Workplace Cult of Disruption

Your Work Friends Podcast: The Problem with Change with Ashley Goodall

Change is worshipped in the workplace…

But at what cost? From reorgs to reinvention, disruption has become the workplace religion. For the past 10 years, organizations have not only been incented and are, seemingly addicted to change and disrupting their companies. Mergers, acquisitions, new leadership teams, new technologies, new strategies, new, new, new.   How do we get to this place where it really feels like we're all working constantly in a cult of disruption?

Ashley Goodall helps us unpack how we got here, why it’s exhausting everyone, and what leaders should be doing instead to create meaningful progress. Spoiler: there’s a better way.

Listen or watch the full episode here

---

Speaker 1: 0:00

A sensible, healthy, capitalist, profit-maximizing organization will ask itself the question how can we help our employees do their best work first?

Speaker 2: 0:27

Hello friend.

Speaker 3: 0:29

Well, it's June. It's June in 2024. It is.

Speaker 2: 0:33

It's happening?

Speaker 3: 0:34

Do you guys go to the beach? Yes, we do go to the beach, so we live about an hour and a half two hours from the beach when you drive there. I swear to God, this is where they film all the car commercials because you can get on some really nice like serpentining switchbacky roads. They're all tree lined. You just imagine the Porsche commercial with the back tire kicking up leaves and that kind of stuff. It's a beautiful, beautiful drive and you live on the beach.

Speaker 2: 1:01

Well, I wish I lived on it live five like five minutes away. We just got our beach pass. I like to go early in the morning when no one's there, so I'll typically be there early and then I stay until noon and head out when all the people show up. Do you have an umbrella and stuff? If I stay there past noon, if it's going to be a full day thing, I have one of those tents that you, you. It has like a little window in the back and you see like I'll hang my legs out, but I am too Casper, the friendly ghost, to be out in that sun. I got melasma so bad one year. It looked like I had dirt on my forehead. What'd?

Speaker 3: 1:39

you do to get that off Like you're like right now? Yeah, Just eventually eventually rubbed off.

Speaker 2: 1:45

It just looked like I had a straight up patch of dirt on my forehead, like ash.

Speaker 3: 1:49

Wednesday was all here in the name of the father and the son. Yeah, oh, that's really funny, thank you.

Speaker 2: 1:57

Thank god for chemicals we are here because we met with leadership expert, consultant and author of several books, but the latest book, the Problem with Change, ashley Goodall.

Speaker 3: 2:11

He's held executive positions at Deloitte and at Cisco, heading up people organizations. Full disclosure Mel and I have both worked with Ashley in the past when our paths all crossed at Deloitte. What Ashley is really wonderful at is thinking about how humans can thrive in the workplace. And in order to do that, what do they need, mel? Stability, stability. I'll tell you, mel. When I read this book, I had two very distinct feelings. One was just total delight because the way the case was written around what work feels like right now was so absurd and so fucking accurate, at the same time that I was laughing through half of the book because I'm like, right, it was so relatable I'm thinking, yeah, man, I could have written these stories too, because this is a hundred percent the experience.

Speaker 3: 3:02

Yeah, especially in the last 10 years. You and I were talking like it doesn't feel like it's always been this way, but the last 10 years it's just gotten more and more and more.

Speaker 2: 3:11

Yeah, and change for change's sake not necessarily meaningful change, and it can feel that way sometimes that it's not meaningful, it's just to do it.

Speaker 3: 3:21

The other very distinct emotion I got was a massive sense of urgency, which is one of the reasons why we wanted to have Ashley on the pod, because it really does feel and the data is in that organizations are not only incented to disrupt and incented to change, ie, bring in mergers, re-strategize, reorg, bring new leaders in. Not only are they incented to do that, but they're almost addicted to it. How do we get to this place where it really feels like we're all working constantly in a cult of disruption? Because that all has a massive human toll, that all has a massive negative impact on companies' bottom line, and so we wanted to bring Ashley in to talk about this. And then what the hell do we do about it?

Speaker 2: 4:10

Yeah, Well, with that. Where's Ashley?

Speaker 3: 4:30

Ashley, welcome to the pod. Thanks so much for joining us today.

Speaker 1: 4:34

It's lovely to be here with you both.

Speaker 3: 4:36

Nice to see you. It's been a while. It's been a while.

Speaker 1: 4:40

I think it must be on the cusp of double-digit years, but we're all basically the same people we were.

Speaker 3: 4:46

A thousand percent. Maybe a little wiser, wiser Maybe.

Speaker 1: 4:52

A little calmer. Yeah, certainly smarter. We're definitely smarter than we were.

Speaker 3: 4:57

And we went through the plague. There's that.

Speaker 1: 4:59

Okay, and that's true. Yes, that's true, yeah, so yay, for the last 10 years.

Speaker 3: 5:03

Yeah, we're going to talk about cheat. One of the things that really struck me with this book was this life in the blender. While I was reading it, I was just like this has been my last 10 years of work, where here comes a merger and acquisition. We're going to re-strategize something. Oh, by the way, now we're going to switch up the leadership team. Oh hi, here's the management consulting firm coming in and they're in the era of the CHRO or they're in the era of the CEO, and now they're going to put their stamp on it. This was something that was like every 10 years, and then it was every five years, and now it's every two to three years, and there are some companies that it's almost every year. They're re-strategizing and it's just so much change that it makes it impossible to feel like you can get anything done, and there's like this massive human toll on it too. One of the things you talk about with the life in the blender is this idea that change doesn't equal improvement.

Speaker 1: 5:58

There's an experiment that I don't write about in the book, involving rats and pellets, so we should probably chat about rats and pellets for a quick. I'll do it, I'll do it.

Speaker 1: 6:06

And I haven't looked it up recently, but I know how it goes. So it goes like this you put a rat in a cage and there's a little lever or, as I say where I come from, a lever, and if the rat presses the lever or the lever, it gets a pellet of food sometimes and other times it doesn't. And so you can do this nice control condition and you can see how often does the rat press the lever if every time it presses it gets food, how often does it press it if it never gets food? And how often does it press it if it never gets food? And how often does it press it if it sometimes gets food. And the result is that the rat that always gets food doesn't press the lever very much because it just presses it when it's hungry and then goes off and has a rat nap somewhere. The rat that never gets food gives up really quickly because rats aren't stupid. The rat that sometimes gets food presses the lever like a maniac because it's like the spontaneous, the occasional reward drives this crazy behavior.

Speaker 1: 7:13

And in a way, listening to your narrative of we used to do change a little bit and now we've done it more, and then we've done it more. It's like we've only got one damn lever at work. It worked a couple of times a few years ago. Has anyone else got any ideas? I don't know. Let's press it again, shall we? It didn't work that time. Let's press it again. It still didn't work. And the rest of us now the rat metaphor fails a little bit are on the other end of the lever somewhere.

Speaker 1: 7:41

I think this idea of constant change, reinvention, transformation, disruption has become the only idea about how to run a company, which doesn't mean it never works. I think there's plenty of evidence that we've gone past the point where it's helping, certainly to the extent that we're doing it today. The irony of all of this is the godfather of disruption, if you like, is Clayton Christensen, who writes a book in 1997 called the Innovator's Dilemma, where he says the young upstarts companies will eat the lunch of the old, established companies because they have a different series of economic constraints and they have many more degrees of freedom, and so they can innovate and innovate, and innovate and innovate. And all of a sudden they go from a crappy product at a ridiculous price point with new customers to customers who suddenly flip from the established players to them because all of a sudden the price point got a little bit better. They got a minimum set of features and everyone can see the upside and hallelujah.

Speaker 1: 8:44

So if you're a big company, be really worried because the upstarts are going to going to take your business away. And everyone goes oh yes, kodak, yes, blockbuster, and you recite the litany of names, of which there are like there aren't 20, but anyway, um, but then you, if you actually read that book all the way to the end, you discover what his prescription is. And his prescription is if you're a big company, you're worried about being disrupted. What you should do is you take a small group of people, separate them from the company, either spin them out or make them a special product team, put them in a different place, wall them off. Give them a guaranteed budget. Give them a guaranteed budget. Give them a very clear mission. Keep a tight group of people. Don't change direction for a while, leave them alone and they will do the innovating for you. And what's that? That stability?

Speaker 3: 9:35

that's stability on both ends.

Speaker 1: 9:37

It's a stability in the legacy corp and in the incubator the innovators dilemma, said differently, is how can we create more stability at work? But no one has ever, to my knowledge, said that's what that book is about. It's actually a book about stability and you know we turn it into catchphrases and it's disrupt everything and disrupt yourself and fail fast and move fast and break things and all of a sudden all hell breaks loose. And here we are having a detailed conversation about how miserable change is at work. I don't think anyone ever intended that we get to this point, but I think we're massively in it now and I think we've got to come up with some different things.

Speaker 2: 10:15

This has a serious impact. This life in the blender is throwing so much around and if businesses are in this hamster wheel of every year you're making a change and you don't have the time or the runway to see the impact of that change and whether it's working before you change it again. So now it's this vicious cycle of the blender. Does it become critical that organizations start to create psychologically safe environments where people can say, hey, this is not a good idea. Do you think the C-suite is open to that? Or boardrooms are open to that?

Speaker 1: 10:49

So I wrote the book, partly out of the sneaking suspicion that C-suites were not aware of all of this. We need to raise our awareness of all of this stuff. Psychological safety is an interesting one. It's a real thing. It's very clear in the literature. That's a thing.

Speaker 1: 11:09

In our discussion of some of the other sort of psychological impacts of change, we can lose sight of the connection between the environment of work and the performance of humans, and it's too easy for people to go you know what. Suck it up. It's called work for a reason. We haven't created these institutions to make you lot happy. You don't get to feel good every day, you don't get to have your mental health and your psychological safety and all of these things, because this is the school of hard knocks. So I think the most important thing to do the whole time is to go listen. You could choose to create a healthy, supportive environment, because that's a good thing to do and you're a human too. But if that argument doesn't get you there, these things are what lead to performance or non-performance.

Speaker 1: 12:03

It is a silly way to run a company to subject it to life in the blender, to constant change, because what you're doing is removing the ability of your people to solve things for you or massively, ironically to innovate. Innovation doesn't come from change, it comes from stability. It comes from a predictable set of relationships and environments and rituals and rhythms that allow people to go all right. I don't have to worry about a whole bunch of stuff. I can focus my time and attention and creativity on a well-understood problem without having to worry that in three weeks' time, I'll have a new boss and I've got to explain what I'm doing to them, and then, three weeks after that, I'll have some other thing and some other thing, and some other thing and some other thing.

Speaker 1: 12:49

So the prescription for all of this is, for sure, change less, have a higher bar on all of this stuff. Understand that we are playing with fire here. Understand that the fire is not people's upset but people's performance. Understand you're dealing with that. And then, sure, we've got to change once in a while. But people have got to learn what stability looks like at work, what the inoculation is against change. And we've got to be very deliberate at creating stability at work, because as soon as you say that to anybody, as soon as you say, how about some stability? The people who are humans go. Oh yeah, that sounds really nice.

Speaker 2: 13:38

Relief right your shoulders drop.

Speaker 1: 13:42

I think that's the world people are imagining, where they say you know what? I believe in change. They're imagining a world where change comes, improvement comes from stability. That's what we're actually all trying to reach for.

Speaker 3: 13:56

Out of curiosity, when you talk to leaders that are sitting at a C-level and you're talking about this case for stability right, the problem with change the case for stability right, the problem would change the case for stability, what is?

Speaker 1: 14:07

their reaction. The ones I talk to, feel the tension between the pressure to change and the need to look after people. I haven't run into many people who would name it stability. So I think what I took away and again, I interviewed people up and down organizations for the book there are people who see quite clearly in executive positions the downside of change. We just haven't given them words and techniques for the counterforce thing. But the folks I spoke to, or the folks I speak to, are not going oh goodness me, I've got to turn down change and dial up stability. They're saying I've got to turn down change. And then what? And is there a way we need to teach leaders, we need to tell stories that the stuff that we all want in the changey change actually comes from the stability. And the stuff that we want in the changey change is performance. Innovation actually comes from stability more often.

Speaker 1: 15:21

It is not to do the jobs for them or tell them how to do their jobs or decide for them how their jobs are best to be done, or tell them how to do their jobs or decide for them how their jobs are best to be done. It is to pin back your ears and listen and look and offer and support and help. And again, the role of an organization is to support its employees in doing their best work, which doesn't start with ignoring the employees and deciding what best work looks like. It starts with paying attention to the employees and how best work happens and where it comes from and back to stability. It leads you to teams. It leads you to ritual. It leads you to helping build people's competence. It leads you to a whole bunch of stuff. But you don't follow the path to any of those things if you don't first understand that a sensible, healthy, capitalist, profit-maximizing organization will ask itself the question how can we help our employees do their best work?

