching." I was looking at your LinkedIn profile and I saw that you are a first-generation college student. You belong to a, I guess, an organization at Harvard that was about that. How does a first-generation college student wind up teaching at a business school? That's an amazing leap.


Diane Mulcahy:

Yeah. I'm not even sure how to answer that question really.


Daniel Stillman:

Maybe it's not a question. Maybe, I'm just high fiving you.


Diane Mulcahy:

Thank you. I appreciate that. That's really nice.


Daniel Stillman:

It says something to me and what I'm just absorbing is your pattern-finding brain because you don't just teach you, you write a lot. I think what I'm trying to tease out is this process that you're going through of finding patterns and naming patterns as well and to tighten and elucidate them. I just think it's a very interesting component of what I'm observing as your psychology. Again, not a question. Just a comment.


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, I think what's so interesting about that is the timing is everything. One of my observations about my foray into the gig economy was that I was a little bit on the early side. When I first started teaching the course, people used to think it was a computer science class. They would say, "Oh, are you teaching something about gigabytes? What is this thing that you're talking about?" That's how you would do a Google search and there would be like one entry and that was it. By the time I had taught for a few years and then wrote the book, my timing was really spot on in terms of releasing the book, and then, it really did become a thing that everybody is talking about. Of course, now in the midst of this pandemic with remote work and people getting furloughed and laid off and working differently, it's incredibly relevant.


Daniel Stillman:

Now, I know you advise companies in this stuff. What are you finding that companies need to know that they don't know about this?


Diane Mulcahy:

I would characterize the advisory work I do in three main areas. One area is around remote work. It's really companies trying to come to, and this could be startup companies or large companies, but really trying to come to grips with the processes and the structures that they need to have in place in order to effectively recruit and manage a distributed workforce. That's one area. Another area is really around talent, and for companies that have relied entirely on a workforce of full-time employees, but are now thinking, "I'd like to incorporate some independent workers. I can see where having the ability to access the exact talent that I need when I need it would be beneficial to the company," but they really don't have any idea about how to work with independent workers.


Diane Mulcahy:

Again, it's just thinking through, "What are the processes? What are the tools? What are the structures? How do we do this best in a way that doesn't require reinventing the wheel?" I work with them on that. Then most interestingly to me anyways or most unexpectedly is that I've done a number of projects with companies that are really what I would call products strategy, where they're saying, "We see independent workers as a customer and we know that they need different kinds of products, whether it's insurance products or financial services products than traditional workers. We just want to try to figure out what exactly they need, what are their pain points and how can we help them solve the problems that they have in their life."


Daniel Stillman:

Like serving that audience.


Diane Mulcahy:

Yes.


Daniel Stillman:

Then reimagining how they structure their internal processes to be able to think about work in a different way. I love in your, in your book, you talk about this spectrum of work where on one hand, there's unemployed, and on the other side, there's this corporate ladder-climbing person and one side of that spectrum still exists and the other side of that spectrum exists less and less and everything else is kind In the middle, where you're working part time, you're working flex time, you're doing a side job. It seems like more and more companies do need to be investing in this reality. How should organizations be investing in this future of work? Because this is what we're talking about. This is where things are. It sounds like where things are going to continue to go. How should organizations be investing in their infrastructure and their way of thinking about the nature of work to continue to be able to tap, as you say, actual talent?


Diane Mulcahy:

There are a couple of steps that organizations can take if they're early on in adapting to the future of work which is really the now of work. One is spending some time changing their mindset. That's really the biggest issue. If I talk to CHROS or something or the C-suite at a company, it's trying to understand what their mindset is, "Are they willing to let go and incorporate independent or distributed workers into their workforce? Do they have the trust? Do they have the clarity into the work that they need to get done and the results that they want to generate to be able to work with distributed and independent workers? Do they have the management talent?" That's often where it falls apart. Even if the C-suite is completely convinced about the benefits of a different kind of workforce, oftentimes managers find it really difficult to change their management style to manage those kind of workers and then it becomes really difficult to implement.


Diane Mulcahy:

I think mindset is the first step and the biggest step. Then after that, it's easier it's execution. It's thinking about, "What are the processes we need to put in place? What are the tools? How do we make sure we preserve culture? How do we make sure that we have some centralized control in terms of standardized onboarding, standardized contracts, rapid payment, debriefing, making sure that we keep a network of independent workers that have worked well for us?" It's really just getting into the operational aspects of it.


Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting because there are these two real important sides. One is this digital transformation side of, "Do we even know how to …" I'm sure you've been on the other side of this like, "We need to get you into our internal system," and it's an absurd headache. I've been paid months after I've done work with clients just because literally getting in the system takes months and it blows my mind that the infrastructure of a company is so antiquated. Digital transformation is nontrivial, but this other side of trust and redesigning work into tasks, projects, needs and to rethink management, those are not trivial problem-solving skills.


Daniel Stillman:

Also, if you're listening at home, I just want to point out that Diane is an online meeting pro. She just muted herself while she coughed. If you didn't know that, that was a thing. It's a thing. Manage yourselves, people. Sorry, it's just everyone always asked me about remote work and I feel like I just need to point out the basics from time to time. Mute yourself if you know you're going to cough.


Diane Mulcahy:

That's good.


Daniel Stillman:

Should I? I'll loop back around, how do you help with these stickier pieces because it is hard to change those things, it's hard to shift the needle on trust?


Diane Mulcahy:

It's incredibly hard. I think the most effective way to change the mindset is to put it explicitly on the table. It's really just sitting down with teams and saying, "Look, if this is an issue, if you have somebody who is a micromanager, if you have somebody who is unwilling to let people work from home a day or two a week, you have some issues with either management style and/or trust. How do you work through that?" One is naming it. Naming it and putting it on the table for discussion. Then, the second, really what I have found effective, is to just engage in almost like a Socratic dialogue where you're really trying to understand, "Where is this person's thought process and mindset coming from? What is it that they're worried about?"


Diane Mulcahy:

Because generally, when people exhibit a lack of trust when they are micromanagers, that stems from some kind of fear, "What are they afraid of? What do they think their employees are going to do when they are working at home? What do they think is going to happen if they're not controlling everything?" and just trying to get underneath that. Some companies are better at dealing with that than others. They have executive coaches. They have other resources to help managers shift how they think about work, but it is a real change. It's a behavioral change. It does take time and effort at the end of the day,


Daniel Stillman:

Is that a part of what you do that you enjoy? Do you enjoy helping companies with that mindset shift? Of all the things you do, is that something that's like, "Yeah, that's"-


Diane Mulcahy:

I do enjoy it. I enjoy pushing the thinking. To me, watching somebody's thinking evolve and get past their current, their baseline comfort zone and getting them to a place that feels larger and more expansive is really satisfying. Equally, it's frustrating if I'm engaged with an individual or a company that is very set in their ways and not interested in evolving. That can be frustrating.


Daniel Stillman:

Especially since they called you. They're like-


Diane Mulcahy:

Or they're like, "We know these things are happening. We know we have to respond," but then it turns out, they want to respond without really changing anything. That's not possible.


Daniel Stillman:

No, it's not. Can you give us the illusion of addressing this challenge? I imagine that you give keynote speeches. That's one way that companies, we all participate in this, it's innovation or change management theater of like, "Hey, so we've got Diane in. She's going to give a talk and we're doing something about this thing," but that's obviously not enough, although it's a good start. People should definitely hire you to give a keynote speech, not arguing against that, whatsoever. I looked at your website. They all sound like really amazing topics and I'm sure you enjoy giving those talks. What's the next step that HR leaders and managers should be taking after they bring you in? What's the next step in the conversation?


Diane Mulcahy:

That's such a great question. What does Monday morning look like? I think for HR, well, really, whether it's an HR executive or whether it's somebody else from the C-suite, the next step is to really decide … There's really an opportunity within most companies to step up and be the person who becomes the intrapreneur, the person who says, "Look, these are the trends that are going on in the world. Here's all of the data that suggests that moving in this direction, hiring independent workers, opening ourselves up to the idea of remote and distributed workers, can bring enormous benefits. It can help us win the war for talent. It can help make us more efficient. It can help give us the skills and the expertise we need when we need it. It makes it much more cost effective for us to be able to step up and step out lots of data and reasons why this can be beneficial."


Diane Mulcahy:

Then, being the person that says, "I want to really run with this and here's the plan of what we need to do." Again, that plan is both thinking about what the mindset is and the culture and shifting that to accommodate this new way of working as well as attending to the operational aspects of changing your workforce.


Daniel Stillman:

You really need that internal champion of the thing to be taking it up.


Diane Mulcahy:

I think that's true.


Daniel Stillman:

I want to roll back to the moment, you're talking about the joy of pushing somebody's thinking and expanding their mindset. I'm wondering, my ax to grind is that we're designing our conversations all the time. How do you plan as a coach? There's plenty of people who listen to this who are trying to do more coaching in their role. I'm curious, what's your conversational superpower? How do you feel like you help people rotate their thinking and to coach people out of one way of thinking and into another?


Diane Mulcahy:

I'm not sure I've thought of it as a superpower, but I think in general, what works is asking good questions and listening. I am not afraid of silence. I think that that is really powerful in a conversation with somebody who is in the process of assimilating information that can shift the way they think. It doesn't happen rapid fire. This isn't a game of verbal volleyball. A lot of time these, these conversations are slower moving. They're reflective and people have to pull their thoughts together. You have to give space for people not to be reactive but rather to be thoughtful. Listening and being okay with that silence and that slow moving I think is really powerful because it's unusual.


Diane Mulcahy:

When you ask somebody a question and then it becomes clear that you're not going to say anything else until they answer it, you get a different answer than if you just realize, "Wow, that question is maybe a little bit uncomfortable. I'm going to paper over that. I'm going to rephrase it and make it easier or I'm going to just talk over it," which I think is a tendency.


Daniel Stillman:

Yes, it is. It's interesting. I've had some people on who talked about how my friend Nancy McGaw from the Aspen Institute talks about how powerful questions need powerful silence. How did you develop that skill? I'll be honest, I'm noticing that about you. There's some people, us Jews, for example, we do what's called collaborative overlap where we don't really let the other person finish their sentence because we're so helpful. How did you develop your … You have a more centered and silent style. Where do you think that came from? That's really interesting. I have noticed that about you just in the short time we spent together.


Diane Mulcahy:

I have always been like that. I think it really comes from, one, being an introvert, somebody who is quiet perhaps to begin with and, two, I was a psychology major in college and I've always just been really interested in other people and hearing what they have to say. I love hearing people talk about issues that are important to them. I like to let them … People do talk in an arc, and if they aren't interrupted, often the best information comes at the end. If you're willing to just, again, sit in silence and let the answer play out, it's a much better answer often.


Daniel Stillman:

I'm just practicing more silence, Diane.


Diane Mulcahy:

How is that going for you? It looks uncomfortable on the video.


Daniel Stillman:

It's tough. Well, it's interesting because this morning, I was interviewing Liz Stokoe. I think I might be mispronouncing her last name. She's also a former psychologist, conversation analyst, and interviewing her, she's rapid fire. It's a very different experience. I think I had a revelation while you were talking, I think of myself as an introverted extrovert. I don't necessarily understand the mind of the true introvert. I guess I feel like if there's a spectrum of work, I think everything's a spectrum usually. True extroverts are terrible people and true introverts are also terrible people, people who are just only interested in outward and people who are only interested in maybe themselves. I've never really thought of an introvert, and this is embarrassing, I'm saying this out loud, introverts as other-directed, right? The idea that an introvert can also be fundamentally curious about the inner lives of others is fasting fascinating to me.


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, introverts are a broad range of people. I don't mean to generalize, but that's definitely true for me. I'm absolutely curious. I think that's why I interview people and write about them. I think it really stems from, "I know my own thoughts on this, but I'm always curious what would somebody else say?" and I love to try to understand that.


Daniel Stillman:

Actually, I'm glad you brought up your writing because I was hoping to transition to, because you're fairly prolific, can you talk a little bit about your approach to writing, how you go from that interview to creating a perspective on the thing?


Diane Mulcahy:

I would say I do two kinds of writing. One is writing that is ideas, just so articles about things that I think and they almost feel like things that I have to get out because as any writer will tell you, writing is not pleasant. If I could avoid it, I probably would, but these are things I feel really compelled to write about. Interviews in many ways are easier because I generally am able to identify a topic that I think is really interesting, but then my role in writing up an interview is to represent what somebody else says for the most part. Usually, I've interviewed them because I think they have an interesting perspective. That's generally easier and the process of writing those kinds of articles is fun because you do get to have the conversation and then reflect on the topic. Generally speaking, if you're interested in something and you talk to somebody else about it, somebody else who is informed or who has an interesting way of thinking or a different perspective, it advances your own thinking. It's really a win-win as those kinds of articles.


Daniel Stillman:

That's one of the reasons why I do this podcast. It literally forces me to learn and I think this verbal process of engaging with somebody consolidates my thoughts. It makes me read your book without the pressure and shame of facing you. It'd be hard to get around to doing it. I feel like I would be remiss because I'm looking at my notes from your interview with Nayla where you interviewed her about the skills that are required to succeed in this gig economy. I feel like since we are all actually living in it, you and me included, I looked at these and I just thought they were just good human skills. What have you learned, not just from Nayla, but from other people, what does it take for all of us to thrive in this large spectrum, this uncertain future of work?


Diane Mulcahy:

I think what was so interesting about my conversation with Nayla, who I interviewed and wrote about in Forbes, is that her research indicated that the way that we should respond to changes in the way that we work, whether it's getting laid off or transitioning to working independently, is counterintuitive. What her research found is that things like having a reflective practice and spending time doing things that are joyful, that are nourishing, that are creative are important to the process of getting to a place where you will thrive. It was really powerful when she said that 100% of the people that had been laid off and ended up in a better situation, 100%, had some sort of reflective practice. I think that's so counterintuitive. It's like the conversational style.


Diane Mulcahy:

So many of us feel like, "I have to be doing. I have to be busy. I have to be productive. I have to have my nose to the keyboard if I'm really going to be serious about doing something." I think her research is so illuminating by saying, "No, that's not the right way. There is room to create time and space for reflection, for doing things that feel really nurturing to you personally, that fill you up, that give you the energy to be able to then put your nose to the keyboard and there really is a balance. Going 100% all day is not the answer, even though intuitively many of us have absorbed that message and feel like that is the way.


Daniel Stillman:

How is that true for you in your own practice?


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, in my own life and career, I've always needed a lot of time and space to do things that are different, right? This need for variety and change is something that you're hearing coming through. I have taken two separate years off ditching my life and saying, " I'm taking a break."


Daniel Stillman:

Wow.


Diane Mulcahy:

I did one year in college. I did one year in my early 30s, just dropped everything and went off to travel around the world in both years. I've also taken shorter periods of time off to do other things that were interesting to me, but I feel like those are the times when you put yourself in a position to absorb a lot of new information, gather a lot of new input, connect new dots, understand new frameworks. When you come back, you're much richer for it. Your thinking has expanded. It's more creative. It's refreshed. It's rejuvenated. It has new input in its current input. I think you're the better for it. I feel the better for it.


Daniel Stillman:

Where did you travel on that second trip? I just miss traveling. I want to hear-


Diane Mulcahy:

I know.


Daniel Stillman:

Let's talk about traveling for one second.


Diane Mulcahy:

It's so hard. I traveled with my husband and we decided to go to places that were hard to do in a normal life. We went to Asia to start and traveled all around Asia. We based out of Bangkok but traveled everywhere. Then, we went to Africa for two months, and then, we went to Australia for two months.


Daniel Stillman:

Favorite Place in Asia? I know these are impossible questions, but I'm going to ask these anyway. Totally relevant because I miss-


Diane Mulcahy:

I love Bangkok. I've been back several times. My husband spent some time there when he was a kid. I love Bangkok. It's a great city. An amazing culture. So incredibly exotic. Friendly. So different.


Daniel Stillman:

And delicious.


Diane Mulcahy:

And delicious.


Daniel Stillman:

I lived in Bangkok for, I don't know, almost a month while I waiting for a friend to show up and go to another country with me. I was eating noodles in the back corner, and then, there's like an Indian temple around the corner that was having festivals like every other week. It's truly extraordinary …


Diane Mulcahy:

It is.


Daniel Stillman:

… and diverse place.


Diane Mulcahy:

It's marvelous. It's a marvelous place.


Daniel Stillman:

What do you feel were some of the insights that you took into your next phase from that time?


Diane Mulcahy:

I think I really came back with just a much more global perspective that was informed by, one, the lived experience and, two, by the real world. I've never been much of a history buff, but when I went to China, I couldn't stop reading about Mao and that whole cultural revolution, I was fascinated. I would say, for every country that I went to, we went to Vietnam and I was like, "Wait, I need to revisit the Vietnam War because I feel like that was lost over in my AP US history class." It sparks interests that I think school might not have sparked because you're there. You're looking around. You're seeing what the environment was, where these events took place and it becomes much more of an interesting lively situation to look into.