Speaker 3: 16:24

first, Work first. So much of this I am wondering is this on the capability of leaders. When I think about the people that are making the decisions about the change, the transformation, in my experience a lot of those people have MBB firms in their ears telling them this is what your competition's doing, this is what the market's doing. They have pressures from various stakeholders the stock market, the board. You have to keep up. You have to keep up. Some of the reason why we're here is because leaders have the lack of capability to lead.

Speaker 1: 17:06

We can offer a couple of candidate explanations. Right, one is that leaders are living in an ecosystem that demands this stuff and the ecosystem you've named, I think, many of the bits of it. There is a stock market and, by the way, the stock market isn't a person, but the people who analyze the stock market are people, and they've learned that shareholder value is the most important thing. Then there are the people who tell the CEOs what to do, and they're the activist investors and the consultants and the investment bankers, by the way, and they've been brought up in all of this and you keep going down the chain to who are all the decision makers and what are the unwritten truths or, in many cases, the written scale quotes truths of this world, and a lot of it is. We have to maximize shareholder value, even though we can't measure it over any sort of decent time frame or human time frame. At any rate, you run into the sort of idea that you have to take dramatic action, and if you're not taking dramatic action, somebody else will and your competitors will. So there's a lot of reinforcement of a set of ideas and not a lot of people standing up and going hang on a second.

Speaker 1: 18:31

But the alternate concept of work might be run an organization so that its employees can offer their best and reason up from that, up and out from that idea. Up and out from that idea, and that's not crazy in terms of looking after the interests of owners or the interests of customers or the interests of God, help us employees. But that's not the place we live today. We live in a place where there are certain accepted truths about how you run a company and you get to look after the employee stuff until you feel it conflicts with the set of accepted truths, at which point you snap back into the set of accepted truths and you do the layoff and you do the restructuring and you do the spinoff and you do the spin-in, the spin in, and in between them you say words like people are our greatest asset, and everybody rolls their eyes and they put up with it because apparently not many people can think of a different way of doing all of this. But yeah, there is an ecosystem component to all of this, I think.

Speaker 3: 19:40

My concern with that is when that ecosystem is running on quarters like we need to see improvement. We need to see impact financially within the next three months. That's the way almost every organization is living right now. I've seen so many organizations do this as of late. They're needing to make an impact. One of the lever levers is absolutely change and another one is dump the people, get rid of these people. How do you think most organizations view people, view their employees?

Speaker 1: 20:15

I think that many leaders are actually sincerely torn because they can see enough of the ecosystem and they can see enough of the humans and they know that the layoff isn't a wonderful thing to do. And they probably know in the back of their minds that if you do the layoff and the market doesn't like it, that will be the wrong outcome. But if you do the layoff and the market likes it for a couple of days, that will be the right outcome. And they probably also know at the same time that's not the leader they set out to be when they were more junior. I think if you give leaders the benefit of the doubt, you can imagine a leader sincerely and honestly conflicted about all of this. My point would be, to the extent that's true, could you choose option B once in a while? Could you actually choose the people once in a while, or could we have a conversation about starting with the people once in a while, as opposed to the needs of the machine must always drive what we do, because we can't stop the machine, because it's something, sooner or later you go. The machine is us. Come on, folks, we can decide to stop the machine. One way to stop the machine is to take your company private. For goodness sakes, it was Francesca.

Speaker 1: 21:54

You and I have a history at Deloitte, and Deloitte does not worry about what's going on this quarter with nearly the intensity that public companies do, and so Deloitte, in a way, has a different attitude, and private companies have a different attitude to their investors which, by the way, is weird because they're more intimate with their investors, because most of the investors are the partners who are walking up and down the corridors every day. So it's like the private company world has a closer relationship with its owners, which allows them to be long-term thinkers Isn't that strange? Which allows them to be long-term thinkers, isn't that strange? And that the public company world has a much more arm's length relationship with many of its investors at least, which forces them to do short-term things. It's because there isn't a relationship there. It does strike me that when you change the context in which leaders are asked to make decisions, then they can tilt more towards people. I remember one of the things I was most impressed by in my time at Deloitte was what Deloitte did in the Great Recession.

Speaker 3: 23:02

I know that I use this story. Yeah, tell the story, because this is that you tell the story. You tell the story. We'll see if we're telling the same story. It'd be funny.

Speaker 1: 23:11

Fabulous, there were two great stories, yeah yeah, so mine is that deloitte said look, there are some storm clouds on the horizon. So what we would do if we were to do the usual thing would be fire a whole bunch of people and try and weather the storm and then, probably in a couple of years, we'll hire them back again. But that's silly, isn't it? Because we're going to upturn a whole bunch of lives and already things are pretty bad because it's 2008. And we know what was going on in 2008. And so we'll upturn a bunch of lives and then we'll have a whole bunch of hiring costs that we don't need. So we're going to go.

Speaker 1: 23:48

The quote, the phrase I always remember was we're going to go long on people and we're going to carry those extra costs and we're going to take it out of the partners pockets, and the partners will support this, and the partners did support this. And we are going to put people first so that when the storm passes we are more strongly positioned to face into the future. And it worked, and it was just massively sensible. And it shouldn't be the only example I can think of that in the last quarter century. That's the thing that really upsets me.

Speaker 1: 24:26

I'm sure there are other examples that I haven't come across yet, but that's a terrifyingly rare thing for a company to do, and I think if a public company did that today, they would be in all sorts of trouble because the ecosystem would go you people are crazy and the activist investor would show up and go. I'm going to have a proxy fight with you guys now, because you shouldn't be allowed to run this company and the institutional investors would go. You just sank the stock price, so blah blah, blah, blah blah. Was that your story?

Speaker 3: 24:54

No, it wasn't my story. But during the same amount of time and I might be getting these wrong right, big fish stories periodically might have embellished, but during the same time.

Speaker 1: 25:06

Did you say big fish as a verb?

Speaker 3: 25:08

I did. That works, I know, there you go Big fish. Okay, so 2008,. Right, so they went long on people. Another way I remember them going long on people was deciding to build Deloitte University, oh yeah, so not only are we going to go long on people by holding our people and keeping them, but we're also asking for a capital call of the partners, and if you don't know what that is, hey, partners, I need everyone to cough up I'm making this up $100,000 to build a corporate university which, by the way, this was not something that people were doing, because we want this to be this cultural hub to invest in people. As a evidence, proof point of going along on people, again, while everyone was cutting, they went long, and the thing that I think about, though, is that was 2008. It was a recent example.

Speaker 1: 25:59

Our listeners need to write in.

Speaker 3: 26:01

Yes.

Speaker 1: 26:03

Goodness me gosh, how old do I sound. Write in on an envelope, put a stamp on it. Goodness me gosh, how old do I sound. Write in on an envelope, put a stamp on it and send it to us at PO Box, goodness knows what. There are quite a few firms that have gone private recently because they want to exit the quarter-by-quarter ecosystem, the activist-investor ecosystem. There are probably other examples out there of having greater freedom as a private organization. But the answer to all of this can't be go private. It can't be. If you're a large company, that means you've got to find hundreds of billions of dollars. The answer to all of this has got to be have better companies. Yes, people have better companies. How are we going to do that?

Speaker 3: 26:42

Yeah, or going back to every once in a while not even all the time, but every once in a while going along on your people, like making that courageous decision potentially to go along or getting good at the difference between change and improvement.

Speaker 1: 26:56

Everyone's interested in improvement. That's fine. That's actually what the activist people want and the consultants want and the investment bankers want and the analysts want. They actually want improvement, but we've just lost the ability to distinguish between change and improvement. So every change looks like a good change and off we go. How can we make things better?

Speaker 1: 27:29

You have to start with the recognition that change and improvement aren't the same thing. I think people at work know that and most people know a half-baked idea fairly quickly when they see it coming baked idea fairly quickly when they see it coming. And it is career suicide to raise your hand more than a couple of times. So the serious point here is we cannot say in organizations tell us if this is a bad idea, because we've created again a power structure and ecosystem where it's hard for people to tell you. If you're a leader, you've got to get curious and you've got to get skeptical about all of this stuff and you have to think much harder about whether I am in change creating. As you mentioned a moment ago, mel learned helplessness. So people have such a lack of control that all they feel like doing is phoning it in every day, or you're creating anxiety, control that all they feel like doing is phoning it in every day, or you're creating anxiety, or you're upsetting teams, or you're disturbing people's sense of place or meaning or any of those things. But we have to teach leaders, they have to be the ones doing this, and we have to explain what no one has ever explained to them before that this stuff ain't always a good thing and it has some very serious psychological consequences. And if you're in the business of improving an organization, then very serious psychological consequences are things that generally you want to avoid. We need to train leaders massively more intensively and massively differently than we do it today, because we've all seen this Most leadership training in organizations is a sort of afterthought and we very often give people the job of a leader before we train them to do the job of a leader.

Speaker 1: 29:15

And you don't do this for surgeons or for pilots or for anyone who's got somebody else's life in their hands, or for any job where it's really important to be good at it, but somehow we do it for leaders as though, yeah, the leader thing. Look, you were the best of the people at doing the follower job. So we gave you the leader job and the trainings in six months, and meanwhile, here are some articles all about change and disruption. You'll enjoy them Off, you go, good luck. And then what's the person? Do they look around and go? What are all the other leaders doing? They're doing reorgs. They're doing disruption oh dear, I'd better do that as well. And we again perpetuate a cycle of leadership capabilities you were asking Francesca a little while ago about. Is this about leadership capability? I think for sure. It's about leadership training, it's about leadership selection, it's about leadership support. It's about the leadership infrastructure and ecosystem of our organizations in a very significant way.

Speaker 3: 30:15

If I could add one to it and I'd be curious about your reaction to this the cohesion of the leadership team as well. I've seen senior leadership teams where the loudest voice in the room gets the win, and if you can't dissent, or if you can't at least understand how to work together as a leadership team, I don't think your organization has a chance. When you look at leadership teams that don't have a healthy cohesion or a healthy dissent ability, your organization is pretty screwed.

Speaker 1: 30:42

And what does that team therefore lack? It lacks a sense of belonging, it lacks a sense of place, it lacks a sense of meaning, it lacks a sense of certainty, it lacks a sense of predictability, it lacks a sense of control. It is a failing team because the place where all of the things that we're talking about either thrive or wither is on a team. And, yeah, if the top team doesn't experience stability, doesn't know how to foster its own stability, then, yeah, good luck everybody else.

Speaker 2: 31:16

It's interesting, especially if stability is the name of the game, right? One of the use cases is around the onboarding of leaders. When you think about a leader's first 90 days either a new in an organization or just new in their role there is this expectation that they've changed something, that they've innovated on something. Do we start there? Is that the lowest denominator to say stop having this expectation for new leaders?

Speaker 1: 31:41

It is part of the ecosystem thing as well, isn't it? Because we teach people to come in and make change in the first 90 days. Therefore, change is the thing that leaders do. Therefore, new leaders must come and make change. It would be a lovely and fascinating exercise to say to a leader all right, in your first 90 days, I want you to discover everything that's working and elevate those things and explain to everybody why.

Speaker 1: 32:10

Those are examples of the sorts of things you, as a leader, want to build in an organization and just completely flip the script. If you flipped it that way, you would be building massive stability for people, which goes here's who we are eternally. Here's how we do our work eternally. Here's what we value eternally. Here's who we seek to serve eternally. We're going to keep all of those, honor those, elevate those, preserve those, and over here, x and Y. We need to find a better way of doing these things. Can you help? For me at least, that's a very psychologically healthy way of beginning a narrative that feels like an improvement narrative, not a change narrative. Now, this whole conversation is about a hell of a lot more than the narrative, but it is interesting to just try on a few words for size and see how they make you feel as a leader or as an employee, and to see if we've actually put the emphasis on the wrong syllable when it comes to all. Things change and we should emphasize some stability too.

Speaker 1: 33:47

So Mel and I like to do this thing with our guests called rapid round, ideally quick short answers.

Speaker 3: 33:50

However, if you met me, I know I understand, I get it, I get. But this is the thing, this if we need to go off, we need to go off on the scenic route. That's the point. It's fine, it's fine, it's fine. All right, are you ready to play ash Ashley?

Speaker 1: 34:00

The medium quick, medium rapid round. Yes, I am.

Speaker 2: 34:04

We're not willing to take a stand on anything. Hopefully this is a fun one for you. In your book you mentioned the word disrupt. Gets folks extra bonus biz dude points which crack me up. What buzzwords would you like to see die off already?

Speaker 1: 34:24

you like to see die off already. Strategic, which is not considered a buzzword, but is affixed to the front of far too many things to make them sound better than they are and to paper over a lot of very lazy thinking. So you just have to call it an asset. It's not a strategic asset. You have to call it an investment, not a strategic investment, and we can save a few syllables from the world.

Speaker 2: 34:43

I appreciate it. Let's simplify. What new buzzwords are on the horizon that you're like? Let's stop this immediately, before this catches on.

Speaker 1: 34:53

AI is getting.

Speaker 2: 34:54

Oh.

Speaker 1: 34:54

Jesus up to everything.

Speaker 2: 34:56

Truly.

Speaker 1: 34:57

And some things that are AI, which is a thing, but plenty of things that aren't AI and that are actually just math or an algorithm, but it's AI, this and AI, this and AI, this and AI is the new blockchain, because a few years ago it was we'll do this on the blockchain and this on the blockchain and this on the blockchain and this on the blockchain, and sooner or later, you just want to go shut up and sooner or later, you just want to go shut up. Ai is terrifying, I think for me certainly, because it seems to remove humans from a lot of necessarily human interactions, and you've got to ask yourself where does that point to? But I don't think we help by affixing AI on the front of things that aren't AI-like.

Speaker 3: 35:38

All right. What would you like to see CEOs do more of? Lesson how about less of? What would you like to see them do? Less of?

Speaker 1: 35:53

Change for the sake of change. By the way, can I go back now? I'm going to go back to my prior answer Listen. There is an art to listen I don't just mean be conversationally savvy. Create the systems and structures to understand the experience of work on the front lines and then pay attention to that so that there is like an infrastructure that needs to happen yeah, but listening to occur I love that answer.

Speaker 3: 36:14

There's a very deep schism a lot of times between the front line and leadership and, quite honestly, we have all the tools Qualtrics, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah to do that efficiently. It's just listen to it and maybe do something with it. Would be nice too.

Speaker 1: 36:28

But you have to make it a priority and you have to realize that the things that people tell you are not the whole story.

Speaker 3: 36:33

Fair. Yeah, All right. Same question for CHROs, our chief HR officers. A lot of times they are in the ear of the CEO and the people voice sometimes, but what would you like to see them do more of?

Speaker 1: 36:56

I wrote a chapter about it in the book Advocate for Employees. And again, that's a hard thing because of the business decisions we want to make and not necessarily come up to the C-suite and go. You shouldn't do this because this will create uncertainty, anxiety, unbelonging displacement, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah blah. You shouldn't do it. But I would like to see CHROs feel the necessity of doing that more. And, by the way, to give another answer to one of the prior quickfire questions, which is now a slow fire question, I'd like to see CEOs demand that of their heads of HR more. I'd like to see more CEOs go. You know what we actually do, really need to change the balance on the people stuff. And so, head of hr, that's on you, and if you come and tell me we've got the balance wrong, I'm gonna listen to you yes or no?

Speaker 3: 37:53

do you believe most hr organizations are working in benefit of their people?

Speaker 1: 37:57

I think they're missing a few things, like if you look at the way HR is structured. It's structured to support business leaders. Mainly it's structured around business priorities. I've spent countless hours sitting in HR off sites where HR says, all right, as good citizens of life in the blender, we're going to change our strategy. What should the new strategy be? And someone around the table goes we should start with the business strategy and then we should figure out the people implications of the business strategy and that will tell us the HR strategy won't hit. That's an incomplete answer. Yes, it is, because the other part is what do the humans need? And the humans don't need the business strategy. The humans need the conditions of human performance. So those are things we could bring those into the conversation. We could bring those into the strategy.

Speaker 1: 38:45

I would love a stability governance organization in a company. What would stability governance look like? You can imagine HR playing that role. It doesn't at the moment. How do we train leaders, how do we listen and how do we deploy ourselves so that we understand the experience on the front lines? Because, again, most of the time you have to be a business of a certain size to get one HR person who has then massively run off their feet trying to keep up with the leaders charging around doing the business strategy stuff. Their feet trying to keep up with the leaders charging around doing the business strategy stuff. We've got to figure out a way of rethinking that so that we expand HR's portfolio to include the conditions of human performance, because, goodness me, those should live somewhere in our organizational construct.

Speaker 3: 39:34

Yeah, and right now it's like learning and development. Sometimes it's looking at the talent management team and being like aren't you doing that? Are you doing that? Because I'm not doing that, that's not my domain, so it doesn't feel like it's something that is its own entity and needs to be its own entity.

Speaker 1: 39:46

And there's a little bit more to continue my very long answer to this now.

Speaker 1: 39:50

Not at all quick fire. This is the slow fire round that. When HR talks about performance, we get very quickly to performance management and skills and all the things that we can capture in spreadsheets and that the software gives us. But if you go and talk to people on the front lines about what are the ingredients of performance, they go a leader who talks to me in language I understand, a sense of predictability and a set of relationships on my team and there is no line item budget in HR for those things. So the definition of performance needs to be agreed and understood, because HR doesn't actually map to those things. Hr maps to things that you hand money to vendors for, and those things are good organizational administration things, but if you think that those are the same as performance things, then you have a very strange idea of what performance looks like.

Speaker 3: 40:55

Ashley, thanks so much for joining us today. It was a pleasure seeing you and chatting.

Speaker 1: 41:00

Lovely, lovely to catch up, and let's do this again soon.

Speaker 3: 41:03

Thanks so much for joining us today. Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts. You can come over and say hi to us on the TikToks and LinkedIn community. Hit us up at yourworkfriends.com. We're always posting stuff on there and if you found this episode helpful, share with your work friends, Thanks Fred.

The Talent Fueled Enterprise

Your Work Friends Podcast: The Talent Fueled Enterprise with Mike Ohata

You can build high-performing teams and create a workplace people actually want to be part of. Just ask Mike Ohata—Fortune 15 talent leader, author of The Talent-Fueled Enterprise, and the guy talent insiders call a badass. In this episode, Mike shares how to lead with care and results, why psychological safety drives performance, and how to stop treating people like capital.

From the future of AI to why simplicity beats scale, we unpack what soulful leadership looks like in today’s world—and why it’s not just possible, but essential. If you’re ready to fuel your org with both head and heart, this one’s for you.

Listen or watch the full episode here

---

Speaker 1: 0:00

It just takes a dimension of courage. And I remember one CEO kept saying the most simplistic message. He goes if we get our culture right, the rest will come. We'll win in the marketplace, we'll win clients, we'll sell bigger projects. And you could feel it. He knew in his soul what the values were. He knew in his spirit what he was after and what he saw. And you go like, yeah, I get it.

Speaker 2: 0:28

What's going on, Mel?

Speaker 3: 1:00

Not much. I feel super energized. I belong to this community, through Culture First, that hosts co-working days in the city. I just love it so much. Not to speak for you, but like me, we kind of thrive on like hive togetherness of collaborating and brainstorming. So I just get a lot of energy out of just leaving my house and sitting in a space with other people who are getting shit done and then being able to connect and ask questions. So it felt good today I did that in the city. What about you? Nice?

Speaker 2: 1:14

And by the city you mean New.

Speaker 3: 1:16

York, I mean New York. Yeah, yeah, sorry everyone.

Speaker 2: 1:18

Yeah, I got to say I don't think I have prepared myself as a parent around sports. I did not grow up playing sports Like we were in like ceramics camp and dance and piano. That's what I did. I didn't really play sports, yeah. But my son is super into sports. My husband played soccer in college. Like they're into sports. I was not prepared for the amount of practices and such like. Just for soccer, just for soccer. And he's in first grade. They have practices on Monday, games on Saturday and then this weekend there was a jamboree like a fundraiser.

Speaker 2: 1:56

I'm like this is three days three days, three days out of the week, dedicated to soccer wait until he gets into middle school and high school.

Speaker 3: 2:06

That'd be five days a week, and then you'll have a pasta dinner to raise money. I was not prepared. Oh, I know what to get you now as a gift I have lawn chairs, I do have not a lawn, not a lawn chair, not a lawn chair like one of those pop-up tents.

Speaker 2: 2:19

What do we do? What do you hell?

Speaker 3: 2:20

yeah, the pop-up tent for outside, so. So when it starts raining, you could just zip yourself in.

Speaker 2: 2:26

It has a little window Like a little drive-thru window Like what here's your snacks. Yeah, it has a little window that you can look through, you're nice and cozy. Throw Clif Bars out of it. Yes, please get me that. That's funny, that's funny Okay. That's funny, that's funny Okay.

Speaker 3: 2:41

Oh man, yeah, you're going to be busy, yeah.

Speaker 2: 2:44

Well, we had a pretty rad discussion with Mike Ohata, didn't we?

Speaker 3: 3:02

We did. Yeah, yeah, mike Ohata joined us. He's a talent executive and strategic advisor. He's worked for organizations like Microsoft and KPMG and he's the author of the Talent-Fueled Enterprise. We read the book. It was awesome, and then we got to talk to him about it.

Speaker 2: 3:11

And we think there's a lot of good knowledge nuggets for folks to take away from this conversation. The book is written and geared towards. If you're the head of HR, the head of learning and development, if you're a CEO, right, it's looking at strategically what do you want to do to make sure that your enterprise is really garnering the full potential of everybody that works there? Right? Listen, if you are in those roles, it's a must read, absolutely, but that's not really why we wanted to have Mike on. It feels like there's this conversation happening in the ether, especially around anything HR or people related that it's very polarized.

Speaker 3: 3:40

Oh, it is right now. I read something yesterday around you're not strategic. If you're a bleeding heart HR person, take some issue with these types of comments, because I think something that you and I talk about often, and something that Mike emphasized, was this need for balance, the balance of caring for people and your bottom line and how you can bring those two things together in a really effective way.

Speaker 2: 4:09

Where work and where goodness really gets done is in trying to find the common ground, is in trying to figure out what is the balance between to your very good points, profit and being really good to your people, or really understanding how you can maximize the potential of your people, and we highly recommend Mike's book With us. He walked through how can anybody, whether you're a manager, a leader of an organization, really fuel your organization with not only talent but with soul as well, and gave some really really practical advice, and it was just a fun conversation.

Speaker 3: 4:43

And, side note, there's a lot of great movie quotes and tiebacks in this book, but this is a great conversation and with that, here's Mike Ohata. Mike, we are so excited to have you with your work, friends, today, and you've written the talent-fueled enterprise, which is focusing on how businesses can thrive by really focusing in on their talent, and we'd love to start off with what inspires you to write this book having me.

Speaker 1: 5:25

I'm really excited and I'm looking forward to our conversation. I've had the fortune in coming out of professional services and the firm I work is. There's this age where you time out and you're asked to retire. In that, just this notion of being able to be liberated from your organization, the stepping back, stepping away, getting out of the organization, has allowed to really share all the things that you'd like to work on. But you don't always have the opportunity to work on and also just get up all those kind of pent up feelings and thoughts around what could have been, could be and why can't we get to them in your careers.

Speaker 1: 5:56

It's really hard sometimes to get things done because we're constrained in these systems and these are of these organizations. The other part of the inspiration it sounds super corny, but it really is the people you work with right. It's the employees in our particular firm and the partners as well. But the people are really inspiring because, at the end of the day, they are the potential right and they are the engine of the organization. And you got to step back and go. I love that we do the work that we do in HR and talent and learning, because we love the people and we want to see what we can do for them and see what they become.

Speaker 3: 6:30

So that was my starting point on how I got inspired love of people and the value of them in the workplace, and how we can make it better. Why is talent such a crucial element in a company's success? Can you explain it to our listeners, like they're five? Why?

Speaker 1: 6:52

is that the case? Talent is just one of those words we use to talk about the people in our businesses, in our organizations, and it is the word of the day. It's become a little bit of the slogan of the day too, but it also shows the recognition that people really do matter for businesses. The broader question, though, that really comes up from that is so what do you do about it? We're talking about talent because we're trying to find a better way to talk about employees, about employees. There is this kind of deep felt in our values and so forth and our feelings that people really do matter Really. They are the heart and soul of the organization, but then the organization keeps churning on doing what it's always done, and so I think it's really important for all of us to understand is that, collectively, we're all here at this place around really needing to understand how to think about talent differently?

Speaker 1: 7:46

And the other thought that goes through my mind and why it's so important, is for the last 23 plus years we've had this notion around talent as a scarce thing. We have this mindset of scarcity and we talk about the war for talent all the time. There's a lot of relevance to those models around like looking at sort of high potential, high performance, et cetera, but it's an incomplete view, and so the challenge that I've kept coming across is that if we're all looking for the same people, the same resource, the same talent, that just doesn't compute, because we're surrounded by all these people and you know this story right Like we've hired the best people and then you wind forward and go, we can't find the right talent. And I'm just how does that even work? What happened along the way? It really begins to speak to this condition around, this philosophy or this point of view that says there's only a handful of good people out there, and I'm just like that's not really a way to live, it's not a sustainable way to live.