Diane Mulcahy:

I felt so much better informed in a way of things that I had missed from formal study. I just feel like that brings a different perspective. After visiting China, I never looked at leadership the same way. These all become dots that you start connecting differently and integrating into what you already know.


Daniel Stillman:

Something that's just bubbling up for me is as we zoom back and think about the global perspective, the gig economy can look different from wherever you are in the world. There's definitely, I use Upwork and tap into a global network of freelancers to help me do my work. When I look at the pricing structures, there's people in parts of Europe that charge very differently than other parts of Europe. Then, there's people in Asia and India and all over, and then there's the gig economy in the United States. It seems like in one level, the gig economy is about privilege, but on the other hand, it's also about access because there seems to be this interesting tension and what it is depending on where you're looking at it from.


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, I definitely think it's about access. I think even within the US, what you're seeing is labor markets becoming much more distributed and what technology like Upwork is doing is removing the friction, around transacting with labor that previously would have been fairly inaccessible. If you're looking for somebody in the US to edit an article, you can pay somebody in New York, with their experience in their prices or somebody in Idaho that may look very different. I don't know if that's not a guarantee but on average. It allows for a wider selection.


Diane Mulcahy:

You can more specifically find the tradeoff between skills or quality and price that you're looking for because you do have this broad access and that's what companies are finding. They can access the precise skills at the price that they're willing to pay because now, they're not just looking in their local labor market where some skills might be in short supply or prices might be high. They're able to expand beyond that and decide for themselves what is the tradeoff they're willing to make. Are they willing to hire somebody with maybe less experience or less expertise or less formal training, but at a lower price or do they really want to look nationally to find the expert, the person Who's at the top of the field and then pay them whatever it is they charge? The choice is now available to everybody in a way that it never used to be.


Daniel Stillman:

We can really in a way design our workflow. I know I've worked with teams at some large global consulting firms that will remain nameless where they actually really enjoy, and it baffles my mind, but the 24-hour cycle of work. Because if you're in the United States of America, you can send something off to India, and then, India works and they send it back to you. Asia and the US can have the sort of seesaw continuous work versus wanting somebody that is if you are in Asia, that is in Asia, where you want to have on-demand access to them during waking hours.


Daniel Stillman:

I had somebody who was in Singapore who came to one of my facilitation master classes and I was like, "Oh, my god. This is from midnight to 3:00 AM for you," but he was like, "No, I really want to do this." I was like, "Okay, that's great." That's crazy. It's really interesting that there's this opportunity for companies to design how they collaborate and cocreate.


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, and it's no secret that companies value the arbitrage in time zones too, right?


Daniel Stillman:

Right.


Diane Mulcahy:

Those same consulting firms all have research staff and document production staff in Asia because when the US and Europe can send it when they're leaving and an Asia is just starting. It is a 24 hour work cycle for these companies. They now have access to that in a way that they didn't before.


Daniel Stillman:

Do you leverage that side of the gig economy? Obviously, we're all in it, but are you a consumer of gig folk and I'm curious how you make your team-


Diane Mulcahy:

Absolutely. I walk the talk. I walk the talk. I absolutely am. When I wrote my book, it was with all independent and largely remote workers, some of whom, I found them through different channels, but everybody was independent. I didn't have an employee. I worked with gig economy workers for everything from editing, to research, to graphic design, to helping me with social media, to my website design, to PR. Every part of that process from writing the book, to launching it, to post-launch, I used … The team changed and I think I'm also a case study of, "Access the exact talent when you need it." I didn't need a PR person until after the launch, but I need a research assistant before the launch. I'm able to go out and find the skills and the experience that I needed when I needed it.


Daniel Stillman:

That's amazing. I want to leave as much time as possible for this conversation about women in the gig economy. You have a series on Forbes where you write about this. Does the gig economy affect women differently? If so, why and how? In the interest of diversity and equity, I'm curious to unpack that a little bit.


Diane Mulcahy:

People ask me this question in some form or another frequently and it usually is around, "Does this make it easier for women to stay home and raise a family?" is what underlies it.


Daniel Stillman:

That's not what I am asking, but-


Diane Mulcahy:

Well, in the sense of, "Does it help women in a way that's different from men?" is usually that question is generally tied to family responsibilities. At the highest level, my response is, "The gig economy provides the same types of opportunities to everybody. Everybody who wants to work independently, who wants to put together a portfolio of work, who wants to work for themselves, has the same opportunity to have flexibility, to have autonomy, to have control over their schedule and their work, to create whatever balance is important in their life or to have no balance and work like crazy and maximize their income, right?" That's a choice everybody gets to make.


Diane Mulcahy:

What I do think is for women or for men, for parents, who have decided that they are staying at home to raise children, it does make it easier to also work if that's something that someone wants to do. Again, you can access all of those characteristics, the autonomy, the flexibility, the control over your schedule, so you can decide, "Look, I'm a night owl, I only want to do work that I can do between 10:00 PM and 1:00 AM," and you can do that. It doesn't matter if you're a man or a woman. Maybe you're a guy who wants to maximize your income and you're doing that as a side gig. Maybe you're a woman with an infant and that's when you're up, right?


Diane Mulcahy:

It doesn't matter. The opportunities are there for whoever wants to access them. My students are active participants in the gig economy. I've had my MBA students say, "You know what? I'm driving Uber while I'm in graduate school and I'm only driving enough to cover my car payment and I just want that payment coming out of my normal budget." That's what they're doing it for. I feel like the opportunity is there for everybody. I don't know if that fully answers your questions, so feel free to refine it.


Daniel Stillman:

No, I think that is a perfectly legitimate answer. I didn't have the family planning aspect. I was just mainly curious because I know you have the series, and so in a way, I was curious about what was behind that if there was a direction that that was going.


Diane Mulcahy:

The reason I started that is I think for me, what I found interesting about the series that I write on Forbes on Women in The Gig Economy is giving women that I think are doing interesting, provocative things or thinking interesting and provocative thoughts, a platform to express those and to put those out into the world. I think there are many more platforms for men to do that still than for women. That was really my interest. Amplifying voices that I found interesting.


Daniel Stillman:

I think that's the other part that I … Maybe what I was thinking about is, and I'm blanking out on the names of the actual programs where micro loans are distributed to women in developing economies, where it really can be amazingly transformative to be able to start a business and the incredibly beneficial effects that has on larger society. In a way, it seems like maybe the gig economy opens up more of those opportunities.


Diane Mulcahy:

The gig economy absolutely opens more opportunities for people that have traditionally been on the margins of the labor force. If you think about people who are disabled or who have chronic illnesses, if you think about people who are retired, maybe they're not in the best of health or maybe they have basically enough money, but would love to just do something supplementary, either for income or to stay engaged, the gig economy offers opportunities for people like that in ways that the traditional workforce never did. The traditional workforce, one of the reasons I think the gig economy is catching on is that the traditional workforce just doesn't meet the needs of everybody. It's very black and white, either you're in it as a full-time employee, or you're out of it and you're unemployed.


Diane Mulcahy:

There's so many shades of gray in the gig economy. People who normally might have been out of the workforce, it allows them to step in at whatever level they want. Step a toe in, step a foot in, step a whole leg. I think that's one of the one of the things that's really powerful about this new way of working is that it does provide opportunities for workers who have traditionally been marginalized.


Daniel Stillman:

I've heard so many stories of how, as you said, people who are differently abled or mobility impaired that now that everybody's on video, it's like you can do everything and anything. These people really can participate 100% in what is now as of this recording the whole economy. With the small amount of time we have left, is there anything we have not addressed that we should address? What have I not asked you about all things, Diane Mulcahy, that we should unpack?


Diane Mulcahy:

That's a huge question and there's a lot of ways we can go with this and a lot of topics that I write about that we haven't covered. I think it would be remiss, just given where we are in the pandemic and in our economy, not to say something about remote work and whether that looks like, what's the future of that, especially given the resistance that so many companies have had to moving in this direction. My view really is that employees want flexibility. For some people, they enjoy going to the office, maybe not every day, but they enjoy being able to go to an office and that's a great choice for them, but for a lot of employees, they really prefer working from home or from a third space and having the flexibility to do that is worth something to them.


Diane Mulcahy:

I think what we're going to see as the economy reopens is that it's going to be very hard for companies to make the case to bring everybody back to the way it used to be if this has been working. If they've been able to deliver, if they've been able to meet the results with everybody working from home, the case for office-based work five days a week, eight hours a day, is going to be impossible to make.


Daniel Stillman:

I've heard this argument that we can't go back, that do finally flip the switch on the future of work.


Diane Mulcahy:

I think so. They say it takes three months to build a habit. We're well past that point and no signs of going back until probably the fall at the earliest. People have really gotten into a new behavior pattern. Again, there's inertia around that and it's going to be very hard to shift people back to the way things used to be. That will have been six months ago.


Daniel Stillman:

It is also potentially illegal. I was talking to one company where they were talking about maybe doing 10% every month starting after Labor Day, but they can't necessarily force people to come in. People may not feel comfortable to come in. We're looking at a situation where, "What is the office for?"


Diane Mulcahy:

That's it. If you're a company that is interested in attracting the best talent, how do you compete with all of these firms that have said, "We are going to go remote. People can be where they want. They can work from home if they want. We will get them WeWork Space or some other equivalent if they want. If you're somebody who's looking at an offer from a company like that versus a company that says, "Get your car. Commute every day. Be here by 9:00 AM." What's more attractive? Where are you going to go?


Daniel Stillman:

I think maybe it was in the article you wrote with Krystal Hicks where you talked about clock and chair management which I thought was just this wonderfully powerful visual. That's how we have been managing. It's like you're in your chair at a particular time. That's how I know you're doing your job and she's shaking her head, everyone.


Diane Mulcahy:

This is one of the conversations that I have with senior executives, "What do you really know about what your employees are doing at the office during the day? Tell me about what they're doing. Tell me how much time they spend in meetings. Tell me how much time they spend doing email. How much time do they spend on the phone? What are people doing during the day?" I have never heard a good answer. The real answer is we have no idea, but we can see them, so we feel better.


Daniel Stillman:

I have one more question maybe which is, what's your next course about? If Diane Mulcahy knows how to write it an MBA course that predicts the next decade of what's up, what's the next MBA course that you'd like to design that we should all go and take?


Diane Mulcahy:

Wow. I don't have an MBA course in mind that I'm designing, but one area that I have thought about doing a course is around entrepreneurship and food. Thinking about-


Daniel Stillman:

Really?


Diane Mulcahy:

Yeah, thinking about the food supply, the food system. I think those are issues that have really come up during this pandemic that just points to … Really just look at it as traditional work with an industry ripe for disruption and the gig economy came along. I look at the food system, the production food system and the food supply and it looks like another area, another industry that is ripe for disruption, lots of pain points, lots of inefficiencies. It's all about entrepreneurship, right? Where are the best opportunities? They're in the stayed, the most traditional status quo industries. I find myself attracted to those.


Daniel Stillman:

That's so interesting. Let's check in in a couple of years because I read a lot of those articles about, "We make five gallon buckets of pasteurized, blended eggs, uncooked, that we sell to institutions and institutions are all closed. I wouldn't know what to do with a five gallon bucket of eggs. Middle school does. All of those got poured down the drain." That's what I think of when I think about some of the opportunities for innovation in right food supply and food systems. I'm sure there's others that are tickling in your brain.


Diane Mulcahy:

Meat processing plants that are shutting down. They're just a different office that people go to produce work. Is there a way to think about that production in a more decentralized, distributed way? What are the benefits of that?


Daniel Stillman:

That's so cool. Well, that's for our next conversation.


Diane Mulcahy:

That sounds great.


Daniel Stillman:

I really appreciate you making the time, Diane. This has been a real pleasure. It's super eye opening. I learned a lot. If people want to learn more about all things, Diane Mulcahy, where should they go on the innerwebs?


Diane Mulcahy:

On the innerwebs, the best place is to go to my website which is dianemulcahy.com and I have my articles and interviews and other writings on the gig economy.


Daniel Stillman:

All right. Check it out. I really enjoyed your book. Thank you so much for making the time. We'll-


Diane Mulcahy:

This is a great conversation. Thank you so much for having me.


Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. We'll call Scene...


The Conversation (as) Project

Season_Four_Image_stack_ES_2.jpg

Conversation Analysis is a powerful tool that looks at large numbers of conversations to help build insights about what works and what doesn’t. 

Elizabeth Stokoe is a Professor of Social Interaction at Loughborough University, and shares some key insights from her excellent book, Talk, the science of conversation and her well-received TedX talk.

As she suggests in the opening quote, any conversation that you participate in has a landscape to it.

What Conversation Analysis can do - and we are all conversation analysts, just not professional ones - is show us the texture of that landscape, and how to navigate the bumps in the road effectively.

One surprising idea I absorbed from Professor Stokoe is in this quote, when she says that:

“In a way, the best conversations might have some clumsy, awkward moments and through that way, you might move past it and into something more mutual”

We know what is natural and easy because we know what feels clumsy. Seeing, accepting and moving past the clumsy can help us find a smoother path.

We are the Turns We Take

Elizabeth’s idea that we are the turns we take, that speech acts are real acts, is a powerful one. And so is her idea that non-responsiveness or silence in reply to an awkward turn can get things “back on track”. If someone comes in “hot” to a conversation an easy way to cool things down is to wait and let the person fix it themselves, as she says:

“People will figure out that they just did something that was a bit off and fix it.”

What I really loved about talking with Professor Stokoe is that she busts conversation myths with ease - and Science!

There are many popular ideas about conversations, from how they differ across cultures to how much communication consists of body language to how men and women speak differently - both in amounts and type. 

Professor Stokoe suggests that there are many more similarities than differences across cultures and genders. She is in fact, more interested in how we construct gender through speech, than how our biological gender influences speech.

And she also reasonably suggests that if body language is 90% of communication, why can we communicate just fine over the phone? There is, as it turns out, very little science to support many such figures.

Working with real conversations instead of simulations

Elizabeth also casts very reasonable doubts on some of industry’s favorite models to explore interactions, like secret shoppers - it turns out that people who are acting like customers don’t act like customers. 

She also suggests that using role-play in training is not as effective as it could be.

Conversational Analysis can offer better insights by studying real conversations en masse, in fine-grained detail.

Be sure to listen all the way to minute 45 when we dive into group conversation dynamics and how people learn what behaviors are acceptable in a session in the opening seconds of an interaction. It is shocking how quickly the landscape of a conversation is built and surveyed by the participants. 

Links, Notes and Resources

Elizabeth Stokoe’s TEDx talk

A deep dive on her work on the TED blog

More on CARM training

Elizabeth’s excellent book, Talk

On Body language: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Mehrabian “Mehrabian's findings on inconsistent messages of feelings and attitudes (the "7%-38%-55% Rule") are well-known, the percentages relating to relative impact of words, tone of voice, and body language when speaking. Arguably these findings have been misquoted and misinterpreted throughout human communication seminars worldwide”

Lenny the anti-cold-calling chatbot

More about conversation and gender from Professor Stokoe here.

Full Transcription

Daniel Stillman:

I'll officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory, Liz. Thank you for making the time.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Nice to be here.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you for saying so. Let's start at the beginning. What features of talk are universal?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's a great question and it's a question that people ask regularly of someone like me, a conversation analyst. A couple of ways of answering this question. I think the first way is to think about what we're doing when we're interacting, when we're talking. What we're doing is we are building and responding to actions, so as soon as you start to think about social interaction, talk, conversation as actions being built, progressed, halted, suspended, moving forwards and so on, then you start to realize that in fact, there are lots of universals across cultures and across languages. For example, questions and answers, they are massively constitutive of a lot of our daily life and all languages provide for us to ask questions and answers. I think when you start to think about what people are doing when they're talking, they are asking questions, requesting, assessing, evaluating, greeting when languages provided for those things.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

That's not to say that languages provide for different ways of building actions, but nevertheless, the core underpinning universal of human sociality is that we are doing actions when we interrupt each other. Then there are some empirical studies over the last 10 years or so, where people are explicitly comparing different languages and how they are building different courses of action. For example, turn-taking, which is one of the most fundamental things, again, a universal thing of a conversation. There's some research by Tanya Stivers and colleagues, where they compared lots of different languages from around the world. They looked at the timing of turn-taking and surprisingly, universally, at least in terms of the large study that they did, they found that each turn lasts for about two seconds and the typical gap between them is about 200 milliseconds, regardless of grammar, language, and so on.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We tend to assume that cultures are all different and they very well might be. That's the question for other types of analysts, but in terms of social interaction and conversation, we can start to see that there are more similarities than differences when we think about action. I think one final way of thinking about this question is, this isn't technical at all, but it's something that I think about quite regularly, which is something like the interactional imperative. I can remember my grandmother when she became really old and hard of hearing, she nevertheless knew that turn-taking must still happen, so she got really good at doing mm-hmms and nods, and little things that sustained the interaction at the right place, mostly. Occasionally, she might get it wrong, but that sense of an interactional imperative, that one must keep taking turns and keep on producing social life through the machinery of interaction, I think is universal.

Daniel Stillman:

This idea of conversation or talking as a project and not replying to the offer … There's this fundamental judgment of, the person is uncollaborative. It's just interesting that there's this imperative to not look like an unhelpful person, to not be that sort of person.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's through the fact that we know that that turn-taking just keeps on tricking, but we can see we have a basis for describing somebody as uncooperative or not collaborative.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

When we make assessments of people, we're not generally making psychological assessments as a psychologist. We're basing or our ordinary diagnoses of what people are like, how rude or lovely-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

What people are doing. A lot of what people are doing is what they're saying.

Daniel Stillman:

I mean obviously, we're going to spend the rest of our conversation unpacking all of that because in your book, which is really, really lovely, you have this phrase, “You are the turns you take.” I think this is a really wonderful idea and you've talked a little bit about it just now. Can you say more about what this means to you, that we are the turns that we take?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I just think it's really interesting. I'm a psychologist by background. Psychology owns the domain of understanding human beings, but most of us aren't psychologists, and most of us, as we proceed along and encounter, suddenly halt it, step outside it, do a psychological assessment of it.

Daniel Stillman:

There's no survey that we're checking off. There's a diagnostic. Here's the four-part diagnostic we're completing.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We're not doing that. We are experiencing interaction in real-time and then, later on, maybe talking about that interaction to somebody else, and basing a lot of our assessments of people on the basis of what they have said. I don't want to make a distinction between what they've said and what they've done because I want to say that saying things is doing things.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

On that basis, we are the turns we take. This becomes really important in places of application of my work. It might feel a bit of an extreme instance of this, but we know it to be true, which is that when you look at crisis negotiators talking to people in the most extreme, maybe awful extreme moments of their lives, then this crisis negotiator, no matter what we might think, is structuring that in that encounter and what might be motivating the person who maybe stood on a roof or threatening themselves or somebody else. We tend to reach to understanding that situation in terms of the individual psychology of the person who is in crisis, but we don't have all of that information when we encounter them.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

When a negotiator encounters that situation, they can't get a psychological assessment of that person. All their evidence of how to develop a strategy, if you like, is based on what the person says. That is what we're doing all the time.

Daniel Stillman:

What they're not saying potentially.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

What they're not saying, yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

This really comes back to this. I've got my notes here. I mean we need to unpack what a conversation analyst is, but there's also this idea in your book, that we are all conversation analysts. We're just not doing it with the scientific rigor that you do. I would love for people to understand. I mean your book is like zooming in minority report style, really just exploding moments of conversations and doing a very, very fine reading of them to say what is happening at each one of those moments. We're also all doing that. You give this example in your book, I think it's hilarious how much pop culture is in your book, of Olaf in Frozen noticing somebody's response being a little slow, saying, “You hesitated.” What does that mean? We're always reading people's intentions.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

That's right. Basically, we are all analyzing all the time. Otherwise, we would never be able to take a turn because mostly, when we are in an encounter, we are listening for the actions being done by the person we're talking to or people we're talking to and finding a moment to respond, which can be difficult. We all know what it's like to crash and talk at the same time.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We are analyzing for the action, so if you're assessing something, then I'm going to either agree with you or disagree with you, and I'm going to have to manage that or move with it. If you say something and I don't understand. Then I'm going to have to display that and we can go really maximum on, “I don't understand you,” by articulating that. Or we can just say, “Huh” or just a little delay, and sometimes that little delay is enough for you to realize she didn't get that and do it again. We're monitoring ourselves all the time as we build courses of action in conversation.

Daniel Stillman:

It's funny. It seems exhausting when we explain it that way and yet, it's the thing that, I wouldn't say we're built to do, but we've built ourselves to do it in a way.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Absolutely. I mean I use that idea actually to think about this book, which was designed for a non-academic audience-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

At least to-

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you so much, by the way.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

To show conversation analysis to lots of different industries and so on because standing on a stage and doing a popular science of conversation can be a bit of a challenge. Everyone talks, so everyone thinks they know about talking already. There is so much pop-psych out there, about communication. That everyone has a view, a very strong view sometimes, about what they think the world of communication is like.

Daniel Stillman:

We must because we get through our days and we get through our lives, hopefully with a reasonable amount of success, yet-

Elizabeth Stokoe:

As soon we go meta on communication, then people's myths and stereotypes start to pop out and they may or may not have any basis in what a conversation analyst at least would take to be evidence of a robust kind.

Daniel Stillman:

What are some of those myths that you think are important for people to step back from?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

My favorite one is the body language myth.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh yes. The 93% that people wrote about.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Some very high percentage of communication is body language versus some other much lower percentage, which is the words uttered. What I like about that is it's so, so massively perpetuated. I've sat in loads of events where again, it's not necessarily an academic event. It's a training event. It's some professional event and a speaker might get on and do something before me, and that slide will pop up. It's actually an interactional challenge. Do I challenge it or just let it go? I mostly just let it go.

Daniel Stillman:

Why? Because you're just so tired of fighting that fight?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yeah, but the interesting thing about that one is that it's very easy to knock it over. There's a conversation analyst called Max Atkinson who's one of the few people who has actually taken the conversation analysis outside of the academy and into other domains. He basically interviewed the author, Albert Mehrabian, I think he's called, of the original article that found that back in the 60s and found something that got used and turned into that stat. I think not only did Max Atkinson argue that Mehrabian himself had joined the campaign to stop people perpetuating that particular myth and get communication trainers to stop using it. He said something like, “If this was true, then none of us would need any other language than body language, 90% of the time.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We wouldn't need any other languages. We'd all be able to operate in the world. Of course, that doesn't make sense. Then we wouldn't be able to talk in the dark or on the phone. As soon as you start to think about it, you think that can't really be right, but yet, it persists a bit like almost everything we also do know about language. The simpler the message, the more soundbite it is, the more compelling it is, but then the more difficult it is to challenge it when it's just passed out of the realm of any article back in the 60s. It's just what people think they know about talk.

Daniel Stillman:

That's very true. I feel like narrative is an element of talking, of conversing with each other. What we're sending is messages and stories, back and forth with each other and we're building a story together. I think this goes towards the racetrack concept in your work. That we know the general shape of the project that we're working on. There's summons. There's an exchange of greetings. There's question and response. We know the vacuum that's formed when somebody asks a question and there's no answer. In a way, how does that …? What's my question here. The racetrack is imprinted on us. How can that concept of the racetrack help us in shaping our conversations for the better? I guess that's maybe the best I can do with that thought.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think the reason that I started to use the analogy of a racetrack, or I might even say a golf course or anything with an architecture landscape to it, with hurdles and possibilities for falling over, mostly what I wanted to communicate is this idea that any encounter is built of projects, be they small or large things. Any conversation that you have on the phone with a salesperson or the council or the doctor, it has a landscape to it. You move through a series of things that need to get done before you can move on to the next one successfully, at least. If you phone up the doctors to make an appointment, then there'll be a bit of identity. There'll be the opening bit where you realize you're both talking to the right person that can make the request. Then there might be some complication around progressing the request.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Hopefully, the request will be met and then you confirm what's going to happen, and then you close the call. The fact that these things, when you look at lots and lots of them, they do tend to have a macro organization like this kind of landscape. It allows us to see things out of place really quickly. When you are on a call where you feel like you're being pushed to make a decision, for example, you're probably feeling that because it's been moved up the racetrack. That they've got some point which should really fit further down the encounter. We might have a sense of that and a conversation analyst would probably be able to show that when you look a batch of conversations. The racetrack, first of all, gets us to think about, everything that you do creates the possibility for the next thing, every single time.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It can be probably quite worrying. You really start to think about it. Everything I say is making it possible or easier or less easy for you to do something next, every single time. I'm constraining or restricting what can happen. That's something. The other thing is to get people to understand that social interaction is much more organized and not messy. People tend to feel talk is messy. It's why we do all sorts of other things to understand communication than bother to study actual conversation because there's, again, this other myth around, talks are really messy. We have to produce idealized versions of interaction to understand that. I guess 50, 60 years of conversation analysis shows that that's just not true, that the interaction is highly organized and yet, people can still be idiosyncratic within that organization.

Daniel Stillman:

I think at least one thing I want to pull out is this idea of when things are off track, we have the sense that things are off track and many people will have to deal with uncollaborative situations or uncollaborative conversation partners. What can you tell us about how, if things are off the track, to bring them back on the track? I know there's examples like Gordon restarting the conversation. He just tries to bring it back on to track, but those ways, to me, feel clumsy and a little awkward.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I mean clumsy and awkward is part of everyday life. We need clumsy and awkward just so that we understand what isn't clumsy and awkward as well. In a way, the best conversations might have some clumsy, awkward moments and through that way, you might move past it and into something more mutual. I think it's interesting that you raised that. The Gordon example you referred is the start of a telephone conversation between Gordon and his girlfriend on the phone. She breaks the start of the racetrack straight away by asking … Rather than saying, “How are you?” “Fine.” “How are you?” She says, “Where have you been all morning?” It's noticeably out of position, if you like, in the normal, unfolding racetrack and we all see it because we all tacitly without ever thinking about it before right now, know that what belongs there is, “Oh, hi.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

“How are you doing?” “Fine. How are you?” Then you move on to the next thing and she replaces that with something else. What Gordon does in response, rather than answering her question about where he's been all morning, the first thing he says is, “Hello,” which belongs there. It might sound a bit disingenuous, especially the way I reproduce it now, but I think there are some things to be learned from that, which is that if you just understand that you can always resist the thing that is being set up for you in the previous term, it might make it clumsy and awkward. Sometimes what you're also doing is a little bit of socializing of people. If you can, then … It can be hard to do this, but I guess I would try to do that socializing sometimes if you're in a position to do it.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

If you walk into a meeting room and someone doesn't say hello or they don't know who you are and they just say something that is a bit off, then you cannot respond to that in the terms set up by that person. You can just say, “Oh, hello” and just do the thing that belongs at that point in the encounter. A lot of the time people will get the message. What you can do is just stay silent, actually, give a slightly blank expectant look. Very often, people will repair things themselves. They'll get a second, a tiny fraction of a pause really. People will figure out that they just did something that was a bit off and fix it.

Daniel Stillman:

It's a reset and literally putting things back on track, and saying, “Oh, good morning.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think this is one of the things that, again, you might think that if you are going to call someone out in any kind of way, that you need to explicitly call someone out, whereas what we see interaction is a bit of silence. If you are face-to-face with a slightly blank, expectant look like, “Oh, I'm tricking you. We're not done yet. Let's see if you fixed it yourself,” that will often work.

Daniel Stillman:

This is escalation versus de-escalation, I think. Responding directly like, “Well, that's rude,” is taking the turn and then one-upping it versus taking the turn and one-undering it.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think saying, “That was rude,” at least again, it's this talking theory, which is I had to talk in theory. Then when you look at real interaction, you see how absolutely difficult it is to say, “That is rude” to someone, directly.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I mean your heart will be beating if you did that. Yet, we're full of advice to people. Just tell them this, but it's actually really difficult when you're in an interaction. I think a really nice example of this is looking at … I've done some research with colleagues on cold calling, not people calling people's domestic spaces, but just business to business. Can we make an appointment to show you whatever it is that we're selling? In that collection, there's a very, very small number of hang-ups, despite the fact that most people will say things like, “Oh, I just hang up on cold callers.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Of course, whether they do or not, right now when they're saying that to whoever it is they're talking to, they're doing something with that now anyway. Whether they actually hang up on cold calls isn't really the point. They're just showing like “This is the kind of person I am. I am telling you this to assert what I would do in this situation,” but we actually see very few hang-ups. People are desperately trying to get out of the call.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's pretty unusual. People have to be pushed quite far by a salesperson to hang up in empirical reality, at least.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I mean, I think this is worth unpacking as well. I'm really curious about the application of conversation analysis to training and behavior change because as you report, we don't often know what it is that we're doing. We don't. Actually, we're not noticing the placement and order of words that you are noticing when you look at the actual transcripts and when you're looking at hundreds of transcripts across multiple conversations. You're looking at a histogram. You're looking at patterns. I may not even know what it is that I'm doing, that is effective and so it's very hard sometimes for me, if I'm a great salesperson, to teach someone else how to be great like me at sales.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Absolutely. At least the first hurdle there is that people do have a view about themselves or others. Also, I think they know, just by inspecting their memory, what may or may not work in an encounter. I think I'm going to assert this strongly and say people really don't know what they're doing.

Daniel Stillman:

No. Because we're doing it, it's very hard to notice what you're doing and do it at the same time.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yes, even though they are tacitly, maybe doing a fantastic job as well. We know that people have great skills at interacting with other humans. At least some of them do. Some of them don't but again, because communication is just a thing that everyone thinks they know about. The first hurdle is getting people to pause and think, okay, if we are going to develop training or guidance maybe or especially assessment of other people's communications skills, then how best to do that. I think I love the example of that, some research conducted with my colleague, Rein Sikveland. We're looking at … Back to crisis negotiation. I think this is just such a gorgeous example whereby the negotiators who are arriving on the scene and have to talk to someone who may or may not be in a suicidal crisis, they have to keep taking turns with whoever it is. They can't go home.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

They can't go give up. They have to keep going. One of the things they have to do is get the person to actually talk to them in the first place because we know that if you can get someone to take turns, then every single time the person actually takes a turn in the encounter, then they're choosing life every single time they take a turn. Even if it's a bit like, “Oh, I'm not doing what you're saying,” it's still not jumping or something. It's a really, really important environment to understand the importance of conversation analysis, I think. We know that quite often the negotiator will basically say, “Can we talk about how you are?” Or they'll ask to talk to the person. I think the NYPD crisis negotiation team's motto is something like talk to me. The reason why I think this is really important is that if you're going to build a motto and build training, then probably you're going to train your negotiators to ask the person in crisis to talk to you.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

When we look at the actual empirical examples though, the reality of these negotiations, we find that being asked to talk is very easy to resist, so people will say things like, “What's the point in talking? Talking doesn't do anything. I don't want to talk.” They almost respond to it ironically Like, “What are you asking me this for?” Whereas the negotiators … This is where the value of my work comes in, I think, which is I'm able to show you, and then back to negotiators, what it is that they are doing to nevertheless, have another crack at that because they have to. they can't just give up at this point. We see that negotiators will either … Some of them just don't ask to talk at all. They say, “Can we speak? I want to speak to you about X.” Those moments don't get resistance.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

People can't say, “Actions speak louder than speak” or, “I don't want to speak.” They just don't say that. They don't resist the verb speak and the broader action that that comprises, in the same way that there is this talk. The opposite of all of this is that if this was obvious, then no one would ask, “Can we talk?” They know already by remembering that speak better. It's more effective, but they and so what we do I can do is nevertheless, reveal the expertise of the negotiators who are managing something really effective and turn that into the training. Now we know what to train novice negotiators to say in terms of how they initiate dialogue with the person in crisis. I think the other thing to say at this point is that there's a tendency, I think, to not believe that language is that important.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

At the same time, it's fascinating, really. People think communication is really important and everyone will express that right up until the moment they want to scrutinize it properly and then develop guidance, training, and so on, from the ground, up, if you like. We tend to think that a person in crisis is going to either jump or not, on the basis of their psychology, not on the basis of what the negotiators say. Whilst their individual psychology is probably very interesting and relevant, we don't know what it is. It's back to where we started. If we don't know it, then negotiators just have to take turns anyway.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Then we can actually find, when we bother to look, that the language is making a difference and now we know it.

Daniel Stillman:

It feels like, given the complexity of the situation, just giving people a Word document, a PDF, a set of pointers like, “Keep the person talking. Ask lots of questions.” The kind of advice that people crave and that we think is actually helping them may not actually help them become better negotiators. That's where I guess role-play comes into your training as well. I'm guessing.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yes. I have a view of role-play, which is when I started to do research-based training on the basis of some of these things that I was finding in the different environments that I was working, I became quite interested in, what was the alternative too? My way of taking this research back to practitioners is to show them real examples, real interaction in the wild, anonymized, and have them live through it, turn by turn. Then think about what they might do in any given moment, so see what a person in crisis or a patient or a potential client says at this moment in the encounter and then think about what they might do next in a real situation because I'm showing them real situations. Then we see what the practitioner did next and evaluate it. This is very different, I think, to role-play where you get an actor to play the part of the interlocutor. I became really interested in role-play as a thing and started to research on role-play.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I was quite surprised at how widespread role-play is used as a completely uncriticized proxy for real interaction, first off. Or that where research is conducted as to the authenticity of role-play, it's basically a post-op, "Did it feel authentic?" kind of research question, which for me, is meaningless. People can say what they like, but it doesn't tell me anything as a conversation analyst. I basically conducted some research and started to compare in the wild. I started with police interviews with suspects and then looked at police interviews with actors playing the part of suspects, to see whether or not they look similar.

Daniel Stillman:

Surprisingly, they're different. I enjoy that.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Surprisingly, they're different. Of course, role-play is one thing for maybe practicing strategies or something like that, but the issue is that sometimes it's the actor playing the part of the interlocutor, where they've been given bad information about the kinds of authentic things that a real patient, suspect, client, et cetera, might do. They've got a bad script, but the other thing, of course, and the police is a really nice example, the actor playing the part of a suspect isn't going to go to prison at the end of this encounter.