Speaker 3: 8:39

And so, in this current framework around you know leaders talking about talent and it's super important for us to realize is that there's a vast wealth of potential in the organization. That starts with understanding all employees and creating sort of opportunities for all of us. I like the shift in the mindset right, Because every employee that you hire, you hired them because you believed that they have this high potential. So where does that change? There's a real opportunity here to support them and their continued growth and potential.

Speaker 1: 9:09

Absolutely.

Speaker 3: 9:10

In the book there was a theme that really resonated with me throughout. You mentioned that the talent strategy mindset that inherently values the human and the concept of I see you is super important. How can leaders and orgs show their talent, that they truly see them?

Speaker 1: 9:28

That's tough. I say it's tough because it's really easy to say do this and do that, but it's really kind of a set of practices that we all pick up every day. It's the simple things from around. You spend time regularly with your teams, with your people. You stop to say hello. It doesn't have to be super formal, but do you actually have a way, a practice, to understand what do people really want to get out of work? What do they want to get out of the job? What do they really desire a year from now, two years from now? Is it the model of performance that drives the business outcomes that drives those questions, or is it a real interest and curiosity in the manager or leader that's going to say I just want to know what's going on, but a lot of it's just connecting and building community.

Speaker 3: 10:12

Yeah, it makes me think of the real need to build psychological safety. So if a senior leader is asking what you're up to, the initial response isn't oh, am I in trouble? But more of they're coming from a place of curiosity.

Speaker 1: 10:24

Yeah, yeah. Isn't that a telling statement when people say, well, am I in trouble? Because they feel like they're not safe or they may be at risk.

Speaker 3: 10:32

Yeah, you also talk about how orgs often refer to employees as resources and the workforce as human capital, which is ultimately dehumanizing right, because it's not seeing people for who they are as humans. What changes would you recommend orgs make in regards to how they refer to their talent to bring back that humanity in the workplace?

Speaker 1: 10:57

Yeah, in general, there's nothing really wrong with the words right and selves. They're just words, and they're just words. Come and go. Really, what's going on here from a theory perspective, is just around. People are watching all day long what leaders are doing. They're watching all day long what the practices, the lived experience of the organization is, and so I think what's really important is you can use words like workforce or human capital, but really the fundamental thing is, what do people see you do? So like, for example, the really common one in which is tough and there's no easy solution or answer around this.

Speaker 1: 11:31

We have this need for a business outcome, but we're not making our plan, and I think I've heard you folks talk about this and then but you're, so what do you do when you have too many people? So the typical thing that often happens is we downsize the workforce or we right-size it, so to speak. Right, and we go through that riffing process. And I love the story that you folks talked about on taking that long view, that long game with people, that behavior and set of actions around. Taking that long view communicates so much to the organization on how you think about people and where they matter, so much to the organization on how you think about people and where they matter.

Speaker 1: 12:08

Now, at the end of the day, people get it. If we're run, like during the great recession, if we're not making it like we've got to make a choice here, but the point there is just in like how transparently clear about it. Leaders often spend so much time getting all spun up over the right words and they lost the opportunity to connect with people and I've had so many employees over the years. Someone was like I want to appreciate it. You just tell me how it is. It doesn't have to be pretty, but at least I don't have to guess what you actually need.

Speaker 1: 12:33

And I think that's what's at stake here. Now, the flip side of it, since we're HR professionals, is that there's this whole kind of HR label thing that we have to go through to make sure we say the right things. I think you can still do that. You just can't get too spun up with ourselves.

Speaker 3: 12:48

A couple of our other guests in line, I think, with this collective thinking of it's okay to be transparent. Even if you're following all the compliance, you can still connect on a human to human level. One of our guests had mentioned, for example, his approach was hey, you're not going to like this, I absolutely don't like it, and it's okay to acknowledge like for lack of a better word, so I apologize the turd in the room, so let's acknowledge it together and get through it together, but to your good point, making sure we're continuing to connect on a humanity level that these are people.

Speaker 1: 13:23

Yeah, One of the stories I remember is that I did have to reduce the number of people, and there's one particular team that got impacted and I just broke down crying, talking to them. The director like called me up after just said but I really appreciate it, but you also got to do your job and it was really just an amazing moment where you know she and the team appreciated the humanity, but you got a job to do, so Get on with it too. Back to the balance, right.

Speaker 2: 13:48

You know, it strikes me, though, the idea of being seen. You talk about people being developed holistically as well, but when we look at HR, I don't think it's set up to do that. We're set up to do more of the compliance, more of the block and tackle. When you look at the amount of funding HR teams get, it's such a small percentage of the overall funding of the organization. It's not a knock on HR leaders at all, because I think HR leaders have the best intentions. They're trying to do the best they can with what they have. There's a lot going on, yeah, and part of me wonders and I'd love to get your take on it in order to really set up or operationalize being seen, holistic development, looking at talent differently, do we have to secede from the union Meaning compliance goes over here to legal and then talent becomes a different beast in and of itself, almost like the human team or the product innovation team? We need to separate in order to really do this, or can we still go the way we're going?

Speaker 1: 14:51

Yeah, we have like this classic mindset around either or right, we have the compliance engine, all the process-based kind of work we're like the people shoveling coal in the coal fuel engine or train and we're just heads down, we just got to keep this thing moving. We're doing that work all day long and then we think, or it'd be really great if we could be focused on the people, and the reality is they're all integrated right. So then it's a matter of how you do the process work, and that's really easy to say conceptually or theoretically, but it really is. It's around how do you combine the two? So, for example, we know empathy is one of those kind of capabilities that bring the two together right. Authenticity, transparency, and when you think about those, we're all talking about those human kind of attributes that actually make us who we are. And that's the heart of it, because people get the engine part of it. There is compliance stuff that happened. There are processes we have to run. It's just that whether or not we still feel like the processes have a soul in it.

Speaker 1: 15:50

So, for example, this is one thing in one of my past jobs is I remember writing just said you know what, like it'd be really great to get transparency around what the corporation has budgeted for bonuses, because you say it's zero to 15%, but we budget it for six, right? So we're here and I'm giving a performance review and the person got 7% and they feel like they're a failure because it's not 15. 7% compared to 6% is actually pretty decent looking right In a scheme of things, I said. And then I'm talking to a professional, an employee, that's looking for $2,000 and because they're going to build a cedar deck in their backyard and they just want to buy the materials but they're going to do the labor and that money means a lot to the individual, but we don't have a way to talk about what the sort of the constraints of the system say.

Speaker 1: 16:42

Wind forward, that organization actually started saying, like here's what we think your bonus is going to be based on, what we can plan for, and you're up or down from that. Now everybody goes oh, I can live with that, but that's a place where you have the constraints of the process and the system. That needs the rigor of the financial model that's, allocating a set amount of resources and a transparency approach that allows people to then understand. Now I have a better idea of where I match up right now. Different conversation. Whether or not they like the evaluation or the assessment, that takes a lot of stress out of it and takes a lot of anxiety out of the process.

Speaker 2: 17:19

I love what you said about the soul. We have to put soul back into some of these processes Benefits, comps, conversation, even layoffs. Right, you can have soul, you can see people in those. When you see this done really well, how do the leaders or the organizations really truly view their people?

Speaker 1: 17:39

So what I generally see in organizations is that most leaders have a good concept of what they're after in terms of goodness.

Speaker 1: 17:49

They have the right concepts in place, so the messaging is right, but what they don't realize is that they themselves, the organizations, the functions, are stuck in the system of the organization and they haven't figured out how to disrupt that sort of state or to change that slowly over time.

Speaker 1: 18:05

So then we're in this place of messaging over here Because it sounds really great, but operating over here all day long, and that's the part when you look at it saying, hey, we love people, you got to go right. That's the kind of stuff that creates that dissonance in the organization. So what really has to happen is we have to talk about what the constraints are. We have to talk about what we're trying to balance out in the organization, and I think that's where I think again, our professors, our employees, they get it, they understand it, they appreciate things really, really deeply. The other kind of funny thing I think about if it really created connection and community, you would know what people feel like they need to be seen and to be understood, versus kind of stalking on fishbowl to see what kind of throwing shades going on. I do think organizations understand it at some level and they have great mechanisms, councils and so forth, pulse surveys and all that. But again, are we enamored with the process and the activity or do we really want to know what's going on?

Speaker 2: 19:06

The older I get, I will tell you. I think so much comes down to fundamentals like basics 25 years ago or something. Somebody wrote that book, everything I Needed to Know. I Learned in Kindergarten and it's this just idea of, yes, connect with people, talk to people, ask them what they need, ask them what they want. A lot of times people get really fearful of doing that because they don't know if someone's going to ask them for something they can't give or they don't know how to be perfect in that dialogue or conversation. But all they really need to do is start with care. People feel that when you start with care I get that from you, mike that you give care, energy, you give very big care, thank you. I want to talk about this idea of developing people holistically, especially when we're talking about AI. Mel and I were just talking about Klarna, for example, who they're going to lay off. What was that, mel? Like 85% of their business.

Speaker 3: 20:19

They just laid off a bunch of folks, got down to half their workforce and I believe they're hoping to get down further within the next year.

Speaker 2: 20:26

Yes, there's two energies that are happening in the world. I'm getting very woo-woo, forgive me, but right, there's this one energy of scarcity. Oh my gosh, ai is going to take jobs. We're going to start seeing a lot of organizations making big moves around completely replace humans with AI, and then you even wrote about this in the book too. Then we're looking at people who want to augment. What does that look like when this AI conversation is happening, where we can look at it as scarcity or we can look at it as augmentation? If I'm a Jane Doe employee, what does it look like in an AI world to be developed holistically?

Speaker 1: 21:03

Yeah. So there's a couple of things. One is, when it comes to AI in particular, I get the sense that a lot of business leaders feel like there's one really good question to ask around how do we adopt AI? And I think that's a question. I think it's not even the best question. I think it's a starting question and I think the exercise that we all need to take is what are the next 5, 10, 17 questions to ask around AI and the implications for the organization.

Speaker 1: 21:37

When I think about it and I step back, we've been surrounded by computer technology, computing technology, innovation for a long time. We keep talking about the speed and the disruption for decades now, and there's a point that says we're not really talking about anything new here. So what's really going on here? So the part of it says to me we should get over it in some way and then start thinking what is the intersection of AI and humans? That's one of the really key questions.

Speaker 1: 22:04

Holistically, it's going to be really around coming back again to these fundamentalists around what does it mean to actually see the employee as a person? And I actually think the answer for that really depends on the organization. That it is because different organizations are doing different things right and there's different kinds of labor and different kinds of work, and holistically might mean that we need to do things that are fun. That celebration is actually a really key part of our culture, so we may do that. Other things may be. I need the latest science, I need the latest technical knowledge and I need you to help me to get there, because that's super valuable to me as the profession that I'm in.

Speaker 3: 22:42

That's one of it.

Speaker 1: 22:42

There's a number of levers that we can use to think about seeing people holistically, but one of them is going to come down to is what are we trying to achieve with our people? And just having clarity about that. You don't have to be all things to all people, but having clarity about what we're trying to accomplish, I think, is super, super important. For example, if we think that it's really important to have a really great hiring process, let's say, focus on skills, understand really what skills you need and what the skills are in the marketplace. If you really think it's important for your organization to train and to develop those skills, then train them. If you think that retaining people is important to the organization and you want your people to understand that, then create some kind of mobility, not because you have to react to their need, but because it's really important to be thoughtful around how they're engaged across the whole organization.

Speaker 1: 23:33

The other thing in convincing people holistically is we often start off with the most basic set of needs. So where do we go when we want to make sure that you know your value? We start off with benefits and compensation, right, and you take math instead of hierarchy of needs. We're talking about things that address our abilities to make sure we have health care, that we can buy food, that we can buy shelter, rent an apartment, buy a home, and then we understand but miss sort of those kind of self-actualization things.

Speaker 1: 24:03

The things that people desire more and this gets back to the holistic thing is that people want to develop. They want to grow on some level, and that's beyond just training, because training is about skills. But there's this other appetite or other need, so to develop, they want to grow on some level, and that's beyond just training, because training is about skills, but there's this other appetite or other need, so to speak, that actually goes beyond that. And that's where I think the opportunity is to see people holistically is really understand well, what are you after Beyond kind of the work gig you got and the pay you get? What do you want out of life? Right, and the answer is going to really vary depending on the organization and the people who go into that organization. But I think the truism that we see in the research shows this and Gardner talks about this, right, and they talk about the human deal is that people are looking for a very different set of things than what people were looking at 20 years ago, for sure.