Daniel Stillman:

No.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

They can do anything, actually. They don't have the same stake in it. That stake is there, maybe to do a really good performance for the scenario, but they don't have that same interest that a real suspect has. We found differences and I think this is particularly consequential. If somebody's performance is being assessed and their job promotion, passing a course, depends on their performance in a simulation, that's where it becomes problematic, especially problematic, I think.

Daniel Stillman:

Sorry for interrupting, but in your book, I really enjoyed the fine slicing of secret shoppers calling veterinarians. Just to give people a sense of what you're noticing, that most of us don't miss, is where the ums are in a secret shopper. They don't actually know the breed of their dog. They pause at it. Whereas a normal person says, “Oh, I'm calling for this and I need to make an appointment about this.” They pause at a much later point. Just the placement of a pause or a word in the response of the person who is on the other side of the call can shift the conversation but the simulated call isn't a real call. The secret shopper is not acting the way a real person would. We're noticing those pauses maybe in subtle ways and reacting to them in uncomfortable ways.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think the other study that I've done, which you mentioned, is really nice because in the police study, obviously both parties in the simulation knew that they were in a simulation. Whereas in the secret shopper study, the person taking the call, which in this particular case was a vet practice, doesn't know that this is a secret shopper phoning to test out the experience that they have in the call. The mystery shopper is also going back, if you like, and reporting on the experience that they have in this call. My question is, do they have a basis for making any assessment? I guess the most extreme polemical version of my answer to that would be no, they have no basis for saying anything about the experience because for a start, they don't ask for the same things.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

They don't phone up and you can hear them sobbing already. I think this is one of the nicest examples, actually, where the mystery shopper is phoning. The remit is something like, “Show that you're upset about your animal and you're going to be asking about putting your animal to sleep.” Looking at how they do that, compared to how somebody who is genuinely phoning about a sick or dying animal, how they do that. The whole thing unfolds completely differently. Now, of course, for the person taking the call, they may or may not think something is off in the way this person that they're talking to is interacting on the phone.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

In a way, the mystery shopper whole thing, it relies on the fact, at least in terms of these phone calls, that you can't see anything about the person that you're talking to either. Mystery shopping works because when you are at the vet reception or in any organization, you don't generally think at any moment, I could be dealing with someone who is not a genuine customer or genuine client. It works in that way. I don't think the vet receptionist necessarily thinks that was a mystery shopper, but they might think they sounded strange because we are always saying things like, “They sounded strange.”

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think this is especially nice and gets us into conversational agents and Artificial Intelligence, and so on. Again, with a colleague, Saul Albert, and another colleague, William Housley, we've been looking at … You might remember that there was this small release of Google Duplex calls, this technology that could phone up and book a restaurant.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Or make a hair appointment. Of course, we've been doing some work on that and looking at things like the placement of the ums and looking at, in very fine grain detail, how Google Duplex passes for humans.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Of course, a massive part of that is that they're on the phone and that the human call taker is massively accommodating for the person that they think they're talking to. If you're on the phone with someone and someone sounds like they don't understand or they sound a bit off, then we don't think it's an AI. We just think they sounded really strange.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We make up for it.

Daniel Stillman:

We try to repair it.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yeah. I don't know if you know, again, some conversation analysts conducted a study of all of these recordings of Lenny the chatbot that is online. I think if I understand this correctly, Lenny is something that you could download and plug into your telephone at home to deal with cold callers.

Daniel Stillman:

Oh yes. It befuddles them. Yes. I remember this.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I think it's not AI. It's basically 16 possible things that Lenny could say in rotation. The challenge was how long could this elderly-voice sounding guy keep a cold caller on the phone? What you see is that the cold call just keeps accommodating who they assume they're talking to. They assume that an older guy, maybe he's confused or maybe just wants to chat. You can see that that when one party has no idea they're in any kind of simulation or AI or mystery shopper, they make it all happen.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. Just to roll it back and to tie a bow on that, I just appreciate that your perspective is not uncritical when it comes to simulation and that we should question like any scientist would. Our observation of the experiment changes things. Our observation of the phenomenon changes things. I appreciate that as a scientist myself too. Our time flows away.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

There's two big topics we haven't addressed. I don't know if we can do justice to both of them. I hope this isn't our last conversation. One of them is group conversations because as a facilitator, that's my main wheelhouse. A lot of people who are listening to this show are also leading meetings and changing organizations. These are much bigger, squishier, more complex conversations and it's harder to get data about them. I have a friend who actually tried to use subvocalization recordings to do mass measurements inside of corporations, but not surprisingly, people were resistant to the harnessing of that kind of data. We could say something about an organization by summing up and doing analysis on all of their conversations.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Absolutely, especially-

Daniel Stillman:

Especially? Yes. I'm sorry.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Meetings maybe will be a starting point.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes, exactly. That's the molecule of the conversations inside of an organization. What can you tell us about the application of your work to these types of group dialogues?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I haven't really done research on big groups interacting. I think one of the difficulties is quite simply data capture, in the first place. If you just take a meeting as an example, if you imagine that you're in a room with 10 people, as a conversation analyst and you have all the resources of embodied conduct, gays, the material environment, and all of those things that are crucial to how we interact, then it's hard to capture enough that you can see what everyone is using to interact, all of the data that you can see that people are using to take turns and so on.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's not impossible, of course, but there is some research on meetings and so on. I'm mostly looking at stuff like turn allocation and how to get the floor, and who dominates the floor, those kinds of things, but I think it is a challenge for the analyst to get, if you like, all of … One of the reasons phone calls are so nice is because you are in the same position pretty much as those speakers you can't see.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes. It's stripped down.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

At least you've got the complete picture. I actually think it would be quite nice to look at these teams in Zoom meetings where you actually have a better sense of everyone's access because you can see the whole screen.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

You can see probably what most of the people can see. Actually, there's definitely an ideal time right now, while we're locked down, to look at how meetings are working online. I think there is also an issue around … The closest I've got to thinking about something like groups is to look at mediation. I've done a little bit of work on mediation, where there might be five people in the room. I'm particularly looking at, of course, how the mediators are facilitating that interaction. Of course, their job very much here is to ensure a balance of participation and so on. That's really interesting because as a model for facilitating any conversation, if your starting point is, we must get both perspectives out into the room equally, that's very different from many of the meetings where it could be like, “We want as few people as possible to talk.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Think about, what are you trying to do in a group? Are you trying to maximize participation or minimize participation? Because people might quite legitimately have different goals. Then at least one of the most interesting things in the mediation stuff is then looking at how the impartial perspective of the mediator and the process, which is meant to be impartial, can fall away within the first 30 seconds as the mediator opens up the encounter. For example, I've got a nice case where there are two or three parties who are in dispute and two mediators...One mediator is setting up. “This is what's going to happen.”

Elizabeth Stokoe:

“We're going to …” They're laying the ground rules and they say to the three parties who were all at war with each other, “Is it okay if we go by first names?” One person straight away, “Yeah. I'm fine with that.” Then the other mediator at this point jumps in and then checks in very explicitly in that socializing way that we were talking about earlier. Then checks in with both people who didn't immediately say yes. This one guy tends to jump in all the time. We all know this person is-

Daniel Stillman:

First movers.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

You ask the question and one person is right straight away. The challenge then for the person and doing any kind of facilitation is to decide, do I want that person to always jump in and be unchecked? Or am I going to very explicitly get an endorsement or an opinion from every other person in this room to stop that happening? Basically, what happens in this mediation is that they do that a little bit, but then you get the sense that it's becoming a bit awkward for them and so every time they say, “This happens,” then one participant will jump in and say, “Yeah. I get that.” They stop checking in with the other two in that rather awkward, passing the baton, type of way. “Do you understand? Do you understand?” They stop doing that. Before the mediation has even started, the participants have learned ... The guy who jumps in all the time, he's learned, I can say what I like and no one's going to check me.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

The other few people have learned he's always going to jump in and no one's going to check in with me.

Daniel Stillman:

There's a new racetrack being built. That's just-

Elizabeth Stokoe:

The racetrack is already completely skewed. You can see the effects of that all the way through. Really, I think setting up expectations of the kind of interaction that you're in, these opening moments are really crucial to understanding how else the whole interaction is going to unfold.

Daniel Stillman:

It's interesting because the facts that you shared way, way earlier, just when we think about the material of conversation, that we speak for two seconds and there's this 200-millisecond gap, and that longer gaps are viewed as awkward or rude. It's not surprising that group conversations can collapse into agreement very quickly and this maybe can transition us to touching on the last, maybe most important topic that we should do a whole other thing on, Ned who just seems like a terrible person. There's this conversation in your book where gender does play a role in group conversations. This group is having a very quick conversation about who's going to be the note taker and somebody was like, “Oh, well, my handwriting is terrible.”

Daniel Stillman:

The first one was like, “Oh, we need someone to be a secretary.” “Oh, my handwriting is terrible.” Ned is like, “She wants to do it. Secretary and female.” He collapses and this woman just takes the role on. She's like, “I'll just do that emotional labor.” She didn't say, “Well, who else has good handwriting?” Or, “Let's all write down everything.” These group conversations do have this way of collapsing very quickly, with movers and followers, with no opposers, but gender also really does shape conversations, it seems, but it's really hard.

Daniel Stillman:

I feel bad bringing this up where we are in the conversation right now because I think everyone wants to have the answer. What's the difference between men and women in conversations? You, as a scientist, will say, “Well, how do people come to have beliefs about sex differences in speech style?” How our beliefs encoded and enacted in self-presentation. It's not just like, “Oh, men are from Mars and women are from Venus.” We're like, “Well, how do we decide to act as a man?” What does it mean? How do we even build that racetrack? Then maybe how do we deconstruct that racetrack?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

My take on this goes back to things like men are from Mars, women are from Venus because that was the context in which I was doing my PhD. My initial project was going to be gender differences in things like turn allocation and who talks most, and who interrupts whom, and that stuff that was very prevalent in the early 90s, in social linguistics, actually. Showing that men dominate mixed-sex interaction and those kinds of things. Also, I wasn't ready to write a thesis that said, “No, no, no. Everything is equal now” because I live in the world. How many years later is it? Of course, we know that maybe things have even gone a bit backwards since the 90s, but in terms of what I wanted to do was that I wanted to try and move away from … Starting with the idea that there would be sex differences because things like men are from Mars, women are from Venus are actually which develop, which promote stereotypes as much as they do anything else and are really problematic, I think, in that way.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Also, because there is, of course, since before then and since then, just such a massive, massive literature on gender performance, construction, and so on. Taking the lead from conversation analysis, I decided to look for moments where gender is demonstrably relevant to the people in the conversation and, of course, nominating somebody doing an action. How do you solve the problem of who's going to write down the notes? Well, one way to not do it, be the person asking, “Who's going to do it?”

Daniel Stillman:

That is a good piece of advice, by the way.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

“Who's going to take the notes?” “Well, secretary and a female.” My whole thesis, if you feel like, was built on observing this one moment in an interaction where you could see that it didn't matter whether there was a male style or a female style. In terms of asking the question, who's going to take the notes, or is someone writing? There's nothing gendered about saying, “Is someone writing?” Men don't do that more than women, any of the gender stuff to think about. When you start to take those actions again like we talked about right from the start, then a lot of these apparent differences just really fall away empirically, even if we believe them, a bit like the body language stuff, but that doesn't mean that you can't nevertheless show that gender or any other characteristic or category is creeping into the interaction, creeping back from the interaction, being pulled into, being pushed out of, and having an impact on the unfolding organization of the racetrack.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

That particular case was my case in point and what I like about that is that it doesn't rely on me saying anything at all about gendered styles, which I really wanted to get away from because what I was able to show was here are moments of consequence, where gender is being recruited into the conversation to do something. Then basically, the challenge was to try and go from one case and think, how on earth am I ever going to find that again? To over then the next decade or more, building up data sets where I could show systematic things happening with categories. A really simple example, the most recent example of that that I thought I would just point out because I think it's a nice one is I started to find things like when people are denying certain sorts of things that they might have been accused of, they might invoke a category in response and that might be gendered.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

I then started to look at how when people are phoning up to buy things, in a particular case, it was buying windows, how the salesperson does a really straightforward thing, and becomes gendered. The straightforward thing is, ask for the customer's name and they tend to do it in one of three ways. They'd either say, “Can I take your surname?” Or, “What's your name?” Basic questions. Or they might say, “So you're Mr.?” You'd say, “Stillman.” That latter method, “So you're Mr,” waiting for you to finish off, was only used with men.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Women were not invited to complete the turn in that way, so people were not asked, “So you're Mrs.?” Instead, they were asked, “So is it Miss, Mrs., or Ms.?” Which sometimes led to problems. Then the other thing, basically, what this shows overall, of course, is that even in the late part of the 20, teens or something, that we still have this kind of standards address term for men. All men can respond-

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

To the all-men, gender, sexual orientation, all of those things. It doesn't matter, men. Whereas women's titles are still a hugely tricky thing in interaction.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

We have a couple of moments where if a woman referred to herself as Ms, there was a little laugh from a salesperson. You can feel this language after all. Of course, all of that is also wrapped around the idea that the person you're talking to is straightforwardly categorizable as a man or a woman.

Daniel Stillman:

Yes.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Probably straight, all sorts of assumptions that are built into just the most simplest of actions, which is asking somebody their name so that you can sell them some windows. There's a lot of work still to be done, I think.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, I mean, there's a lot more to talk about, but we're out of our time.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

Yes.

Daniel Stillman:

Liz, I really appreciate you talking about this. Obviously, talk, I think our lives are built of it and it's super important for us to understand it and so I really appreciate your contribution to our understanding of it.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's been a pleasure to talk to you.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you. People should go buy your book. Is there anything else? People should find you on the Internet where?

Elizabeth Stokoe:

If you Google my name, you'll find all sorts of books online and so on. I hope that people will just open their minds a little bit to what you can find out if you study in this very fine-grained way that we do conversations.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you so much, Liz. I really appreciate it.

Elizabeth Stokoe:

It's been good to talk.

Daniel Stillman:

Thank you so much

 


Deep Listening

Season_Four_Image_stack_OT_deep.jpg

I’m so excited to share this conversation with Oscar Trimboli, author of Deep Listening, a lovely book/card deck.

We talk about the costs of not listening, the opportunities that are created when we listen and why hearing what's unsaid can transform your work and life.

In our western conception, we have speaking and listening, a basic duality. 

Oscar describes our normal conception of listening as monochrome, two dimensional listening rather than multi-color, multi-sensory listening. 

Oscar has worked to absorb traditional approaches to listening from Inuit cultures in North America, to Australian Aboriginal cultures, as well Polynesian and Maori cultures. 

Oscar breaks down a 6-dimensional listening model that leverages a deeper understanding of the Chinese word for listening, Ting as well as an Aborginal concept for listening, Dadirri, which approaches listening from 3 dimensions - Self, Peoples and Lands.

125/900 and The Cost of Not Listening

Oscar introduces us to the 125/900 rule - the simple fact that we can speak at 125 words a minute yet we can think at 900 words a minute. 

The basic math of conversation is that there will always be something unsaid.

The Impact of this fact is impossible to calculate. In our daily work this can mean a misunderstanding, an argument, lost work or a delay. 

But Ocar points to two shocking examples: 

+we lost three critical weeks in the fight against the Coronavirus because the Chinese authorities weren't willing to listen to a doctor. On December 30, 2019 Dr. Li, an ophthalmologist in a Wuhan hospital, alerted six of his friends on WeChat saying, "There's a SARS-like virus that has a huge impact on the mortality of aged patients.”  Li was later asked to recant his statements and also later passed away from the disease.

+August 27th, 2005, Dr. Raghuram Rajan, then head of the International Monetary Fund, spoke at the Federal Reserve annual Jackson Hole conference in 2005. Rajan warned about the growing risks in the financial system and proposed policies that would reduce such risks. Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers called the warnings "misguided" and Rajan himself a "luddite".

How to Listen to people you disagree with

One final idea I want to highlight is how Oscar suggests to go about  listening to those people we fiercely disagree with. 

He suggests, rather than work to convince them, simply ask”

"when was the first time you formed that opinion?" 

The immediate impact is that it gets us out of talking points and into the starting point. It’s a more human story. It’s the beginning of empathy and of understanding the data that they are working with.

Links and Resources

Start here with Oscar’s Listening Quiz

Oscar on the web: www.listeningmyths.com

More About Oscar

Oscar Trimboli is on a quest to create 100 million Deep Listeners in the world. He is an author, Host of the Apple Award winning podcast—Deep Listening and a sought-after keynote speaker. He is passionate about using the gift of listening to bring positive change in homes, workplaces and the world.

 

Through his work with chairs, boards of directors and executive teams in local, regional and global organisations, Oscar has experienced firsthand the transformational impact leaders and organisations can have when they listen beyond the words.

He consults to organisations including Cisco, Google, HSBC, News Corp, PayPal, Qantas, TripAdvisor helping executives and their teams listen to what’s unsaid by the customers and employees.

Oscar lives in Sydney with his wife Jennie, where he helps first-time runners and ocean swimmers conquer their fears and contributes to the cure for cancer as part of Can Too, a cancer research charity.

Full Transcription

Daniel Stillman:

Oscar Trimboli, I'm going to officially welcome you to The Conversation Factory. Thanks for making the time.

Oscar Trimboli:

Thanks for giving me the greatest gift of all, the gift of listening.

Daniel Stillman:

I thought I would try something now. How long have you been thinking about listening? How long have you been thinking about this issue? How far back does it go for you?

Oscar Trimboli:

I think for me, I've always thought about it. How long have I been conscious about trying to transmit the idea of listening is probably a different place in my world. I think as a youngster, I had this huge, protruding jaw. And if you grew up in the '80s, there was this movie called The American Werewolf in London and I spent, it felt like, every part of my teenage years with braces on. Most people have braces on their teeth for two to three years. The way I remember it, my entire teenage years were spent with braces on because I had this massive jaw.

Oscar Trimboli:

Now, the way to not get noticed, Dan, when you've got this big jaw is just to listen. And the easiest way to deflect attention from people is just to ask them questions. So I think that was the first time I was using it as my ninja move to deflect attention away from my teenage perspective on myself. That's the first time I really became conscious of it.

Daniel Stillman:

It sounds like listening is almost like a place of safety for you.

Oscar Trimboli:

And it's a place of judgment. That's where my villains and my superheros hang out. In that particular case it was creating safety, but also in that space it was creating judgment while I was listening to these conversations between aunties and uncles at post-dinner conversation or a post-dinner card game. Yeah, I got a bit judgy on people, too.

Daniel Stillman:

How so?

Oscar Trimboli:

"I can't believe you said that. She didn't actually mean that. What she meant was... Weren't you listening? You're not being fair to them. You always jump to that conclusion." And although it was the first time I was consciously dissecting other people's listening, it wasn't the first time I kind of coded listening.

Oscar Trimboli:

For me, I only notice that judgment in retrospect. I didn't notice in the moment. I think there's a unique satisfaction that comes to people when they're being judgmental because it's kind of like eating the first cherries of summer or something like that. Mmm, yes. You're wrong, I'm right and judgment wins.

Daniel Stillman:

Well, it sounds like you felt like you were hearing things. You were listening to things that other people weren't listening to.

Oscar Trimboli:

And I was listening to body language when adults were playing card games, for example. And although they were playing an Italian card game and they were speaking Italian and I couldn't understand Italian because I was only raised to understand English, I could see in people's faces their face, their finger position, their spinal position, the way they were tilting their shoulders, the way they were looking at their card playing partner was all giving signals away, even though they felt that they weren't while they were playing these card games.

Oscar Trimboli:

And that translated into school, too. Those card games were played at school. We were a school of 23 nationalities from war torn parts of South America, from Eastern Europe, from Southeast Asia at the end of the Vietnam war and at the beginning of the Cambodian war. So teams of two playing this card game would play in their home tongue, in their native language, which lulled them into a false sense of security because their body language gave away much more than their actual verbal language gave away.

Oscar Trimboli:

And again, Dan, I wasn't conscious of it at the time. And I wasn't good at counting cards. In fact, I have this thing called discalculous, which means I write numbers around the wrong way. So my superhero power in the card playing games was that if they were short of a player they'd always ask me to play, and I always thought because I was the only lonely person around, but I had probably had a higher winning percentage because I wasn't necessarily paying attention to what was being said because the Portuguese were speaking Portuguese to each other, and the Polish people were speaking Polish to each other, and occasionally if they wanted to trick people, they'd talk Russian to each other because they could speak both languages, so it was an interesting time to pay attention to what wasn't being said.

Daniel Stillman:

This is great. I have this diagram in front of me of all the things that I'm hoping we'll get to, and I feel like we're already starting to lay out not just the costs of not listening, but the opportunities that are created when we listen and the benefits of hearing what's unsaid. I want to see if we can peal back some layers on all of those things. Can you speak a little bit about the costs and the opportunities in deep listening or in not deep listening, more specifically?

Daniel Stillman:

And maybe, since many of us who are listening are... What you do and what I do, it's kind of this hilarious... I now have some empathy for people when they're like, "I'm talking to the conversation expert," and I'm like, "I'm not an expert, I'm just a fan of conversations." I imagine people feel that way when they're speaking, too. They're listening, "I better make sure that people are on their best behavior around you." I feel that. I feel how deeply you listen, so this is a very meta conversation. Listening exists at home, it exists at work, but I want to make sure that we take this into the context that people are going to be using this in for a lot of their waking hours, which is at work.

Oscar Trimboli:

What's quite funny to me is when I finish a conversation with a host that interviews me, whether that's on TV or on radio or on a podcast, they all say, "I started really hard to try and pay attention and listen deeply to you, Oscar, but my old habits just jumped across the table all through the middle of the interview. How do you be this deep listening expert?" And I always say, "I'm not the expert. What I am is someone who's managed to notice distraction quicker, and it's distraction that gets in our way."

Oscar Trimboli:

A lot of people say, "So what's this deep listening caper, Oscar? Why is that different from active listening?" And I always say active listening, crucial movement popularized in the '80s and the '90s and it focuses on listening to what's being said. Deep listening is focusing you on what's not being said.

Oscar Trimboli:

If you know the 125,900 rule, you speak at 125 words a minute yet you can think at 900 words a minute. It means the first thing that you say, there's a one in nine chance, or 11%, that what you say is what you mean. So the cost of not listening is just having a conversation with 11% of what both parties, or in a team, all parties, are thinking about.

Oscar Trimboli:

Now, I don't know about you, Dan. I don't gamble but I've been told you get better odds on a roulette wheel in Las Vegas than you do if you're having conversations about the 11%. And that's one of the first costs that people aren't even conscious of in making sure, "Great, I'm listening to what they're saying." So deep listening is listening to what's not said. And deep listening is a very different orientation. The active listening movement teaches you to listen to make sense and what that means for you as the listener, whereas deep listening is about helping the speaker make sense of what they're thinking rather than what you're making sense of what they're saying.

Oscar Trimboli:

And we can jump ahead to the costs of not listening, whether that's December 30, 2019 where Dr. Li, an ophthalmologist in a Wuhan hospital, alerts six of his friends on WeChat and says, "There's a SARS-like virus that has a huge impact on the mortality of aged patients. Please be careful, please keep your grandparents and parents safe right now." And within a week, the Chinese authorities come in and see Dr. Li and say to him, "You're wrong, you're speculating, you're making rumors up, and you need to recount what you said because what's happened is this has gone right across the WeChat network and it jumped over to WeBo," which is the Chinese equivalent of Twitter.

Oscar Trimboli:

And he thought deeply about it for a week, and he recanted. He said he was wrong and all of that. And then he was looking after patients and he contracted the virus, and then in late February he passed away. But we lost three weeks in the fight against Coronavirus because the Chinese authorities weren't willing to listen to a doctor. And what's the cost of that?

Oscar Trimboli:

We will never be able to calculate that cost, yet for all of us in the workplace, we shouldn't be so smug to go, "Well, the Chinese authorities didn't listen to Dr. Li." In our workplaces, we don't listen to people who have a different dogma to us. They might come from a different profession, they might come from a different country, they might come from a different educational background, they might have a different set of experiences.

Oscar Trimboli:

In 2005, Daniel, there was Dr. Rajan who spoke at the World Central Banker Congress in Jackson Hole, Wyoming in August the 27th. It was a Saturday morning session just after morning tea, and he basically said, The global financial system is like a sewage pipe about to explode, and here's why." He said out all the reasons why and it was great. He published the paper. You can still read it today. And every central banker in that room laughed at him, they castigated him during question time. They said he was completely wrong, and the global financial crisis came about three years later. If people were listening to Dr. Rajan, maybe they could've taken some mediating actions.

Oscar Trimboli:

And whether that's that or the BP Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster in 2012 where 11 people lost their lives, $50 billion dollars of legal costs incurred by BP because of the pollution they created because the managers weren't listening to the engineers saying it was unsafe to drill at this speed.

Oscar Trimboli:

So in our workplaces, those costs aren't that big for us, Daniel. Those costs are typically projects that run over schedule, confusion, conflict, chaos in the workplace. These are all the costs of not listening, but also at home. But the body of work that I focus on is really what's the cost in not listening in the workplace? There's a few examples that immediately come to mind for me right now.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It's interesting because there seems to be, underneath it all... In your book you talk about the different levels of listening, and I think when we talk about self listening, a lot of people... I feel like it's generally introduced in a negative sense. Like, "You're just focused on yourself and you should be focused on the other person."

Daniel Stillman:

And one of the things I like about your writing is that there's a necessity to listen to ourself. The doctor knew what he knew and he recanted. He chose to listen to power instead of to himself. It's a shame that he passed away. I don't want to speak ill of the dead, but I wish he had listened to himself more than to the power, even though that's a very hard choice to make.

Oscar Trimboli:

I think when it comes to listening to ourselves, we often get into these dualities or binaries, these conflicts of A versus B or one versus two or red versus blue. When I talk about listening to yourself, I want people to go a step even before that. Many of us have all these browser tabs opened in our mind. It's another thought, it's another thought, it's another thought. And every thought takes a part of your working memory up, and it's finite. So the likelihood we can listen to somebody else without closing down those browser tabs before we get into any kind of conversation is really low.

Oscar Trimboli:

Other people say to me, "Oscar, it's like I've got my own music playing in my head or my own TV show going on before I even get to the conversation. How do I quiet myself down? How do I still myself down?" And it's hard.

Oscar Trimboli:

86% of people in our 1,410 research database say that the language they use about their listening barriers is all before they come to the conversation. Think about that; 86% of us are distracted before we turn to a conversation. And if we continue in that state, we are distracted by the conversation, not just before the conversation. That's why there's an illusion that communication is actually taking place, which you're coding so well in your new book.

Oscar Trimboli:

For me, in the five levels of listening, the most commented on by scholars and academics and people who've spent a bit of time in the space of conversations or listening all say starting at level one, listening to yourself, is the step most literature skips over. If we're not ready for the conversation, how likely is it for it to be a productive dialogue?

Daniel Stillman:

Am I interested in what the other person is even saying? Can I-

Oscar Trimboli:

Or am I capable of being interested? It's not even am I interested? I am so distracted with what's going on for me right now I don't even know to process the thought about am I actually interested in the next dialogue? Because consciously I might say that to myself but subconsciously while I think about the fact that my mother-in-law passed away three weeks ago at 93, I have a friend in Vancouver who's week eight in ICU with C-19. All these things are showing up for me right now, too.

Oscar Trimboli:

For me, that's why the practice of drinking water and the practice of breathing is so critical and so basic. A lot of people want their fancy-pants intergalactic really sexy ninja move the triple back flip kick. And I say to people, "Drink water, breathe deeply." And they go, "No, no. What's the real tip?" And it's like, no it's the practice of those things around hydration and presencing yourself through breathing, which sends a signal to your nervous system to go it's okay. There's no threat from this conversation with Daniel right now. There's no threat from the judgment the audience is making right now, which you're doing. I know you are, and that's okay.

Daniel Stillman:

Can we highlight this? Because this is interesting. I don't think many people realize that breath is the one part of our, and maybe the only part of our biology that we can consciously control, but also don't have to consciously control. And that regulating your breathing affects so many other parts of your nervous system. You're nodding. Nobody's watching the video. I am, so say more about that. What's unsaid? What haven't you said about that?

Oscar Trimboli:

We have our mind and we have our physiology and we have our neurology as well. The nervous system, the parasynthetic, sympathetic nerve system. There is as many nerve endings in our gut... In fact, there are more nerve ending in our gut than there are in our brain. And the very act of breathing is both a conscious choice and it's subconscious. You can't survive without breathing.

Oscar Trimboli:

Most of us aren't conscious that the way we breathe is like the way we sit in a chair. Some of us sit in a chair in an erect position with our shoulders back and relaxed, and some of us hunch. And most of us who are hunched won't be breathing from the diaphragm where the most natural parts of breathing take place. But in that act of breath, it's a reset for the nervous system to go, "It's okay. We've got you. Continue on with those high level activities of thinking creatively or thinking collaboratively or being in a conversation on a complex topic."

Oscar Trimboli:

But most of us, when we're in a situation of fear or we want to flee a situation, our breath actually shortens. And for a lot of us, when we feel challenged in a dialogue, there's no difference in our mental systems if we're challenged physically or we're challenged mentally. The brain still releases cortisol, the nervous system still reacts the same way as if we're under physical threat. And yet the conscious act of three deep breaths, in through your nose, down the back of your throat, all the way down to the bottom of your lungs, back up through your diaphragm and out through your mouth three times.

Oscar Trimboli:

In the good old days, Dan, when I used to go into elevators in buildings, I had this practice, and the practice was really simple. Cross the lobby floor, switch my cellphone off, put it in my bag, and as I went into the elevator, or the lift, I would close my eyes if nobody was there, I'd put my back up against the wall of the elevator and just take three deep breaths. And the question I just posed to myself was what will be productive for them in this meeting that I'm about to have?

Oscar Trimboli:

And then when I go to reception, I'll always ask for a glass of water for me and for however many people were there. I know it's really different now, and again, Dan will say, "You can't see this right now but Oscar's got a bottle of water that he's just brought up," so Dan can see that. And you should be drinking water every thirty minutes. Most people in the west actually go through the day dehydrated.

Daniel Stillman:

It's terrible.

Oscar Trimboli:

And they say their brain hurts, but their brain doesn't hurt, they're just dehydrated.

Oscar Trimboli:

Those simple things that we want to be conscious of the fact that we can regulate our breathing, and yet the act of regulating our breathing sends many other physical signals to the body to take you to a state that reduces your distraction. And in a reduced state of distraction, you can listen not only to what's being said and what's not being said, but you're also emptying a space in your mind for the conversation to actually land.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. There's one ritual I was taught by my friend Salmon Masala. He teaches teams to take a team breath, and we just breathe together, we self-regulate together. It's an amazingly profound ritual and team practice. I know there's no magic bullet, and breathing and drinking, it's like table stakes, but are there other rituals that you teach to teams to be able to be more conscious with their listening and to set the scene so that it's more possible?

Oscar Trimboli:

In 2014, Google instituted this practice. It was an experiment, as they tend to do. Inside their organization, if there were more than six people in a meeting, they had a specific piece of music that they played for a guided mediation and it was the choice of the host whether they played that music for one minute or three minutes. It was the most commented thing on Google Geist. Google Geist is their annual employee engagement survey. And the reason it was the most commented on thing is they said the most productive meetings happened when we went through this set process of at the beginning of every meeting, we would play this music where everybody just either closed their eyes or lowered their eyes and focused on their breathing for a minute or up to three minutes.

Oscar Trimboli:

Now, in your desperate quest, Daniel, to get more things, I'm just going to keep coming back to the basics until we do those-

Daniel Stillman:

Or is this mine or the universal quest?

Oscar Trimboli:

Yeah. I guess it was posed in your question about what other techniques do you use with your team? And for me as a leader, one of the things that, if I run a workshop, it's my role modeling that sets the tone for the meeting when it comes to listening.

Oscar Trimboli:

Back in 2012, visiting Microsoft vice president where I used to work; he flew from Seattle to San Francisco and then to Sydney, effectively 24 hour door-to-door flight, and he jumped straight into a meeting on a Tuesday morning in Sydney where I was hosting in a boardroom in a CBD hotel, 20 executives from basically competing technology organizations in this part of the world. And I introduced him and I gave everyone a bit of background and I said, "Peter, over to you for some opening remarks." And he was sitting at the end of the boardroom table in that power position and he just got up and walked over to the corner. And I was like, what's going on here? He put his cellphone in his bag and he turned to the room and he said, "I'm really sorry. I just realized I've traveled 24 hours to be with you for the next 90 minutes. The most important thing I can give you right now is my complete and undivided attention."

Oscar Trimboli:

What happened next definitely stays with me for the rest of my life. What do you think happens next, Daniel, with the other 20 senior executives in the room from competing organizations?

Daniel Stillman:

I can't imagine.

Oscar Trimboli:

17 of them switched their cellphones off, put them in their bags. I'm speculating that the three who left them on left them on in silent mode because you could hear the pockets vibrating during the meeting for these people that were not switching their cellphones off.

Oscar Trimboli:

He left the meeting at about the 70 minute mark. I was debriefing the group, and what was fascinating; they said, "We get these visiting vice presidents coming out and preaching to us all the time and rarely is there a dialogue. It's just a broadcast monologue. And what we were surprised about today is how much we learned from each other." Peter just stimulated a conversation around a few themes, and the room learned more from each other than they did from him, but he created this environment.