Speaker 2: 24:48

Yeah, I think about this a lot. What does the future organization need to look like in order to do this? What are some of the big ticket structural changes that would need to happen in order for this to be the employee experience?

Speaker 1: 25:03

Philosophically, the first thing that's going to happen is a mindset shift in leaders Leaders Okay, Because actually I think the structural shift will follow this ability to imagine what things could look like. So, for example, people talk a lot about workforce planning and that can mean a lot of different things. For a lot of organizations it just means resource management. But what has it happened? Or what needs to happen if you want to get structural changes around how you recruit, how you create opportunities for people is you actually have to imagine. There is a model out there, for example is that if we get people that have the right attributes and we can develop those attributes and then we can develop the skills, we can actually create a workforce that has greater agility, for example. But today's practice is keeping most of us grounded in buying today's skills and then getting all kind of worked up around tomorrow's skills. So then we get into this hyper motion around that we need to do training and rapid upskilling and we got a whole set of terms for those kinds of activities and they're all OK. They're all the OK responses and good responses. But can you imagine a system where everybody believes in the ecosystem of work? It says I may only have it for a year to three years and then you're going to move on, because people do. We know there's a lot of research that shows this, but that actually has huge implications for how we develop people.

Speaker 1: 26:25

The question for all of us is can we actually develop people in a way knowing that they're going to leave? Because if we do that, there's a whole bunch of structural changes have to happen. Like we have to rethink the work. What does it mean to have work that's being operated or executed by people who aren't there all for a long time? And we know there are certain industries, say like logistics, call centers, where, like they know what turnover looks like and so they actually have had to come up with a work model. So the work gets structured in a way that kind of fits that demographic pattern. But that's the kind of structure thing I think could potentially take place much more broadly in corporate America. It's hard to move because there's a lot of moving parts, there's a lot of day-to-day operating results that we need to deliver, and I think you can do both. You can find those areas where you can begin to slowly shift.

Speaker 2: 27:12

It's interesting I think this was in Ashley's book. This idea of an organization would be a state, a team would be a neighborhood.

Speaker 1: 27:21

It did.

Speaker 2: 27:21

And that you're much more likely to make change at the neighborhood level. And there's responsibility I would say responsibility to your very good point around the neighborhood level and I know that Mel and I wanted to talk about. What are some things that we can do at the enterprise level, at the team level, at the individual level.

Speaker 1: 27:43

Yeah, so it's a great analogy. I'll start because if you take that notion it goes right back to that idea around is the team, is the learning unit. It is also where community and connection is most tangible. So one of the things that has to happen is how do you bring that level of tangible community and connection as you go up the organization? It's what has to happen.

Speaker 1: 28:08

It's a really tough thing to say do this and it all magically happened. The really basic question that the executive team has to ask is what do we want to accomplish with our people that's going to make us a better organization tomorrow and it integrates well with the business outcomes that we're accountable for. That sounds tactical, but I would tell you that is a really hard thing to answer. When leaders can answer that and get it down to one or two things and you know what happens when one or two things comes like to seven to 13. No, really, what's like the one or two things you're going to do that actually moves your people In what direction do you want to move in?

Speaker 2: 28:49

I've been thinking a lot lately about this idea of simplicity, because when I've seen organizations do this really well, they're not doing 15 things in shallow depth. They're doing one, two, maybe three things and they're going really hard on them in terms of yes, campaign and strat and funding them, but also in process, in the way that we build workflows, the way that we talk and the language that we use, all around these things to the point where their employees can talk about it and they know it and they feel it. It's very hard to do with 10 things.

Speaker 1: 29:24

This is going to sound harsh, and it's not meant to be harsh, but it feels more like an observation. But we tend to not focus on the one or two things because I think it actually takes a lot of courage to do. It does, and it doesn't mean that leaders are feeling less powerful or sinful, it just takes a dimension of courage. And I remember one CEO who just said we kept saying and to your point is the most simplistic message. He goes if we get our culture right, the rest will come Like we'll win in the marketplace, we'll win clients, we'll sell bigger projects. And you could, just you could feel it Like he, just he knew in his soul what the values were, he knew in his spirit, like what he was after and what he saw. And you, just you go. Yeah, I get it, you didn't get spun up on what are we on now? Like 7A of the nine point strategy, on the five year plan that gets revised every six months. It wasn't known sounding like that. It was just like this really simple view of the world.

Speaker 3: 30:24

I have a question.

Speaker 1: 30:25

Sure.

Speaker 3: 30:26

How do we crack this nut? Because I feel like we hear this story consistently, that there's a need even for the CEO, to have courage. But if you're leading the organization, why do you need to have courage? You can say, no, this is how we want to do it. So what's preventing leaders from taking that stand as a collective and saying, yeah, we're all in on this, we don't need to have courage because this is what we believe, so it's not. Again. I keep feeling this, even at the leadership level, the C-suite level, this lack of psychological safety to say this is what we need and this is what we should focus on. What makes it so challenging for people to take a hard stance.

Speaker 1: 31:10

My theory around this is that organizations as systems have different or varying permissions.

Speaker 3: 31:15

Yeah.

Speaker 1: 31:16

So some organization will give a lot of permission to its leaders to have courage around how they want to drive and how they want to lead, and other organizations don't.

Speaker 1: 31:26

And I think the leaders who prosper in whatever organization they are, I think they figured out right one way or the other, either consciously, with lots of self-awareness, or they just found what was comfortable and found a way to prosper in the environment they're in. But what I would say to any leader at any level that if you're not feeling that sort of integration of yourself and your values with the organization's values, then it's something to question and to think about. Dear colleague john blumberg writes about this around the return on integrity and he talks a lot about personal values actually have to really align with the organizational values and that's a journey. But I would say sometimes what happens is that leaders are like all of us, get caught up in the systems that we're in and so they only have, or feel like they only have, certain permission to go a certain way. The transformational leader not meaning about creating transformation organization, but the leader who's transforming themselves will find a path. They'll find a way to rise above that, to transcend them.

Speaker 3: 32:29

It's just so interesting even to hear that there are certain organizations that still don't value that perspective in this day and age, with all of the research that shows when you commit to your people, you will see business results. I think I ask every guest why do you think that is? Why do you think there are still some organizations that don't see the value?

Speaker 1: 32:54

Why do you think that is? Why do you think there are still some organizations that don't see the value? It comes down again to this view around what matters most. Right in its simplest terms. And if you're someone who's wired by power and you're wired by money, and that's what gets you excited and energized, that's what gets you energized and you're going to operate that way. If you're wired a little bit differently, then you have different set of priorities and actions. And here's the thing that I think we know theoretically in all our leadership development, research and so forth is that it takes a diversity of leaders to make it happen, but most organizations tend to put in place a leader who looks just like everybody else, because that is the ethos of the system. That is what we value in the system is that we value making money, we value power, we value the political game or what have you. And again, not all organizations are wired that way. That's one pattern.

Speaker 3: 33:45

Yeah, what advice would you give to that leader that has a mismatch with their organization but they want to try to make a dent in a positive direction? What advice would you give to that person?

Speaker 1: 33:59

Yeah, I love American landscape portrait, like just because there's this notion that humans are really small and the landscape of kind of the continent was just so daunting. And without getting into sort of the historical politics around, who was here first? Because I appreciate that discussion very much but built into the psyche, I think, of what we do sometimes is around this notion around that it could be lonely, right, you could be out there foraging your way. But what's so exciting about it, I think, for the leader who's up for this, is that you can be in the worst set of circumstances and have the best time of your life Because you have this authority to tell the story that you want to tell, to cram the path or kind of create the path that you have.

Speaker 1: 34:45

And I think what the irony of this statement is that there are a whole lot of people watching, taking notes and maybe following along at the same time and I think every organization, as homogenous as it might feel, there's this huge diversity of potential in people that actually see this and want something more. That's what's so amazing is that you could be in a really tough situation, but the arc and the joy is freeing out a path through all of that, even if you don't get to the change that you would like to have gotten to. Is the change the goal or is the journey? It's the destination of the journey more important, but I would say the journey is more important Totally makes me wonder.

Speaker 2: 35:25

Just an offshoot point I've been thinking about it a lot lately. I'm on a journey myself. This idea of work because so much of work has been around quarter by quarter results, revenue, shareholder return, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It's profit driven. Yeah, point blank Done. One of the things that I'm excited about AI is that it's going to force conversations around. How do we view people, how do we think about augmenting people and enable them to do their best work? Because all the other administrative schmutz could be taken care of. There's so many opportunities for those discussions. I'm optimistic about it. With what's happening in the ether, can we swing the pendulum from everything has to be around profit and rev a little bit over to people and balance it more?

Speaker 1: 36:11

Yeah, but again, we're not on either end of the pole right.

Speaker 2: 36:14

We can't be, we shouldn't be.

Speaker 1: 36:16

We're somewhere that we're trying to figure out what the balance is of both of these things, and we all live and benefit from being in a capitalist society. So, whether or not people want to admit it, we're all capitalists at some level, and that's an okay thing. The question you're on is then again, like where you're getting to is what is the balance for that, for how we think about people? So back to the ai. The question is how do we redesign work? What's tomorrow's work? Because we know tomorrow's work isn't going to be today's work. But if we only think about replacing today's work with ai and automation, we can miss the question.

Speaker 1: 36:52

Yeah, so we do that and we should be asking okay, what are we doing tomorrow? It's not today. And that part's really exciting because, look, if you look back around for these analogies, if you look back around when you had horse-drawn carriages moving people around, just think of all the technology changes that are taking place we're going to find a way. And I think, through all of this, what's really exciting is this talent discussion has come to the foreground, because we all recognize that people are really a critical part of the equation and while we think that there's slogans or initiatives to talk about workforce planning or kind of talent and culture and different things like that. And all those things indicate is that we understand there's a new equation, that we have. That part gives me a lot of hope.

Speaker 3: 37:57

This is our favorite part, Mike.

Speaker 1: 38:00

Yep, okay, I'm prepared. The fun part is.

Speaker 3: 38:03

You hopefully don't need to be so it's just a group of questions. Yes, no one word answers or a longer answer. If you're like this needs a longer response, that's totally fine. That's some of our best conversation, but we'll just go through the series and the point is first thing that pops in mind. If that sounds good, sure, okay, what are you currently reading, or I'll say listening, in case you're a fan of audiobooks.

Speaker 1: 38:28

Yeah, I am a reader because I just I absorb it sticks a little bit better. There's two things I'm currently reading. One is it's the Kingdom, the Power and the Glory by Tim Alberta. I don't know if you know this book, but it's about the Christian nationalist movement and how it's taking place. It's a long read about halfway through but it's a really fascinating bit of journalism that he's done. The other one is by a friend and colleague. It's called Leading to Greatness, by Jim Reed, who was the CHRO of Rogers in Toronto.

Speaker 3: 38:55

What song is on repeat for you? Oh?

Speaker 1: 38:59

I got two. One is a young artist named Jalen Nwunda, it's called I think it's called Come Around and Love Me, and the other one is an older one. It's a jazz tune. It's by Stan Getz and Oscar Peterson. It's called Tour's End.

Speaker 3: 39:11

Many people feel their companies don't care about their growth. From your experience, what are the top two signs that a company genuinely invests in its employees? So, like you're interviewing, you're researching, you're talking to people, what are the two big giveaways that they're truly investing in their employees?

Speaker 1: 39:31

Yeah, the way I think about this or feel about this is twofold. One is you'll hear and see an excitement and that the employees see a connection around what they're doing in their day job with who they are. The subtext of that is, or the vision that you may get a sense of is and who they're becoming Right, one which is related to excitement word, but you have this real sort of palpable sense of energy around that they're actually learning and growing, that their job is not just a job but it's actually a building block along those lines around where they want to get to. It could be career and it could be beyond career.

Speaker 3: 40:11

I love that. The thought of like their face lights up, because we've all seen that right, when you've had an interview and you ask someone about their experience, you can really you see the shift, someone who truly loves it. Okay, ai, the big elephant in the room. Ai and how it's going to impact people. What's the one thing an employee can do today to avoid being left in the dust and stay relevant? What's one thing they should just do if nothing else.

Speaker 1: 40:39

Okay. So there's a tactical thing If you're organizing, or two tactical things. If your organization's got like LinkedIn Learning, for example, or you could go on the web or what have you, you need to learn fundamentals about AI. Go and do that, it's great. The other thing, what I would do, is it's available, but use Copilot, use ChatGPT and integrate it into what you do in your day-to-day and you'll soon find out, at least in this kind of the large language model stuff. There's just so much opportunity for how it can enhance your work process and how you use your time and energy to get work done. And there's this whole thing around that. Microsoft puts out research around work, and one of the things he said, one of the skills to learn, is how you do delegation, ai delegation, which is basically how you prompt AI right, and especially in this sort of co-pilot context, and I thought that was so interesting, because they're learning how to get the answer that they feel like they're looking for by getting the right prompt.

Speaker 3: 41:39

Microsoft does offer really cool ongoing education for folks on AI, so highly recommend it for anyone. There, you go, yeah, okay. What's one thing that's giving you a lot of joy these days?

Speaker 1: 41:52

Oh, my goodness, wow. There's a lot of things, but I'm a little bit of a fitness kind of person. I have this routine every morning that I do core exercises for 30 to 40 minutes and while it's not always comfortable for me, it brings me a lot of joy because I see the reward of the habit that I've worked on. So that's probably one thing that's top of mind.

Speaker 3: 42:13

Nice, I like it. Who's a leader you really admire?

Speaker 1: 42:17

Okay. So I don't know if I have a leader that I really admire, and the reason being is that I think leaders are situational. The qualities of leaders depend on the situation they're in. That said, I'll give you an example of a leader that I do admire in the situation that he's in, and that's President Volodymyr Zelensky and what he's doing to keep Ukraine together and fight the war. Would I ask President Zelensky to run the transformation around our AI strategy for an organization? Don't know, don't know. It's a different set of capabilities, different situations. For me it's like a multiple answer, but I think there's a lot of leaders in a lot of levels. They have really fantastic qualities.

Speaker 2: 42:57

Mike, it was so great to talk with you today.

Speaker 1: 42:58

Thank you so much for having me. I'm so excited and I enjoyed the privilege of being able to share my thoughts and feelings with you.

Speaker 3: 43:10

Hey friends, this episode of your Work Friends was hosted by Francesca Ranieri and myself, Mel Plett.

Speaker 2: 43:16

This episode was produced and edited by Mel Plett and myself, Francesca Ranieri.

Speaker 3: 43:22

Our theme music is by Pink Zebra and you can follow us over on all of our social media platforms Instagram, tiktok, youtube and, if you're so inclined, joined us over on LinkedIn in our large and growing community, and you can email us at friend@yourworkfriends.com, or visit us on yourworkfriends.com. Also, folks, please like, subscribe and leave a review. If you enjoyed this episode, and if you really enjoyed it, please share with a work friend or two. Thanks friends, thanks friends.

Employment is Dead

Your Work Friends Podcast: Employment is Dead with Deborah Perry Piscione & Josh Drean

In this episode, we dive into why the traditional nine-to-five no longer cuts it and explore how AI, gig economies, and decentralized organizations are reshaping work as we know it.

We sat down with futurists, innovation thought leaders, and founders of Work3 Institute’s Deborah Perry Piscione and Josh Drean to get into the mindset shift from “I work for you, you pay me” to a future where skills and purpose matter more than a desk and a paycheck. You’ll hear bold predictions about money possibly disappearing, villages re-emerging, and why flexibility, community, and entrepreneurial thinking are now non-negotiables.

If you’re curious about what work—and your role in it—might look like in the next five to ten years, this episode will give you plenty to think about.

Listen or watch the full episode here

---

Speaker 1: 0:00

Traditional models of employment are failing to meet the needs of the evolving workforce. Employment as it looks from an industrial age kind of model of you work for me, I'll give you X amount of dollars for Y amount of hours, I'm the boss, I tell you exactly what you need to build and exactly what you need to do, and you don't ask questions. Just does not serve us anymore.

Speaker 2: 0:40

Hey, this is your Work Friends. I'm Mel Plett and I'm Francesca Ranieri. We're breaking down work to help you stay ahead.

Speaker 3: 0:48

We're also joined by Lucy, a 60 pound boxer, who is breathing into the mic right now.

Speaker 2: 0:53

How is that a hot breath going for you?

Speaker 3: 0:55

It's like the best dog, but her breath is just. Here's a mint. Here's a mint. I know I gotta get some of those greenies. I'm like here's a mint, here's a mint. I know I gotta get some of those greenies. I'm like I don't want to know.

Speaker 2: 1:08

I don't want to know oh, I mean, here she is just, but this is the panting, is not francesca it?

Speaker 3: 1:12

is not. It is not. It's just like in a brand new, whole new audience base after this episode and in other news we'll do a class for only fans oh my god, a new way of working. A new way of working. Yeah, speaking of a new way of working, we had a mind-blowing conversation the other day we did we met with the authors of employment is dead.

Speaker 2: 1:38

deborah perry piscione is a globally recognized innovation thought leader. She's an architect of improvisational innovation, a New York Times bestselling author the Secrets of Silicon Valley, serial entrepreneur of six companies, a LinkedIn learning author, and she also worked on Capitol Hill. And then Josh Dreen joined us as well. He's the co-author, co-founder and director of employee experience at the Work3 Institute. His work has been featured in Harvard Business Review, forbes, fast Company and the Economist. They both speak globally actually to bring work and tech insights to digital first leaders, but they're very focused on human-centric workplaces as well. Very interesting concept Employment is dead. What I also took away from that conversation is it's mainly how we think about traditional employment. But work is still here to stay. It just might look a little bit different. How about you? Yeah?

Speaker 3: 2:35

One of the things in this whole AI conversation that I think we've been really missing is what could work really look like in the next five to 10 years. Both Josh and Debra brought some very mind-blowing perspectives of how work could feel decentralized and gigged and really exciting Potentially, how we don't even have money anymore. Are we going to return to villages? If you are looking for a futurist's view of what the world of work, what your life might look like, especially on this whole AI trajectory, this is the episode for you. Yeah.

Speaker 2: 3:14

Listen, it's a thought piece for sure. Noodle on it. Let us know what you think. With that, here's Debra and Josh. All right, welcome Josh and Deborah. We're so excited to see you both. All right, we're going to set the stage and jump right in, because we're in it. The title Employment is Dead. Really bold statement. What led you both to this conclusion?

Speaker 1: 3:44

Oh yes, employment is dead. Our bold pitch is that traditional models of employment are failing to meet the needs of the evolving workforce. Employment, as it looks from an industrial age kind of model of you work for me, I'll give you X amount of dollars for Y amount of hours, I'm the boss, I tell you exactly what you need to build and exactly what you need to do, and you don't ask questions, just does not serve us anymore. And when Debra said it's dead, we do make the distinction that work and employment are two very different things, and we've just bled it together and don't think too much about it. But in the very first chapter of the book we say employment is this construct that we designed. That doesn't work.

Speaker 1: 4:30

Work, on the other hand, individuals who want to build skills, who want to be a part of a company or a movement bigger than themselves, to belong to a community. That is what is important. So how do we reclaim some of those elements? And we talk more about this and we can get further into it, but I'm curious to have you weigh in on that, debra.

Speaker 4: 4:50

Well, I wanted to give a little bit of another additional nugget on the backstory. Josh and I really thought we'd have a multi-year run rate with this book, and we'll be lucky if we have five months, because this concept of these jobs eroding is happening so quickly. So the world really needs to wake up and, on the one hand, we're going to get back more time so that we can be better citizens, better family members, have more time to do things. We just really have been desiring this European lifestyle for so long. Now we're going to be able to get it, but we do need to look down the road, not only for ourselves, for subsistence, but how do we all collectively work together, which can look quite different from an economic model that we've known for over 150 years?

Speaker 2: 5:38

Yeah, I think everyone's pretty cozy with how it's always been right. That's always hard, but what I gained from the book was traditional jobs are gone, but work is here to stay. So the optimistic realist in me is employment might be dead, but work is here to stay. There's work that's going to happen For the time being. Yeah, for the time being.

Speaker 4: 6:00

I almost got, even though Waymo has been in San Francisco for quite some time I haven't seen it in my Silicon Valley neighborhood until recently and I was waiting to wave at the car, not realizing it was a Waymo, because I smile at people when I they're waiting for me to cross the street. I was like there's nobody in that car so soon. Just as much as AI is evolving, so are robots and humanoids, and so we are getting to, you know, that general AGI, artificial intelligence, where it can rationalize, teach itself and be in concert with robots being able to learn on their own, and so that's happening a lot faster than we anticipated as well, and so that's happening a lot faster than we anticipated as well.

Speaker 3: 6:45

The evolution of work has changed. A lot of people haven't studied this so deeply, so I'm wondering if you can talk through how expectations of work have changed over the years, just to set the stage.

Speaker 1: 6:58

Yeah, I can jump in here. I spent a lot of time working with HR professionals and when you look at HR in general, that field has just shifted so much. When you look at the beginning of HR, right, it was personnel and I think that it was birthed out of this idea of we have people who work at the company. We need to pay them. They could get into trouble and we could be sued as a company for whatever they say or whatever they do after hours, and so let's get ahead of that. So the traditional model of HR was how can we do the paper things it's paying people PTO and then we got into this era of discretionary effort where it was like people work for us nine to five. It's very contractual, but how can we almost trick them into doing more work, staying later, creeping into some of their personal time? What can we do to make the workplace exciting? To be there at 6 pm, at 7 pm, come in earlier, and so there's the carrot and the stick. Your bonuses are tied to that. And there's also the look we've got snacks in the break room, We've got beer on tap, we have a lot of different things. And that birthed the employee engagement movement which was yeah, we're Apple, we're Google, we want you to have an amazing experience at our organization. So how can we engage you more? And that's where we have hot yoga, or we cater food every single day, or we'll watch your pet. We have a pet daycare on campus right, it's very much this 2000s view and that has shifted into employee experience.

Speaker 1: 8:34

I think is where we are today is how can we design experiences that employees want to have and need to have? The problem is we're still falling behind because we're unwilling to look at the deep and true needs of employees. We actually write about it in the book. We call them the 10 operating principles of work, three, the non-negotiables of the modern workforce. And, just to give you an example, employees want flexibility. That's one of our operating principles. Can we offer them flexibility? And, like we did during the pandemic, we don't really do it now, and so we see a lot of companies who are more. How do we get them back into the office? The RTO mandate over. What if we customized their schedules and individualized it so they can work according to their circadian rhythm? Yes, you can go get your kids at 3 pm, Because we know that you log back on at 7 and you work until midnight type thing, and so there's a lot of flexibility that we can be offering employees. It's just it feels like we're still stuck in that model.

Speaker 3: 9:34

Why do you think that is? Why are we still stuck?

Speaker 4: 9:39

Today's model is based on really Taylorism, which Taylor was an engineer in the early 1900s who came up with the concept and said people do not have emotions. They don't have feelings, they're just cogs on a wheel to get that widget job done. And that was really the creation around middle management as well. We became very consumed with time and for someone like myself, I never understood if I didn't eat lunch on a particular day in my Washington DC Capitol Hill office and my work was done at two o'clock, why do I have to sit there until six? Because our hours were eight to six. And then, if you pulled all-nighters in Washington DC, at least in my generation, you got like a badge of honor. Rather than looking at the output or the productivity behind work, we just got into the concept of time, and so it is really hard if you may be very innovative and I think, sitting here in Silicon Valley around companies like Google who did try to do things very differently Marissa Mayer was very famous at Google for allowing people to tap into their rhythm, as Josh mentioned and just when do you work best? It may not be within that eight to six timeframe, and I had to adopt that engineer model when I first moved to Silicon Valley, because every engineer I worked with was really extraordinary in the middle of the night and that's when they got their work done.

Speaker 4: 11:13

Technology and products and consumerism in foods. But yet our cost of living is at its highest, in part because of premium pricing. So Gen Z has like 82% less buying power than baby boomers did because of all this additional abundance and the fees around it. So if you're always trying to catch up in order to pay your rent or your mortgage, it's just hard to grow beyond. You just don't have time to think about it because you're on that treadmill.

Speaker 3: 11:54

Yeah, it's such an interesting thing because we know that a 30-year-old today is worse off than their parents were. To your very good point right, the buying power in the younger generation is not there, and I think there's a lot of reasons for that too. And then we're also looking at potentially jobs going away, work going away. This idea of job security non-existent definitely now doesn't exist anymore. Technology is going to drive this so much faster, right, we're going to get into these holes so much faster. My biggest concern is this economic wealth gap is going to get even bigger, from the people that have to the people that don't have.

Speaker 3: 12:37

And does technology exacerbate that or does it democratize that?