Oscar Trimboli:

And I would say anybody who leads a meeting, whether that's a virtual meeting or a face-to-face meeting, they are setting the environment that is either fertile where a conversation can grow, or it's concrete and the [inaudible 00:26:41] for the conversation just bounce off into the drain because there's no fertile ground for the conversation to land. And in Peter's beautiful role modeling in that story, I often ask people, "Notice if you're giving attention or paying attention," because paying attention feels like taxation, whereas giving attention feels like an act of human generosity.

Oscar Trimboli:

And your orientation is very different when you give attention versus pay attention. So just that simple thing to go when I'm paying attention it feels like there's a friction created in this dialogue because I have to pay something, whereas giving feels free-flowing. It feels natural, it feels elegant, it feels organic.

Oscar Trimboli:

The question I would pose to anybody is how were you role modeling listening before the meeting, during the meeting and after the meeting? And a lot of people say to me, "How can you role model listening before the meeting?" or, "How can you role model listening after the meeting?" And in a lot of those cases, people don't realize that if a meeting has an agenda, where's the rule that says the agenda can't merely be a question? And pose the question before the meeting. Because people are going to come into that meeting with a very different orientation to budget setting meeting for fiscal year 2021 as opposed to what should be different in our budgeting process this year compared to last?

Daniel Stillman:

Or what are our priorities and how will we pay for them all?

Oscar Trimboli:

And I often say to people, "Listening is the willingness to have your mind changed." I didn't say, "Listening is changing your mind," I said it's the willingness or the openness to having your mind changed. And that's set before the meeting.

Oscar Trimboli:

And then the difference between hearing and listening is the willingness to take action. After the meeting, are you willing to take the action that you committed to to show everybody that you were listening? Or are you just going to go and do your own thing? So this is how listening before and after a conversation shows up as well.

Oscar Trimboli:

But never underestimate the role you play as a parent when it comes to listening or even as a adult child to a parent. You can set the listening tone. It reminds me of a very funny situation. In September last year, I was asked by a person who was interviewing me in Chicago. His name was James. He said, "Oscar, we all have an uncle or an aunt at Thanksgiving, and they're always ranting about something. It might be the angry grandmother." I said, "Okay. I get the scene." "How do we listen to those people we fiercely disagree with?" The question took me back, and I just simply said, "Ask that person when was the first time that they formed that opinion?" And in doing so, you actually reset this automatic story that they tell and they have to go back to that point in time.

Oscar Trimboli:

Most people don't know this story; James rings me up in December, after Thanksgiving. He's about to publish the interview and he says, "Before I do, I have to tell you about my uncle because I asked him that question. And we had a completely different conversation." And I went, "How so?" He said, "Well, he didn't get drunk, for a start." I say, "Well, that sounds like a good starting point."

Oscar Trimboli:

It was a question around politics because they both disagreed on politics, but he asked his uncle when did he first form this perspective on this political issue? And his uncle took him back to the 1960s and explained a really specific situation where that happened. And James said to me, "Wow, I was willing to have my mind changed. And in that moment, I cared enough about my uncle to listen to him and realize that that was his story, and he just carried that forward with him. And the world has changed but his story hasn't changed. But knowing that story, we now discuss that story and where it started rather than where he's at now and it's a much richer conversation for both of us. Our relationship has transformed."

Oscar Trimboli:

I said, "James, I'm completely delighted for you, but do you realize you did that? You, as a listening role model, changed the whole conversation." And in that moment, he kind of went, "Oh. I can help somebody change their own perspective on a topic just by listening to them." And I said, "Yeah. As a listener, we help the speaker make sense of what they're saying." And he said, "Can we record that again? Can we go and record this?" And I said, "Yeah, sure. We can record this." And he kind of added that onto the end of the interview.

Oscar Trimboli:

But equally, I was doing another interview with someone who was interviewing me and their recording ended up in a faith-based group. And they sent me an email and said, "Oscar, I don't know if you're religious or a Christian or anything like that, but this listener had asked me to share this situation with you." And she was a mom in a multi-faith congregation. They basically have a mother's group once a month. She said, "If you listen to this podcast interview before, it's going to be like a book club. We're going to discuss the podcast episode, not the books we normally discuss. And because this is a bit different, I'll buy you a Starbucks coffee voucher."

Oscar Trimboli:

What shocked me in the email that was forwarded on to me is there were 12 people, 12 women, and they're all at that chaotic stage in life where they have young kids and they're all under five and they're in family formation. And they showed up to the discussion, and what shocked the host was she said, "Three people pulled her aside before they sat down and said, "I need to tell you something, and I'm not sure I want to talk about it in our group today."" And all three women, wives, basically said exactly the same thing: "I haven't been listening to my husband since we've had kids. I've ignored him, our marriage is on the rocks, and for the listening to this interview for the first time, I had the courage to go and have a real conversation with my husband since the kids have been born." And I was touched. For me, I spend a lot of time in corporates talking about the cost of not listening, but the cost of not listening at home is pretty huge too, right?

Daniel Stillman:

Tremendous. The family is where it all starts and where we learn how to talk and where we learn how to listen. It's delightful.

Daniel Stillman:

I want to roll back on a whole host of things you've said, and I want to analyze the story of the man who traveled 24 hours and took a moment and-

Oscar Trimboli:

Peter. Yeah.

Daniel Stillman:

Peter. And also of your friend who sat with his uncle at Thanksgiving. What I think is really interesting about your work is, from my own perspective, I am always looking for better ways to design our conversation because when we have simple framework, a simple structure, a design helps us know what to do. And I've been looking at the process of Ting and some of the ancient wisdom that you pull from. We have been trying to solve these problems for a really long time. Obviously as human beings, we've been 40,000 years as modern humans and we still stumble. And so I've been looking at these steps of presence, respect, focus, feeling, hearing, and seeing, and I see the myriad very, very strongly in what Peter did and what your friend did at Thanksgiving.

Daniel Stillman:

And I'm curious, one, how you stumbled upon this piece of wisdom and insight. And two, can you walk it through from your perspective? Because I'm new to it. It sounds like an old friend for you.

Oscar Trimboli:

Most of the problems we're trying to solve our ancient ones. You're right. I went back and researched through the book, Inuit cultures in North America, South American, jungle cultures, Australian Aboriginal cultures, Polynesian and Maori cultures through the islands of the pacific. Ting, which you talk about, here, which is six dimensional listening which is taught in the 12th century by the king's consigliere, for want of a better word, the person who's responsibility for bringing through the next generation of princes and princesses in the court.

Oscar Trimboli:

And to ensure that the dynasties continued, one of the key things the leaders always talked about is the importance of listening to their constituents, in modern language. All the people that were under their rulership. And Ting is six dimensional, and whether we listen for dadirri, which is-

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah, I was hoping we'd get to that, too.

Oscar Trimboli:

... an Aboriginal word, which talks about listening as three dimensional listening but at a much meta level. Listening to yourself, your peoples and your lands.

Oscar Trimboli:

The greatest listening cultures through history are also the greatest storytelling cultures. And there is something rather unique in humans gathering around a common place and space to hear a story because stories, particularly in Aboriginal but also in the Chinese cultures, were directional tools. They were tools to help you understand how to get to a special, sacred ritual site, but there were many steps to get there. You may travel hundreds of miles to get there through rivers and over ravines and through gulleys. And stories were done. But in these ways of telling stories, you were training the youth and the pre-initiation males on how to listen because it would literally save their lives because if you turn left or right, you could have crocodiles eating you going the wrong way on a river versus turning right and then everything will be okay.

Oscar Trimboli:

Back to Ting, Daniel; most of us think about listening. I call it monochrome, two dimensional listening rather than multi-color, multi-sensory listening. Ting teaches us about six colors. Most of us are taught to listen by our hearing and our sight. Listen to the body language and all of a sudden we think we're going well on our listening. And we are. What we do is we double that 100% every time if we start to look at other layers of listening.

Oscar Trimboli:

What I love about Ting is it says that you're listening with your heart. Now, one of the things we have to pay respect to the Mandarin language is only a Westerner would deconstruct Ting into its elemental characters. No Chinese person would do to Ting what I've done. It's about seeing, it's about hearing, it's about your presence, it's about how you're staying focused in the conversation all the way through the six dimensions.

Oscar Trimboli:

There's an integrity in the way that the ancients listen that we've forgotten in modern times. And again, back to dadirri where we talk about listen to yourself first, listen to your peoples next and then listen for your lands because your lands are connecting you with your past but it's also sustaining you in our present. Again, there's a integrity, there's a connectedness in all three of those things and you can't do one well without the other being more productive.

Oscar Trimboli:

Again, when we come back to why is breathing so elemental? And why it's so part, an ingredient in this beautiful [inaudible 00:40:50] broth of listening, it is because it connects everything inside us and everything outside us. Without oxygen in the earth, trees don't grow. Trees don't grown, animals, fish, whatever; they don't happen. And then there's the element of water.

Oscar Trimboli:

Too many of us are looking for the latest fancy-pants move, just being patient and going back to our elders have wisdom. If we could learn from them in just the most simple, basic things, we'll really have a transformational impact.

Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. And taking the time to set the stage for good listening is time well spent.

Oscar Trimboli:

Many people in the workplace have these things called work in progress meetings, and they happen regularly. They might happen daily. They might be called stand-ups or sprints or those kinds of meetings, or they might be weekly. And I'd ask you listening right now, if you're ever been part of those meetings have you ever been frustrated with yourself or somebody else who comes to the work in progress meeting the following week and says, "My task is complete," and then people as you to explain what you've completed and you've completed something that nobody asked you for because you weren't listening. And you wasted a huge amount of time yourself and for the group because you weren't listening in that moment. So the cost of not listening, for most of us in the workplace, is wasted effort. We can't do our best work, or our work isn't valued because it's not connecting to the bigger picture or it's not delivering on something we get really excited about.

Oscar Trimboli:

Getting ready for the conversation to listen reduces the likelihood you're going to hear the wrong thing. If you wanted the modern move, Daniel, that basic modern move beyond water, beyond breathing, it's this. And some people are going to go absolutely crazy like I'm taking away drugs from a drug addict. Remove your digital devices before you start a conversation. If it's a cellphone, I'm not saying go cold turkey and switch it off immediately, but at least try and gray-scale with no notification, and then from no notification to silent mode, and from silent mode to airplane or to flight mode, and from flight mode to off mode. And if you've got a laptop or an iPad or some kind of tablet, just switch off the notifications if you're taking notes on a digital device.

Oscar Trimboli:

And you will have that very different relationship with yourself and your presence, remembering that the difference between a distracted listener and a deep listener is just noticing how often they're distracted. If you switch off the notifications on your computer or your laptop or your cell or your tablet. And now it's just one button. In the good old days, it took a long time to take off those notifications. But right now, it's a button that we can all push to put all the notifications off on those devices.

Oscar Trimboli:

Those 1,410 people I talked about earlier in our database that we've been tracking for three years, Daniel, they say they've doubled their listening productivity by just switching their devices off or switching their notifications off. I say to them, "Quantify double. What does that mean?" And they all say that they get more time in their schedule back. And on average we're finding these people get four hours a week back in their schedules because they're not going into meetings where they're repeating themselves or they delivered the wrong task or they're asking the right kind of questions. And meetings actually become shorter, not longer. When people say, "This listening stuff takes time. I haven't got time. I'm too busy being busy." And I say to-

Daniel Stillman:

It's a pretty good American imitation, though. That was good.

Oscar Trimboli:

I don't even know which State that accent was supposed to be from. And for me, those initial steps of first time going into the listening gym, you're going to get sore muscles, for sure, where you're lifting your weights. But what people notice consistently is... And they all come back to, "Yeah, there is time freeing up in my schedule." Or the opposite is the time I have available now, I'm using those things on stuff I really enjoy, or it's really creative, or it's really long-term, or I can go and move some really big rocks rather than just transactional issues in our business.

Oscar Trimboli:

So for us, the act of listening is going to get you back four hours a week, and the fastest way to do that is just switch the devices to non-notification modes. And if you really want to double, again, just switch them off because we relate to our devices very differently if they're off to whether they're on. If they're on and the notification thing is off... Tell me if this ever happened to you, Daniel: "I'm waiting for that email. Wonder if that email's coming in. I wish I could push that button. If I just push the button now but keep my eyes in front of the room, nobody will notice and the email will come in. I'm sure I'll be okay." And that moment, you're giving your attention to a device.

Oscar Trimboli:

Don't let the device use you, make sure you use the device. That's all I'm asking for. Give conscious attention to everybody around you, but don't let the device use you because the kinds of psychologists that are designing notifications are the same people who design slot machines in Las Vegas to make you continuously scroll on that slot machine and keep putting money in. And that's what happens with a lot of people while they're thumbing their cellphone, too.

Daniel Stillman:

And the truth is, our working attention is, by one measure, 120 bits per second, and one person talking is 60. That's half of our attention. And looking at the phone, looking at anything else, trying to split our attention; there's not a lot of it to go around. We think that we have infinite attention but it's really not the case.

Daniel Stillman:

Oscar, we're really coming up on our time and it's a shame. What haven't you said that ought to be said? Is there anything else that remains unsaid to make our time together complete?

Oscar Trimboli:

There's lots. We haven't spoken about the four villains of listening, we haven't talked about listening individually, collectively and at organizational and ecosystem level, so I'll just conclude by simply saying there are many things left unsaid. Remember, I think at 900 words a minute, I can speak at 125 so there's a big gap. Stick with the basics; that's the thing I keep reminding myself. Devices off, water, breathing; those three things working in harmony together are really powerful. Just practice that.

Oscar Trimboli:

If you want to learn about your listening barriers and what gets in your way, you can take the seven minute listening quiz if you visit listeningquiz.com. You can quickly assess yourself and we'll give you a tailored, 90 day program specifically designed around your specific listening barriers. And at listeningquiz.com, we can connect you with really the next set of tips beyond this. Once you get the breathing right, once you get the devices sorted, once you get your hydration going, we'll help you to explore and notice the difference between bias questions and neutral questions, which are covered so delightfully on the previous episodes.

Oscar Trimboli:

And understand that sometimes the best question that you can answer sounds like this. And if you were going to write down one thing out of today's interview, it will be what I say next. This question is the most powerful question you can ever ask somebody, so here it comes. Silence.

Daniel Stillman:

Boom. Good punchline.

Oscar Trimboli:

The word silent and the word listen have identical letters. I've just done Daniel's head in. He's trying to rearrange the letters-

Daniel Stillman:

I know, I'm not so good with-

Oscar Trimboli:

... in his head. Better you write it down than try to do it as-

Daniel Stillman:

No thank you.

Oscar Trimboli:

... a visual exercise. In the West, we have this awkward relationship with silence. We could do a whole episode on this. We call it the pregnant pause, the awkward silence, the deafening silence. Yet in the East, in Japan, in China, in Korea, in high-context cultures, silence is a sign of wisdom, it's a sign of authority, it's a sign of respect.

Oscar Trimboli:

In fact, a lot of Westerners get very confused when they go to meetings in the East and notice that the senior person in the room, it almost looks like they're asleep but they're not. And the room's waiting for they and there may be up to five minutes of silence. And in that time, the room is coming together, and this is where consensus is evolving and adapting.

Oscar Trimboli:

In jungle cultures, in the Aboriginal and ancient cultures, in the Inuit cultures it is not uncommon for the gathering of tribes to sit in silence for hours, days, weeks, and yet communication is still taking place.

Oscar Trimboli:

Though, Daniel, if there's one thing we could spend a whole other conversation talking, it's about listening to the silence.

Daniel Stillman:

I often talk about the difference between being and doing. Western cultures, we value doing. And in my book I talk about this; speaking versus listening. Speaking is doing and listening seems like non-being and non-doing, and what's that for? But the bowl is useful because of the space in it, and we need that space.

Daniel Stillman:

I really appreciate you making some space in your day, in your time with us and having a spacious conversation with me about this really, really important thing; deep listening. And obviously, yeah, if people want to get into the next step stuff, you... I was going to ask you these questions but there's places to find you on the internet. People can read your book. A whole piece of your brain, preserved posterity people can leisurely, at their own pace and time, leaf through. Are there other places on the internet that people should find you in their leisure hours?

Oscar Trimboli:

Just listeningquiz.com is the-

Daniel Stillman:

Once we turn our devices back on.

Oscar Trimboli:

Look, listeningquiz.com is the starting place, and that'll give you access to the books, to the deep listening playing cards, it will give you access to the deep listening jigsaw puzzles, it'll give you access to the Deep Listening podcast series, the online masterclass for managers and how to listen across the nine meetings that matter, it can give all the socials and things like that.

Oscar Trimboli:

And we also have a community of practice where we get together twice a month across three different timezones to listen to each other and come to a common space where between six and eight people discuss the barriers that are getting in the way of their listening every week. As you mentioned, Daniel, listening is both a skill, it's a strategy and it's a practice. Those three things are all the kinds of muscles you need to build there. So listeningquiz.com; starting point for everything.

Daniel Stillman:

Oscar, thank you so much.

Facilitating complexity

YKUsQMdD.jpeg

I’m thrilled to *finally* share my conversation with the amazing and electrifying Nikki Silvestri.

We connected back in early March and recorded our conversation in late May, at the height of the quarantine. It’s been a process to find the time to sit with this deep conversation and pull together some insights for you.