Speaker 4: 12:41

Yeah, that's such a great question because, as Josh knows, I used to always say AI is going to democratize opportunity, but really what it's coming down to is digital fluency. I sit in the middle of this stuff and trying to keep up with it day to day. I'm like, oh, you haven't heard about Manus, that's going to build out the company for you. That's Reid Hoffman's new startup and Josh and I are very much on the global speaking circuit and I'm lucky of a speech last two weeks. I'm constantly revising it. So there's exhaustion with keeping up and you cannot keep pace with the five or so AI companies. Where they're going to be the winner takes all situation. There was a venture capitalist who made a famous statement as the SaaS kind of model where you would eventually exhaust those sales. In an AI model, you can not only take all the jobs, but you can take all the salaries of the people that used to work for you. It's endless. The money is endless.

Speaker 3: 13:46

Yeah, I was just reading AI 2027, that white paper that's out there too, and it just feels like it all starts to funnel up into three big things at the end of the day, and it's just holy shit, as all the wealth and all of the abundance, if you will, going to ladder into these three conglomerates, whatever we want to call them.

Speaker 2: 14:19

It's fascinating to watch, and the3, because I and Josh. You started to talk about it a little bit, but can you both break down what Work3 is all about for our listeners?

Speaker 1: 14:29

Yeah. So the Work3 Institute is an HR and AI advisory where we help companies marry emerging technologies with workforce strategies. It's hey, we want to use AI. We have no idea how to get started. We want to help our people better use AI and upskill them to be able to 50x productivity, 10x productivity, whatever the promise of AI is going to be. We just don't know how to do that, and a lot of it tends to be.

Speaker 1: 14:57

These forward-thinking human-centric companies who see the change happening don't know how to get on board and we match them with some of this technology. A lot of it, to be honest, is like you've never touched a generative ai tool. Here's a few options. And generative AI tool here's a few options. Here's some homework to start using it today. Just use it in your daily life. We are big on helping reclaim human fulfillment at work and satisfaction. It's something that, especially as companies are being squeezed right now economically, how do we not lose sight of employee satisfaction? How do you continue to do well by your people? Because if you look at the stats, they're not great either. Most employees are burned out. Most employees would take a new job in a heartbeat. Most employees don't trust their companies to do right by them at this time, and so tackling those human-centric projects head on.

Speaker 2: 15:51

You talked about the principles earlier and I loved, debra, what you were saying too. Just, things are changing so quickly and Josh mentioning RTO, right, we swung all the way over here during COVID. Now we're all the way back and something about the traditional model and I know we started to touch on those barriers that actually are gonna get people to the future. Some of it has to do with, like, executive leadership still thinking in that very traditional way, right, like even some of these folks who are really tech forward are still like I need to see your face and I need to see it every day from eight to six, as you mentioned, deborah, and if you're not a butt in a seat, I don't trust you're getting the work done. How do you get them to cut through that old way of thinking to get them to the future?

Speaker 4: 16:38

So the last chapter of our book is on the work three transformation. How do you go from the traditional organization into the era of AI? And a lot of it has to do with communication and, as Josh mentioned, it's about the people. First, the human element. When we wrote this book, we really thought the adoption would come from a lot of the big organizations and the consulting firms. But what happened, with Doge coming out and the geopolitical component of this is, people were losing their jobs so much faster. And then there needed to be a proof point If you were in the hiring business, that you had to prove that AI couldn't do that job.

Speaker 4: 17:21

This book quickly shifted to the individual wanting to know what do I need to do? Because we can't call this unemployment anymore. We need an entirely new economic model in this era of AI, because moving into that next job, it's just not going to be there. But I think, mel, it's more about fear and holding on as long as they can, because they know this is happening. So I don't care if you're Accenture or you're a law firm or whatever you are. You know that AI is going to take over your business. It just is. And so let me hold on to the work element as long as I can, and Josh and I have certainly talked about it. They probably sign these long-term real estate leases. They're just holding on as long as they possibly can, and I know you want to talk about some recent articles where one of the anthropic co-founders has talked about job loss.

Speaker 4: 18:21

That's going to happen at the entry level, but CEOs, boards of directors, can all be taken out by AI, so why not hold on as long as you can and let's work together as long?

Speaker 2: 18:31

as we can. We saw it even two years ago, right when they were testing AI, taking the bar exam or the accounting exam, and they're passing with flying colors Like absolutely it's at all levels, not just entry level, For those types of business leaders or even in professional services that are kind of holding on with fear. How do you move them to the place of opportunity of the portfolio worker in those environments so that everyone can continue to feel?

Speaker 4: 18:58

whole to some degree. What's happening simultaneously is Gen Z coming up. We often talk about various kind of use cases or individuals, young people that have made a tremendous amount of money at 15 years old, generating, creating a game on Roblox, and I think the average Roblox developer, Josh teenager, makes about $65,000 a year. So you know they're not going to want to necessarily come into what traditional work offers when they've had so much control and ownership over being that gain developer. And so you are having this market. Yes, 50% of these entry-level jobs, white-collar jobs, are going to go away in the next one to five years. There's also a lot of interesting things happen on the Web3 side in the metaverse. Josh, you're really the expert here, so you should weigh in.

Speaker 1: 19:58

Yeah, the answer is if you look at the pattern over time, companies who operate in fear, especially large companies who don't take the risks that Debra's talking about and don't push things forward, will risk obsolescence. That's just how it is. And the argument that we make again is that if we are still having the employment conversation and that's exactly what we're having right now which is oh, are you at a nine to five full-time employment with one company or unemployed? Those are the only two options. This doesn't make sense. And the younger generation to Debra's point already has abandoned traditional nine to fives. They are abandoning college right now, they are adopting AI and they are pushing forward in a way that doesn't even make sense to these aging leaders who have been doing this for so long. In a certain way, it's just outside their scope. Mel, you mentioned a DAO or a Decentralized, autonomous Organization. Some of our more progressive clients are piloting DAOs within their organization right now, which sounds like a scary word or a Web3 new thing, but really all it is like we don't need decision makers at the top of one person, a manager making all of the decisions and just telling us exactly what we need to do. You hired me because I have skills and I have a voice and I'm creative and there's a lot more that I can offer to the team. So what if we distributed tokens to them, voting power? Essentially it's you want to make a choice for the team? Get on Snapshot. It's just a Web3 tool that will allow you to vote in real time which direction the company could go, and you can make hundreds of these decisions every week together in an instant. And once the group has decided collectively which direction they need to move, then a smart contract will execute and say all right, that's the direction that we're headed.

Speaker 1: 21:55

And now you have hyper agile teams that don't. They're not bound by the same red tape, their hands aren't as tied as other teams and they're moving quickly and they're producing more results than other teams. And so there are companies that are doing it that way. What I think this large scale global DAO, like a global gig economy, is going to be more so the mainstream than an internal gig economy. Why should I work for you only when I can do my same skills for several companies and several projects? That feels better to employees. And so again, how do you attract Gen Z? A lot of companies can't even answer that question. They just label them as lazy or entitled. And then there are companies who are like oh, let's pilot some DAOs. And then there's, oh, let's operate outside of traditional employment, which feels like I don't even get the value out of the work that I contribute, so pay me more for the work that I'm doing. There's a lot to unpack there, but that's just a teaser.

Speaker 2: 22:58

We know Gen Z is already making up 30% of the workforce. Between Gen Z and millennials, I guess borderline zennials, that's 70% of the workforce already. Right, and Gen Z want to feel like they're co-creating the workplace with you, they're not just showing up and being told what to do. So I actually love that concept of the voting piece that you talked about. Where is this working really well? I know you can't share client names, understood, but where are you seeing this working really well? What are you hearing from feedback where you are testing this out Abroad, abroad, good.

Speaker 4: 23:32

Of course Switzerland, Germany I might ask them out. Josh and I do a lot of global work overall, so yeah, there's definitely forward-thinking individuals overseas.

Speaker 1: 23:52

We share case studies with them. Individuals overseas we share case studies with them.

Speaker 1: 23:58

It just feels like a couple standard deviations away from what they are willing to do, right, Even if this was working really well, like JuiceboxDAO is a great example, right?

Speaker 1: 24:05

This is a vibrant, interoperable community that doesn't employ anyone, and yet they have so many people core contributors, or bounty hunters, as you call it in the Web3 world who are contributing and adding value and getting paid based on the value that they are generating. And so, again, it's very difficult to come into a leadership place and say, hey, work is changing. And they're like give us some answers and it's yeah, but the answers aren't going to be what you're used to and they're going to challenge everything that you know and like AI added to all of that which is moving so rapidly. It's difficult, and that's part of the reason why, with AI, we see a large group of companies who are like oh yeah, AI is going to replace my expensive workforce, and people are tossing around oh yeah, we're just going to be unemployed, Everyone's going to be unemployed. It's guys like broaden your horizons, maximize the skills that you have and you will always be working.

Speaker 3: 25:10

I think that's my question. How are people going to make money? I think that's my question. How are people going to make money? And you've mentioned, like the creator economy with Roblox, right, or, for instance, these DAOs. I find it very lazy when companies go oh, I'm just going to fire everybody, or we're just going to get efficiency gains, or we're just going to dump a bunch of money in AI and throw spaghetti at the wall to try to figure out what's happening, without really thinking about what the art of the possible could be in their organization. And we see this very commonly when technology hits. It's like tech for tech's sake, as opposed to actually enabling your business to be something better than it could be. Yep, like, how are people going to make money? And my secondary sub question of that is do companies really go away?

Speaker 4: 25:54

I'm going to tell you what I think is going to happen in five years, when money goes away. Josh, why don't you do the interim step? Because that's the beauty of our collaboration is Josh is in the thick of things and I am looking more at the economic models of the future.

Speaker 3: 26:09

Can we have both, though, because I'd love to know the now and the future.

Speaker 4: 26:12

if you'd be willing to share, yeah for sure, josh, you want to begin, and then I'll follow up future, if you'd be willing to share.

Speaker 1: 26:17

Yeah, for sure, Josh. You want to begin and then I'll follow up. Yeah, and just to clarify how are individual employees going to make money in kind of a gig economy, space creator economy, or how are companies going to make money knowing that employees are probably going to choose alternative work models?

Speaker 3: 26:32

Let's start with employees like individual people, because I think that's the biggest concern for a lot of folks right now is will jobs exist? Will work exist?

Speaker 1: 26:40

Yeah, it's so funny. So many TikTokers who are like I'm unemployed. I just got laid off for the second time this year, so blow up my TikTok and collectively we can hopefully make some money. Everyone's trying to carve that space out, and I would say the reason why the creator economy has stagnated, the reason why the gig economy isn't hot right now, the reason why Airbnb and Uber is not excelling like they used to, is partially because plenty of reasons right, but from an employee's perspective, if I'm driving for Uber, you have a centralized company. They need massive amounts of cashflow in order to keep the business running, and so where are you going to get that cash? You can go to investors and you're tied down to being more and more profitable, and the employee just gets to a place where this isn't even worth it. I'm not even making enough money.

Speaker 1: 27:33

Too much of it is flowing back to a centralized organization, and so one answer could be decentralized organizations, which is we cut out the middleman. We don't need them. We have technology that exists where you can open an app and get to work. It runs peer to peer, which means I offer my skills and my services outside of an Upwork. Upwork right now is the only way. There's other platforms, sure, but if you want to be a freelancer, the only way you're going to find work is through some of these channels. Again, upwork takes a large cut of that.

Speaker 1: 28:09

So how do you make this make sense? Plus, benefits are tied up into employment. Specifically, there's a lot of challenges that have not materialized yet, and I'm just letting everyone know on this podcast today that smart people are working on this technology and the minute that it becomes viable for the masses, why would an employee work a full-time job when they could have just as much, if not more, money, working on projects that they love with, like passionate individuals, single mothers working three hours a day because that makes sense to them over other options? And Reid Hoffman he has said that traditional jobs will be dead by 2034. And I think a lot of people misinterpret that to be like AI is taking all of your jobs. You'll be done by 2034. What he's really saying is that model, that decentralized gig economy, will be viable by 2034 and everyone will be choosing that.

Speaker 4: 29:02

And Josh, he revised that year in the next two to four years.

Speaker 3: 29:06

Oh Jesus.

Speaker 4: 29:08

Yeah, if you look at his Manus AI, you'll understand why because it can create the company for you. So, francesca, your question is the question I hope that I always get asked and rarely do so in the interim. We're gonna have to be incredibly entrepreneurial, whether you're entrepreneur or not. So you could be driving for Uber right now and you also make these delicious gluten-free chocolate chip cookies that people have been asking you to provide for parties and locally, but now you're giving it to your Uber customers and they're starting to take orders. So what I mean by that is you want multiple revenue streams and getting those revenue streams to work together.