A friend shared Nikki’s work with me and I was hooked - Nikki was setting up a program to teach facilitation to Rural Women, and I was so curious to dive into her facilitation and leadership approach and her critical work.

Nikki’s core metaphor is soil - the complex place that gives life to us all - the source of our nourishment.

Monoculture vs Food Forests

Soil can be thought of as a series of inputs - minerals, water, carbon, etc. A mathematical equation for creating a space for life. But rich soil is not simple. It’s a complex, living thing that responds unpredictably to attempts to control it.

In agriculture we can have a food forest - a near-wild combination of plants and animals feeding each other and ourselves. Or, we can have a monoculture - sprawling spaces where we use as much science and technology as possible to sustain maximum outputs at all times and at all costs.

Nikki suggests, rightly, that monocultures can also exist in our own organizations...and that when we have such a monoculture, when we are not doing what she calls “basic diversity and inclusion work” innovation and creativity will be lost. 

Esther Derby, a noted Agile consultant, touched on this forest metaphor in our podcast interview - she said that she would rewrite her whole book about leading change using food forests and forest succession as her central metaphor.

Mechanistic thinking vs Complexity Thinking in Group Work and Leadership

We push this metaphor of soil and complexity deeper into growing personal leadership and holding space for deep group work. Nikki describes the central tension:

“I was trapped in mechanistic thinking because nonlinear complex thinking, it had too many unknowns and it made me too uncomfortable....With the amount of responsibility that I felt like I had, I needed to know. And frankly, I needed to know that I could manipulate my way into the linear outcome that I was looking for because there was "too much at stake" to not have that happen.”

After all, control is rewarded. As Nikki suggests: “The people who are able to manipulate, and dominate, and control the outcome the most are the ones who are rewarded.”

Links, Notes and Resources

Nikki Silvestri on the web https://www.nikkisilvestri.com/

Nikki’s TEDx Talk

Nikki on Soil and Shadow

Gestalt Organizational Development

Carter's Cube (free login required)

Full Transcription

Daniel Stillman:

We're live. I will officially welcome you to the Conversation Factory. All right, Nikki, I am so excited you're here. Man, I think the opening question I want to ask you is, what is the soil you came from?



Nikki Silvestri:

Oh, that's such a beautiful question. Are you just asking me that because I'm Soil and Shadow, or is that the way you usually phrase that?



Daniel Stillman:

I never ask that question, and I know that that's your question. I think it's a great question.



Nikki Silvestri:

It's such a great question. I love it so much. Okay. Okay. The soil nerd in me just was delighted that that was your first question. My soil that I come from is the soil of Los Angeles. And what I love about that, about being a fourth generation Los Angeleno, is that one of the oldest graveyards in the city is on a border town of Koreatown and toward downtown LA. And my great grandparents are there, and there's not a lot of people whose great grandparents are buried in a city like LA.



Daniel Stillman:

No.



Nikki Silvestri:

So I love the fact that I have such deep roots there, and that then before that my people came from the South, like so many Black folks. I'm from the soil of that land in that place, and I feel grateful for that. I'm from the soil of artists and entertainers. My great grandfather was a Black man and black-faced in a Minstrel show. And my grandfather was in a really famous blues quartet back in the day. Just the entertainment industry and how Black folk in particular intersected with the entertainment industry for activism, for care, for telling our story in a time when it's not really safe to tell our story in a complex way, I come from that too.



Nikki Silvestri:

I think the last piece of the soil that I come from is mothers, which has become a more relevant topic for me now. I'm almost 20 weeks pregnant. I'm 18 weeks pregnant with my second child right now. And just raising my toddler while being pregnant has given me such insight into the legacy of just all of the mothers before me and how hard it is to raise humans. I'm just like, "How do any of us get here?" I'm astonished that any of us are sane, honestly. That's the soil I come from.



Daniel Stillman:

It's rich and loamy. I heard your voice catch when you talked about mothers. That feels really real, and that's something that you're really connected to right now.



Nikki Silvestri:

It is.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I have my stickies here, snippets of your work that I've snipped, that I think would be worthwhile to circle back around. You've written about the complexity mindset and facilitation and work. And I feel like you have a really interesting perspective on complexity because of soil and because of the complexity of soil. You were talking about the magic that people wind up growing up and becoming people from little people. Can you talk about why complexity mindset and facilitation and then work is important to you? Take us through how you got there, how it became helpful and clear to you.



Nikki Silvestri:

Those are two separate and deep questions.



Daniel Stillman:

Cool. Take them as you will.



Nikki Silvestri:

Okay. The second one, how did I get here? One of the reasons I like soil metaphor so much is because I feel like they're so clear. When I was in the earlier part of my career as a nonprofit executive director, I was in an organic monoculture, is what I like to call it. So, because I had really good values, that was the organic part, the pesticide would have been just straight, get as much money as you can, or not anything even unscrupulous, just the social justice, social equity, progressive, that was my "organic mindset". But the monoculture part is that you can have that mindset. This is what I discovered. I'll use "I" statements like I do in facilitation.



Daniel Stillman:

Thank you.



Nikki Silvestri:

I had that mindset and was still working in a way that was depleting myself. I was pushing my team in a way that was depleting. I was sacrificing our long-term health and sustainability for short-term goals, and then wrapping them in all these pretty progressive words, and thus it's okay, which I see so many-



Daniel Stillman:

And this is the joke, when sustainable isn't sustainable, right? Ha ha ha-



Nikki Silvestri:

That's exactly... Well, inorganic-



Daniel Stillman:

Certainly not for the people.



Nikki Silvestri:

... monocultures are not sustainable.



Daniel Stillman:

No.



Nikki Silvestri:

You could be certified organic and still stripping the hell out of your soil. Taking that metaphor and bringing it into social contexts was really fascinating for me because then it led to break down for me. I was just experiencing a personal journey and I was trying to put language around it. What led to my breakdown? Why did I have an existential crisis at the peak of my career about the fact that I didn't think any of my work was going to work? Why did I hate people, like just straight up? I never wanted to work on a team again. It was so bad. It got so bad.



Daniel Stillman:

Oh boy.



Nikki Silvestri:

And so, then soil, I just started going to workshops on soil carbon sequestration, because I wanted to find some avenue to hope when it comes to the climate. And getting carbon out of the air and into the soil was very inspiring to me. And it was in that journey that I started learning about healthy soil and how to build healthy soil. It was fascinating to me, just what fertility actually means, that you could have on the one hand, you put a bunch of minerals into soil... Not a bunch, just like three main minerals into soil. And then those three main minerals, you can have an equation.



Nikki Silvestri:

You put in this many minerals, you get out that much yield, and the equation will work for a period of time. And I found that in social systems, you can do the same thing. You can put in a salary, a work plan, a mission statement into an equation and pop out a certain level of productivity or a project management software, whatever the widgets are that people identify as being what keeps people motivated and productive, and a high performance team. People get attached to these widgets? I mean, it's one of the things I coach on all the time.



Nikki Silvestri:

The meaningful part of facilitation and the meaningful part of gathering people is social fertility. If you give them the healthy ingredients that they need to convene amongst themselves... The way that I define fertility is increasing the complexity of relationships. If you do that in the soil, when it comes to water, and carbon, and all the different minerals and bacteria that live in the soil, give them the freedom to increase their complexity of relationships. And not only will you grow what you intended to grow, you're going to have a bunch of co-benefits.



Nikki Silvestri:

You're going to build nutrient density in the food. You're going to stop soil erosion, etc. If you do the same thing, whether you're facilitating or just building a team, you have these basic ingredient building blocks of how you create a healthy socially fertile environment. And then that team of people create stuff you never would've dreamed of creating. It's the foundation of all my work. And in facilitation, it's an art form because it's not just about the outcomes of whatever the gathering was that you were going to do. It's about creating the environment for magic.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Well, and so that's interesting. I don't think you would propose that because it's an art, we don't have any control or agency in the process, right?



Nikki Silvestri:

Not at all. It's a co-creative process.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. It seems like underneath it, you still have core theory you're working with. There is soil science. There's there's group dynamics, right?



Nikki Silvestri:

Absolutely.



Daniel Stillman:

Which I'm guessing you are as deep of a student of group dynamics as any facilitator who's serious about their craft.



Nikki Silvestri:

Absolutely. I like to translate the part that we can control. It's the difference between the owner's manual of how to run a 10,000-acre chemical-laden monoculture, and the manual of how to build healthy soil on a regenerative ranch or farm. The regenerative ranch or farm, there's the five principles of soil health, and diversity of the plants and the animals, well, having animals on the land, having a diversity of plants, making sure your soil is covered. And then two more that are escaping me. But I translate those all the time into what that looks like in the social context.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Diversity.



Nikki Silvestri:

Diversity and inclusion is something I work with all the time. Yeah. You have the same group of people. You have a monoculture in terms of the culture of the people who are in the room, there's a certain amount of innovation that will be lost. It's basic in diversity and inclusion work. But how to do that without having so much conflict that you break the container completely, that is an art form. And that has very specific things you can do.



Nikki Silvestri:

When it comes to keeping the soil covered, that one is very interesting to me because it's about when you have a vulnerable resource. How do you protect an idea when it's brand new and learn how to improve it in a way that doesn't destroy it completely, but that gives it enough cover so that it can grow? One of the best descriptions of this I've ever seen is the brain trust concept that was in Creativity, Inc. the book Creativity, Inc by the dude who started Pixar.



Daniel Stillman:

John Lasseter.



Nikki Silvestri:

His last name is Arthur.



Daniel Stillman:

Is it John Lasseter or is it the other... Ed Catmull's. Ed Catmull is the one you're talking about.



Nikki Silvestri:

Yep. It was Ed Catmull's book. That's right. Pregnancy brain is real. So you're going to have to prompt me several times in this conversation.



Daniel Stillman:

I don't have an excuse for it. Not that I know.



Nikki Silvestri:

But just that description of how creative companies are able to protect a new movie idea and then make it better, but without destroying it, knowing that something needs to change almost completely from one form to another when it's new. Groups of people when they get together are really quick to criticize. And so, a part of creating fertility is the ability to improve without damaging the sanctity of newness, which is also specific in an art form. So those are just a couple of examples. You're not taking your hands off the reins at all. You're actually doing things that are very sophisticated, that are guiding, but are not controlling.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. If anybody's listening and happened to hear... I don't know if you've checked this episode out, but Esther Derby came on the show a couple of months back and she's a wonderful, wonderful speaker. She wrote a book about seven rules for positive, productive change. And she's, "I've got this last one that's not in the book," and really it was about forest succession. The power of the metaphor you use, the metaphor you use is the question you ask, and the questions you ask are the answers you'll get. It's what you see. It's what you can even ask about.



Daniel Stillman:

Sometimes people talk about innovation management, which is this mechanistic perspective that creativity and innovation and change can be done in a one plus one equals two kind of a way. What we're talking about here is not even gardening, which is this... I've got this sandbox and I've got rows and beds and there's inputs and outputs. But this is the idea of the food forest. How can I have something that is truly self sustaining, that is truly natural, and truly regenerative? And there's just great stuff that just pops out of it more than I could have ever imagined.



Daniel Stillman:

How do you get from what my friend, Robert, calls not just going from A to B, but going from A to B prime, more than we could have ever expected. You don't get that from mechanistic thinking.



Nikki Silvestri:

No, you don't. The question is, how do you do that?



Daniel Stillman:

I mean, that was more of a comment than a question, but if you want to yes and that.



Nikki Silvestri:

I am so in the yes and camp. I mean, what's interesting to me is that if I go back to my breakdown, I was trapped in mechanistic thinking because nonlinear complex thinking, it had too many unknowns and it made me too uncomfortable. It was actually intolerable. With the amount of responsibility that I felt like I had, I needed to know. And frankly, I needed to know that I could manipulate my way into the linear outcome that I was looking for because there was "too much at stake" to not have that happen.



Daniel Stillman:

Right. Yes, and that's putting your hands on the wheel because we're panicked.



Nikki Silvestri:

Yes. And it's the way the world works. The people who are able to manipulate, and dominate, and control the outcome the most are the ones who are rewarded. There are different schools of thought when it comes to, is it a spectrum? Is it an either or? I honestly don't have an answer for that. I feel like I've just gotten to the place where I know where I'm orienting and the people who feel most aligned with my work are orienting, and it starting from a different place. It's starting from the perspective that you can never actually understand in totality an ecosystem, full stop.



Daniel Stillman:

Right. Which is a really humble place to come from. And yet-



Nikki Silvestri:

Exactly.



Daniel Stillman:

And yet I'm willing to bet that, as we must, you are in my perspective, a designer of conversations and you put guardrails on a thing. And so, I'm wondering-



Nikki Silvestri:

Oh, absolutely.



Daniel Stillman:

... what is the wisdom you try to impart to people when it comes to intelligently guiding dialogue in a way that is safe and productive?



Nikki Silvestri:

Well, and that's the step by step, is if the origin point is you can never completely understand or have your arms completely around an ecosystem, then that goes for the land, and that goes for social dynamics. That goes for any system where there's more than one piece interacting with one another. In conversation, part of that starting point is you need a ton of practice with things going off the rails in order to trust yourself and your ability to get intuitive at some point. Because, honestly, at some point, all the learning goes out the window and you just have to know and trust yourself and your ability to manage things that you could not have at all planned for and were completely unexpected.



Nikki Silvestri:

That's one of the first things I introduced. Are you comfortable going there? And if you are, then we can go through the other steps. But then there's just some basics when it comes to... A lot of this is organizing principle, which I also think is interesting around the art of one-on-ones. Before you walk into a room full of people, you should know as much as you possibly can about the system from a humble place. Knowing you're not going to know the whole thing, try to know as much as you can.



Nikki Silvestri:

It's extraordinary to me the number of people that don't do that kind of basic thing. Then also group process agreements. But the complex group process agreements, it's a lot deeper than just, "If you're used to talking a lot, don't talk so much. And if you're not talking so much, go ahead and step in."



Daniel Stillman:

Right, as if I knew how to self-manage as a participant.



Nikki Silvestri:

Right.



Daniel Stillman:

Which I don't.



Nikki Silvestri:

Right. But there's one of my favorite group process agreements is expect and accept non closure. Like walking into a meeting and saying, "This is one of my basic operating principles." In a meeting where the outcome is to have closure on something, usually messes with people's heads. [inaudible 00:17:30] kidding. You set the expectation of, "This is how nonlinear complex systems work. Here's what we can manage for. We can manage for having next steps for everything that comes up. We can manage for having a spirit of generosity when things come up. We can manage for not looking at conflict as a bad thing."



Nikki Silvestri:

In fact, looking at conflict from the perspective of Gestalt Organizational Development, and Carter's Cube as a part of what leads toward cohesion, when you have an orientation phase of a group, there's a whole series of tools that I pull out just to give people context for, "This is the natural progress and process of how a system moves from one place to another." We can't control the outcome of where we will get to in the end 100%. But what we can do is manage for each step in the process and keep it safe enough so that there's enough conflict when we get to the next phase, but there's not so much conflict that we break trust.



Nikki Silvestri:

The last thing I'll say about that is then another piece of facilitation in the art is knowing when to intervene, when there's too much conflict, and knowing when to just let it ride and let people work out their own stuff. That's why I feel like so much of this, you can teach as just, "These are the practice agreements of engagement." But then at least 50% of it, if not more, is the practice of being able to feel into a group. It does feel like parenting to me.



Nikki Silvestri:

It's one of the reasons my voice cut in the beginning when you were talking about motherhood, like when do you push a toddler and when do you be gentle? There's all these guidebooks on it. And at the end of the day, you just need to practice and figure out how children work. And it's the same in groups.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I went through a whole phase in my life where I was rejecting all of the tough love that had been given to me. I was like, "Tough love is not the same thing as love." And I think there's very often this idea of, "Well, they need to each toughen up. We need to straighten this out. We need to have some hard talk." I often just have a sticky note on my wall, just to love my participants as much as I can because everyone's just going through a rough time, now but also always.



Daniel Stillman:

Was it Emerson who said... Or is it Whitman, it's like, "Be gentle. Everyone is fighting a mighty battle, and we know nothing of." I actually don't know anything about the Carter's Cube. I'm trying to find it out on the internet, but it looks like Gestalt theory, there's not a lot of it on the internet.



Nikki Silvestri:

No. John Carter is the person I'm talking about, and he published a few books a long time ago. But it's very, very, very, very niche. Unless you're in the Gestalt Organizational Development community, you probably don't know what I'm talking about.



Daniel Stillman:

I mean, I'm looking at it now on the internet. Yeah. This is a corner of the internet.



Nikki Silvestri:

It's a corner, but it's brilliant work. It's brilliant. It's brilliant work.



Daniel Stillman:

What's important for us to know about it. Because I definitely understand this idea of the push and pull and the two hands of the Potter's wheel forming and opening the clay pot. And if you've got one and not the other, you've got nothing. And so, it's about balance for me. But I have a feeling you're seeing some other forces at work when you're thinking about group dynamics. So maybe I'm not even seeing.



Nikki Silvestri:

Well. An example I'll give that's more common is the Gestalt Cycle of Experience. And that one just describes how groups and individuals process information. You go from sensing something to then being aware of it, to then experiencing anxiety or excitement about it, to then taking action on it. And then that action leads to some kind of contact with your original role, which allows your shoulders to drop. And then there's withdrawal from the entire process, and then it starts again.



Nikki Silvestri:

That's an example that I can give people around... There's a step by step of how groups move through dynamics. Where are we right now? That's just one of a number of things. But one of the things that is similar in soil is that people have a bunch of different models that they use for how they do regenerative agriculture. Different frameworks. Frameworks are an opportunity for us to at least locate ourselves in a process when we're uncomfortable, and naming the discomfort, and knowing what came before it to potentially cause it and what could come after it if we integrate it. It's just that by itself is a really great tool to use no matter what the framework is that you're throwing in there.



Daniel Stillman:

This connects to a question I wanted to ask you because you mentioned safety. And I feel like everyone has their own... Well, no. I feel like many people don't have their own. Everyone should have their own perspective on what it means to and how we should or can even facilitate safety. When I think about physical safety in the way that I've been teaching it, it's like, we know, if you show somebody a picture of a blind, dark alley, you feel unsafe because you can't see the exits and you don't know what's down there, and you don't know what's safe.



Daniel Stillman:

This idea of having a framework and saying, "Where are we now?", where does everyone think we are? I'm looking at this now. Are we observing change? Are we scanning or making change? Are we developing practices or making choices or are we leading and managing?



Nikki Silvestri:

Exactly. Exactly.



Daniel Stillman:

If everyone says, "I think we're here, but I want to be here," then we have the beginnings of a really interesting conversation.



Nikki Silvestri:

Exactly, exactly. This idea of safety is... That is a topic for me because I get irritated. Let me tell you what-



Daniel Stillman:

Don't hold back from [inaudible 00:23:50]-



Nikki Silvestri:

Irritated when people feel like comfort is equivalent to safety. I can't stand it. It's one of the reasons why my firm is called Soil and Shadow, because I just wanted to be clear. You talk to me, we're about to box with some shadows. That's just what's going to happen because I don't do a resistance to discomfort. Discomfort is how you grow. And I also feel that it's one of the deep, deep ways that I approach diversity and being a Black woman. It's just so much of my life has been not seeking comfort as a state of being that will let me know when I've "made it" or will let me know when I'm able to "live fully".



Nikki Silvestri:

It's such a deep, personal thing for me, the equivalence of privilege and comfort. And so, when I'm managing groups and when I'm facilitating groups, the way that I describe safety is if you have enough risk to grow, but not so much risk that you break trust and damage relationship. And it's a very fine line. It requires a few basic tenets, which is another thing what I facilitate. One of my facilitation tools is the scale of emotional intensity from one to 10.



Nikki Silvestri:

I tell people in the beginning, "I am prepared to hold a container up to about a level six today, because we're going to be getting into some difficult, deep conversation." Unless I'm doing just straight up spirit ritual and we've got libations-



Daniel Stillman:

11.



Nikki Silvestri:

... and we're sitting naked on the earth or something. That's a 10. I don't get paid to facilitate a 10. You feel me?



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I see what you mean.



Nikki Silvestri:

I will go up to an eight.



Daniel Stillman:

This is like when you go to the nurse and there's the smiley face to the frowny face, like what amount of pain are we having here?



Nikki Silvestri:

That's exactly right.



Daniel Stillman:

I love this idea of asking people what they're willing to contain because what you're willing to hold space for is what you can accomplish.



Nikki Silvestri:

That's exactly right. And it's a tool for me because I say in the beginning, "The container is a six. If you feel yourself at a six moving to a seven, I need you to remove yourself from the group. We have a space over there." If I know it's going to be an emotionally intense so and so, the conversation we're having, then I have a place to go. There's either a separate room or a separate place in the room that has blankets and candles, and whatever people need to just go take a time out like a child. You're experiencing an inner tantrum, but my job is to hold the group. And your job is to hold yourself in the group.



Nikki Silvestri:

So if you feel yourself in an inability to meet where I'm prepared to hold the group, I need you to take responsibility for bringing yourself back down to a six. And if you go to an eight in the group dynamic, I will take you out of the space myself. Unless I'm co-facilitating, and most of the time, if I know I'm going to be in a deep conversation like that, I do try to co-facilitate. So one of the facilitators can remove themselves and go and be with the person, because it's not a punitive thing at all. It's just that we will break trust if the container is set at a six and you go to an eight, and then we in the moment try to develop agreements for what it takes to hold an eight without breaking trust. So that's an example.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. What's tough for me about that is that I think I try to create a safe space where everybody's voice is heard and matters, but I can screw up. I can say something that can set somebody off and not know it. There's still that moment where it's like, "How much of this do I need to take responsibility for?" Especially, and maybe this is when we make the transition to talking about distributed facilitation, it's much harder to take somebody into a side room and have a side conversation with the same level of smoothness on the internet, because I can't just put my hand on somebody's shoulder and say like, "Hey, where are we with this?"



Nikki Silvestri:

Totally. Well, and that's a good distinction to make in terms of what I'm saying, because the only thing I'm talking about is emotional intensity on that scale. If you can be with what just occurred and stay at a five, knowing that you could go to an eight, but you're a mature person who can manage your own emotional expression in a group space, then 100%, we need to talk about it. But we're talking about it at a five, you know?



Daniel Stillman:

I do know.



Nikki Silvestri:

I've done this before in real time. If it's something that needs to be addressed, but you need to actually cry because it was so triggering for you, then maybe the whole group needs to take a 20-minute break so that you don't feel isolated and we're continuing to have a conversation. But all I'm saying is that I'm changing the group process agreements to hold the container for a higher level of emotional intensity for everyone. I don't, at this point, do that unless it's a serious emergency situation because it's an incredible drain on the facilitator-



Daniel Stillman:

Well, yeah, let's talk about that.



Nikki Silvestri:

... to do that. I would rather take a break.



Daniel Stillman:

Because I've got that written down here. I know that facilitation can be draining, and that we have to take care of ourselves. And on the flip side, what we are capable of holding space for, if we can't hold space for this kind of uncertainty, emotional intensity, ambiguity, we're not going to find anything wonderful on the other side. My friend, Bob, who came on this podcast ages ago, who teaches negotiation at Harvard, he talked about how you can design a negotiation so that nothing actually happens. It just becomes sterile. It's so contained that nothing interesting happens and there's no resolution because nothing was actually truly put out on the table.



Daniel Stillman:

And so, in one hand, we have to create a space where real stuff can come up, But that's draining to hold space for it. So, I mean, what do you do to take care of yourself as a facilitator?



Nikki Silvestri:

Yeah. It's one of the reasons I have a spectrum of emotional intensity. Because the first part of that is, I look at the outcomes of what's meant to be discussed and held. And then I usually have a pretty good read on what level of emotional intensity is likely to come up holding that level of space. So if I know that we need to have the space to go to an eight, if it comes up, for example, then I'm taking a day off before the facilitation. I'm taking a day off after the facilitation.



Daniel Stillman:

Oh man.



Nikki Silvestri:

I am calling in my ancestors straight up like, "Grandmamma, I need you up in this room to make sure I've got my shit together." And other people's ancestors. I need the grandparents in the room who can look at you crazy if I can't look at you crazy. If you're starting to break the container and just, there's a whole level of prayer and self care. And just me trying to make sure I'm in alignment. I mean, facilitation is a very spiritual thing for me. The oldest version of it was like holding counsel space, and counsel space is deep.



Nikki Silvestri:

Lives were decided in counsel spaces. War was decided in counsel spaces, whether excise a person from a community and send them off into exile was decided in counsels. It's profound when people give you the trust to hold them. And so even the way that a building breaks during a highly intense space, how much food do I have in the room? If it's a level eight, there is constant nourishment, constant. And I will even do some juju like having flavored water. What particular vegetables and fruits am I flavoring the water with?



Nikki Silvestri:

Sliced cucumber evokes a particular kind of nutrient in the water that people might need to have this particular conversation. Or do we need pineapple water? I'll go really deep into the details of how I'm setting up a space. And that's a part of creating fertility. It's like a basic tenet of fertility, is what are the pieces that you're putting in place? What's the level of detail and care you're taking in curating the environment within which then the pieces of the ecosystem are coming to play?



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. This is a perfect transition because work time, time moves a pace, and I want to make sure we talk about Gathering Fire and what's become of that project. Because when my friend, Jen Hayzlett sent me your newsletter, this idea of teaching rural women, the art of convening and facilitating, because community building and counseling is so critical to community building, I was like, "This is such a..." I never thought about how important it was and how critical it was to teach these mindsets and skillsets to that group.



Daniel Stillman:

But I'm wondering, A, what's being done with that initiative now, and how can we have that level of detail and care when we can't send people cucumber water through Zoom?



Nikki Silvestri:

Indeed. One thing that's been interesting in this era of social distancing is that I've been converting a lot of my in-person care that I would do to pre-gathering instructions for people to do for themselves. And it's really testing this question of, how well do you care for yourself? It's the same when I'm talking about going to a level of emotional intensity. If someone's coming in and they don't care for themselves well at all outside of the group, and they come into a really well-held container that I'm holding and they find that it actually works, then it turns me into some kind of magical unicorn that's just-



Daniel Stillman:

Which you are, but that's-



Nikki Silvestri:

... super skilled. Of course, I'm a magical unicorn. Of course, I am. Anyone can do it. It's just how much level of detail and care are you willing to take and how much practice are you willing to have with extraordinary discomfort? So I have had instructions-



Daniel Stillman:

Simple. There you go, but you make it seem so simple.



Nikki Silvestri:

... before. I'm just like, "Yeah, it's just discomfort that makes you feel like you're going to crawl out of your skin and sit with it. That's all." But so the instructions before a gathering. Prepare cucumber water. I'm sending you a package with the workbook and a candle. I would like you to have a floor chair that's comfortable. Here are several links. If you're paying to come, then this is something I will send you as a part of the package, a floor chair, because when that computer opens, I want to see you sitting in front of that floor chair, with a candle in front of you, with that workbook, wearing the t-shirt that you got in the mail, wearing the essential oil that's the main theme.



Nikki Silvestri:

There's a way to bring in sensory stuff. It means that there's a lot more mail flying back and forth, just as a logistical thing. And if someone really takes the time to prep for the gathering, the way that I would prep for them and I send them the materials to do so, it really does evoke a sense of care and it creates its own container. The Gathering Fire Initiative is still happening in some form or fashion. The idea behind women leaders in rural America needing facilitation support is that just so much of what is controlling and dictating what happens in this country is happening in rural spaces right now.



Nikki Silvestri:

It's things like the majority of California is technically rural, and people don't think about that. But this power, intense power, is concentrated in rural America, and women are stepping up to just be the eye in the churches and to be the eye in the county meetings. They're trying and they need help. If what happened in 2016 in terms of this intense political divide in our country, so much of that was split between rural and urban as well. We just felt like it was time to really care for the folks who were living at the intersections, who care about all of us who happened to be in rural communities, considering that the face of rural communities is incredibly diverse.



Nikki Silvestri:

But the folks that we think of living in rural America may not be the faces we initially think of in terms of that diversity. So there were a lot of complexities there and we wanted to just make sure we were properly serving that community. In this era of social distancing, I don't know, being on land and being in person together was a huge component of how that training was going to happen. One interesting thing is that in the next two to four years, as we're figuring out, before there's a vaccine, just what the safest way is to gather in person.



Nikki Silvestri:

Land is coming up in a lot of my conversations because it's just safer to be outside. And considering that that was something that was always a part of my in-person gatherings, it's coming up to me as fascinating. There is a now a meme in popular culture that being indoors in circulated air is not healthy. And it's like, "D'oh, yeah, it never was sedentary-



Daniel Stillman:

We call it fresh air.



Nikki Silvestri:

...lifestyle. Never was healthy. How about that? And now there's a virus that's like, "Oh no, I'm just kicking you out," kicking me out of the nest. "Go do all your convening six feet apart in a field." And it's like, "Great, convening six feet apart in a field, done."



Daniel Stillman:

Right. It's just a constraint and we can work with it. This is only slightly relevant. An NPR did a bit about, in Germany, they basically opened up a restaurant outside and they gave everyone hats that had Pool Noodles attached to those.



Nikki Silvestri:

Pool Noodles. I saw that.



Daniel Stillman:

You saw the Pool Noodles?



Nikki Silvestri:

Yeah.



Daniel Stillman:

I just loved it's like we're just all going to have Pool Noodle hats on and doing paired conversation six feet apart. Grab a partner but don't actually grab them.



Nikki Silvestri:

Yeah. I mean, it's adjusting the idea of personal space. And it's also been interesting to me thinking about the idea of circulation, because that's a big thing too. When you're inside, you're in a very controlled environment in terms of temperature, in terms of air flow, in terms of the floor and the ceiling and the walls. It's a controlled environment.



Daniel Stillman:

Well, it's a container.



Nikki Silvestri:

It is a container. It's a total container. And when you're outside, the ability for things to circulate, where you're standing is on the actual earth. So whatever you're talking about is held by a living substance underneath your feet. Then there's air flow that's just a straight wind. I have found that when I facilitate conversations outside, the harder the conversation, the further outside I go. I bring more plants into the space if it's an indoor conversation, but if I'm going to an eight, as much of that conversation as possible is happening outside.



Daniel Stillman:

Why so?



Nikki Silvestri:

I might even take us to the ocean. Well, just because I feel like nature is a great container for really intense emotion. Then we're not limited to directing it at each other. I've had people turn to the ocean. I'm like, "Whatever you're about to say right now, it looks like you might start screaming. Just turn to the ocean and tell it to the ocean, and we will witness you tell it to the ocean. But let the ocean hold it so that we're not the ones holding it."



Nikki Silvestri:

Then they turn back around and we can process it together. But asking non-human ecological entities to hold the intensity of some of the stuff we come up with, it's a tool that I use. It's been very, very, very helpful to distinguish. I mean the more facilitation "version" of it is just the witness stance in listening versus the responder stance in listening.



Daniel Stillman:

Right? This is the third point. This is why even just writing it down on a piece of paper and putting it on the wall means that we can look at it together instead of me giving it straight to you saying, "This is what I think about your project," versus saying, "Here's what I think about the project." It's on the wall now. And we're both looking at it. The space says something.



Nikki Silvestri:

Even if it's about the other person, taking the witness stance about something that's about you is very hard, and it's totally possible. If you set a container that's basically about things need to be surfaced, and this is way too hot to try to integrate or decide right now. But having it be in the shadows and in the background is completely eroding the trust. So the first step is going to be expressing it. And your job is to witness in a pure, in a pure way. There's no responding. Maybe there's no eye contact.



Nikki Silvestri:

I've done that as well. Like look at a spot in the wall or look at a spot on the floor and share, but don't look at the person. Then there's just an acknowledgement, "I've heard you." Then there's a break or lunch or something. Then there's some processing afterward. I've even taken entire days of space. A lot of what you're hearing, because I have Soil and Shadow, Shadow in my name, a lot of folks come to me for level eight conversations, which is a lot of what you're hearing now.



Nikki Silvestri:

I can do a four. I have. It's super fun. And just part of the work that I love and part of the work that I feel really well suited for is going to a level eight when it's not direct conflict resolution. But there's just intensity in a system and we need to move forward in some way. And we need to get through things that are hard to talk about. So come and help us work that out.



Daniel Stillman:

We're coming up against our time. It really flies. I've really enjoyed this conversation. Is there anything that we have not talked about that you think... What have I not asked you about that we should talk about with regards to convening, facilitating, and holding space?



Nikki Silvestri:

Yeah, the only other thing I would say is it's just specific to this era, knowing that many people are not going to be feeling safe to get together in person at all. It is possible to curate, as I was talking about earlier, a virtual space that is so much more intentional than you ever might have thought of going or doing. It's in that level of detail orientation and care that you can curate a level of intentional virtual space that feels so luscious and so nurturing that you can get into hard conversations. There's tons of tools out there for when you get into the part of the hard conversation. But what I would really want to emphasize is just the care, the before and after and attending to the senses type care.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. I think what I'm really taking away is the intentionality of building capacity in the soil, and really nourishing that, the space in the ground, and being detail-oriented about that is caring for it.



Nikki Silvestri:

That's right.



Daniel Stillman:

Yeah. Yeah. Well, Nikki, honestly, it's such a pleasure. I think there are a lot of people who look at facilitation as a mechanistic process. And if I have more recipes and better ingredients, I can make more delicious food. We started our conversation talking about making a Dutch baby for your son for breakfast. And it's like, when you see a recipe, you can reproduce it ish, but there's still something that the chef brings to the recipe.



Nikki Silvestri:

Totally. Totally.



Daniel Stillman:

The recipe does not make the chef. And so, I really appreciate you talking about all the inner stuff about what the chef brings to the recipe, the inner stance.



Nikki Silvestri:



Thank you.