Speaker 4: 29:50

My head is really where are we going to be when money goes away? So I'll give you an example, and this is a geopolitical issue as well we may move back towards communal living. We're seeing a lot of that pop up around the world. We may grow our own food. I think we're going to see much more of the rise of the family-run business, and I don't mean just the mom and pop small storefronts. These can be multi-billion dollar businesses, but we are going to have to be much more reliant on our families and our immediate community.

Speaker 4: 30:30

And then government is going to have to figure out an entirely new support system, a safety net, because you can't just call it unemployment anymore. If President Trump wants to pay women $8,000 to have a baby, which he's asked for because of our birth rates being in decline, then you're going to actually have to pay people to, whether it's mom or dad, to take care of that child on top of it. So you're going to have to pay for childcare or elder care Again. It is going to be so fundamentally different from what we know today, and I'm heading off to Copenhagen and a few other Scandinavian countries next week just to continue to look at some of their ways, of the way they live their life and what can be adopted around the world.

Speaker 4: 31:23

I was just in Mexico City. They certainly have the family-run multi-billion-dollar business nailed down, not that it doesn't come without its challenges, but we are going to move much more towards the village, if you will, almost back in time, because it's not about the big corporation anymore. They say the average company. Big company in the future is going to be 50 to 200 people, and then you're going to have the company of one, the big unicorn, and then you're going to have the company of one, the we going to barter? Are we going to be more providing subsistence to ourselves, our families, our communities? And that is the big unknown question at the moment.

Speaker 2: 32:27

If money goes away, how do you have a multi-billion dollar business?

Speaker 4: 32:30

There'll be a few of those people that do have the digital fluency because you are capturing, as I said earlier, the SaaS or any technological kind of innovation. There was a market that you target to. Now, in an AI economy, as jobs go away, you can capture those jobs and the salaries you are paying people. So there's still going to be services that need to be provided for, but we do have to services or functions. I used to say we'll have the barbell economy where you're either the AI engineer or you're the plumber. Now I say you've got to do both. Really, the generations of the future can have some degree of cognitive functionality before AI completely takes it over. We do need those physical skills in the interim before humanoids are fully developed.

Speaker 3: 33:30

Are you guys freaked out by this, or is this exciting to you, or is this exciting to?

Speaker 4: 33:34

you. It's exciting to me because I think we know, had it not been for COVID, we wouldn't have evolved, We'd still be in the same kind of mindset. And so when we think about the problems of the environment, right, we don't need to drive to work anymore. You go to a place like Copenhagen. Everybody is biking. Things become more localized. So I think we had this great big globalization and if anything the president is doing right now is bringing it back to the US, whatever your politics are manufacturing consumerism, and I think eventually that's going to become more and more localized.

Speaker 3: 34:25

Knowing humans' capacity for change, and this is happening so quickly that will there be in the short term a lot of pain.

Speaker 4: 34:36

No matter what your religious perspectives are, there is a belief that we're coming into the era of the feminine, and in that feminine it is more about the heart rather than the head. We've been chasing capitalism for so long, and the haves and the have-nots, the dichotomy and the spread continues to get larger and larger. And, to your point, has that made us happier, having money, or has it made us more lonely? Because we're always on the chase, even among the world's richest men. It's just a continuous battle. Who's on top? Who cares? How much money do you really need?

Speaker 4: 35:18

And so I do think we will be in a position where we will have more time to give back in ways that families need. Particularly children need. They need that love and support. And there's something very beautiful about that family farm, with those children getting up at 3 am and all working together to contribute to the family wealth. And I think it's scary because, again, we've been in this kind of world of work that we've known for 150 years now. But we will have to evolve. We don't have a choice. With or without the AI hype, it's happening. So we're not going to have a choice, but to evolve at this time.

Speaker 2: 36:02

The beauty of this. It brings us back to a place for why we're all here anyway, which is to live, because I think one thing that I heard as a common theme throughout COVID post-COVID was this mass reflection that took place because people finally had an opportunity to slow down and remove the blinders of the hamster wheel that they were just on and they're like whoa, I didn't realize how much of my life I'm missing on, and so it's interesting. It seems pretty optimistic to me, although I think there's a lot to work through and there may be a lot of scary things too, but at the same time it gives us the opportunity to be just human beings and exist.

Speaker 3: 36:41

What about the people that are like freaked out? We talk to people all the time that are I'm going to lose my job, AI is going to take my job. You've got obviously anthropic guy saying you're not going to have a job. What do you say to those folks?

Speaker 1: 36:56

I would say it's not black or white. I have a job and I don't anymore. If you have skills that you want to develop, if you have things that you're passionate about, start chasing them now and don't worry about the certifications or the college degrees. That stuff is irrelevant. Just build your skills alongside AI and there will be a place for you, whether it's gig economy 3.0, whether it's in a creator economy world. Youtube has shown us that you can make a video on anything and you can find a following and make money off of that. A decentralized gig economy will be more than that. It'll be what skills do you have? Let's apply it. In these ways, ai will be able to match you on projects. You don't have to look for clients. You don't have to beg companies to hire you with your cover letter. It'll be as easy as opening an app and getting started. But definitely hone those skills. God. The death of the cover letter, please go.

Speaker 2: 37:50

I was going to say you just made every employee happy to hear that.

Speaker 4: 37:53

I don't know if you guys are of the generation. I actually had to mail it in the mail.

Speaker 3: 37:57

Oh yeah.

Speaker 4: 37:58

Oh yeah, you didn't have to go through that, but I'm a little bit more draconian.

Speaker 2: 38:12

I am wake the hell up, wrap it round, and this is to get to know you better as human beings and your personal POVs on a couple of things. It's 2030. In one word, or one sentence what's work? Going to look like Dead.

Speaker 1: 38:34

Decentralized.

Speaker 2: 38:36

What's one thing about corporate culture you'd like to see disappear for good?

Speaker 4: 38:41

All of it.

Speaker 1: 38:44

Management.

Speaker 2: 38:46

Interesting. Okay, what's the greatest opportunity that most organizations are missing out on?

Speaker 4: 38:55

Treating their people as human.

Speaker 1: 38:59

AI.

Speaker 4: 39:01

Okay.

Speaker 2: 39:03

What music are you listening to right now? What's on your playlist Keeping you happy?

Speaker 4: 39:08

I'm going to Coldplay tomorrow night. Oh, that's amazing.

Speaker 2: 39:14

Do you have a favorite?

Speaker 4: 39:15

song from their albums oh many.

Speaker 2: 39:17

Just love it. Yeah, okay, how about you, josh?

Speaker 1: 39:22

Yeah, all of my early 2000s punk rock fans. They're all putting out albums now. So we've got some All-American Rejects in there, some Jimmy World. They're keeping me happy by feeding me more music.

Speaker 2: 39:35

Yeah, Listen, Gen X and the millennials and Xennials. Over here we have the best generation of music coming up. In that time Everyone's coming back.

Speaker 1: 39:43

No one can argue that.

Speaker 2: 39:44

No, what are you guys reading right now? It could be audio book too. No judgment.

Speaker 1: 39:53

I'm reading Open Talent right now. It's a book that actually came out Harvard Business Review Press about the same time as ours, very much in the same vein as the work that we wrote about, but it's very much talking about the now of work, which is how do we open up our workforces to a talent marketplace or an internal gig economy.

Speaker 2: 40:15

So it's very fascinating marketplace or an internal gig economy. So it's very fascinating. Yeah, we we had john on the pod recently. It was an awesome book and very in line with also your concepts as well in terms of that portfolio work of the future. So it's really good. Who do you?

Speaker 1: 40:39

I am a work nerd, so I all of the greats the Adam Grants, the Marcus Buckinghams come to mind. There's a lot of great work, social media individuals right now who are doing some great work. So a shout out to Chris Donnelly, there Just changing work, one TikTok at a time.

Speaker 4: 41:00

Yeah, and I hit it more from a historical perspective, of a lot of women who were the first Amelia Earhart, just somebody I admire greatly, even someone like Oprah, who understood the concept of ownership rather than just being a successful broadcaster. So people who really broke the mold and were first and likely told no quite often and just continue to persevere.

Speaker 1: 41:30

Yeah, I like that. And shout out to Debra, who is a modern Amelia Earhart in my mind. She does all the value she puts on conferences in Silicon Valley of these powerful women who are making big waves in the investment space, innovation space, keeping that trend moving forward. Thank you.

Speaker 2: 41:50

So what's one piece of advice you want everyone to know? And it doesn't necessarily we're going to get to the advice you want employees to have at the end. So this could be personal or professional, but if you were talking to someone you care about, what's one piece of advice you would give them today that you'd want them to take away To?

Speaker 4: 42:06

take risks. There are no wrong answers. I was always that person and this is something I do see, quite a dichotomy between men and women, not to generalize. But men will just jump and women will come to the edge of the cliff and it's almost analysis by paralysis, by analysis. At this stage, you got to try a lot of things and figure out what sticks, and there are no wrong answers and there's nothing embarrassing or just by. I don't even want to call it failure, because you learn along the way. The worst thing is to not try.

Speaker 1: 42:44

I love that, debra. The worst thing is to not try. It's so true. I would say and this tends to be aligned with the content that we write about is prioritize skills over experience. I have a younger brother who's considering going to college right now and he's hey man, is it worth it? I'm seeing a lot of stuff about it, and when I was a kid there was no other option. It was like go to college, that's the only way to get skills. But nowadays there are so many other options to learn and grow, and so I would say don't worry about the piece of paper and learn and grow. And so I would say don't worry about the piece of paper. And, yes, college is a great experience. The community side of it is great, but you need to make sure that you are at least graduating with skills that are going to be attractive in the marketplace.

Speaker 3: 43:27

This has been an amazing conversation and super appreciate the glimpse of what's actually going on today and what will be coming and how people can get on the bus for their own benefit. You both are doing work and keeping up to date with this. As it's changing every two weeks, how can our listeners stay?

Speaker 1: 43:45

connected with you. Find us on LinkedIn Debra Perry-Pershoni or Josh Dreen. The Works for the Institute is there as well. We love to chat about any of the challenges that you are facing and love to connect Debra Josh thanks so much for joining us today.

Speaker 3: 44:00

Thank you for having us.

Speaker 2: 44:02

This episode was produced, edited and all things by us myself, Mel Plett and Francesca Ranieri. Our music is by Pink Zebra and if you loved this conversation and you want to contribute your thoughts with us, please do. You can visit us at yourworkfriends.com, but you can also join us over on linkedin. We have a linkedin community page and we have the tiktoks and instagrams. So please join us in the socials and if you like this and you've benefited from this episode and you think someone else can benefit from this episode, please rate and subscribe. We'd really appreciate it. That helps keep us going. Take care, friends. Bye, friends.

More Human in the Age of AI

Your Work Friends Podcast: More Human in the Age of AI with Jacqueline Carter

We’re all being told to master AI, but what if the real secret to thriving at work is doubling down on what makes us human?

In this episode, we talk with Jacqueline Carter, author of More Human, about how leaders can build their edge through awareness, wisdom, and compassion.

If you're feeling overwhelmed by tech changes or unsure how to lead right now, this one’s for you. It’s not either/or. It’s not about keeping up. It’s about choosing to start with human.

Listen or watch the full episode here

---

Speaker 1: 0:00

It's like a lot of organizations right now. It's like they're rolling out high-end Ferraris but not teaching anybody how to drive, and that's just a waste of money.

Speaker 2: 0:21

Welcome to your Work Friends. I'm Francesca and I'm Mel. We are breaking down work, so you get ahead, mel. What's the good word?

Speaker 3: 0:31

I'm heading to Rhode Island and excited for that. How about you? Very nice, pretty chill over here, pretty chill over here. I showed Robbie the picture of Enzo on the first day of first grade and the last day of first grade of Enzo on the first day of first grade and the last day of first grade.

Speaker 2: 0:46

For those of you who don't know, I have a seven-year-old. He started first grade with a shaved head. He ended first grade with this mop of curls, a gold chain. Dressed in all black, he either looks like he's a sophomore in college, at USC, or is going to start really getting into creed sometime soon. I don't know. It's all over the map.

Speaker 3: 1:03

I love his style evolution.

Speaker 2: 1:05

We let him dress the way he wants to. He picks out all of that. He asks for a chain. We got it from TJ Maxx or something. It's not like he has a real gold chain or anything like that, but it's interesting watching your kid make choices.

Speaker 3: 1:18

Yeah, it's just fun to watch their personalities evolve. I don't know, I think it's really cool, but I do too.

Speaker 2: 1:24

I will allow him to wear anything but sketchers. My child will not be wearing sketchers. What's your beef with sketchers? I just I cannot, I like cannot stand that brand. I don't know what it is it's like a joke it's like a joke.

Speaker 2: 1:42

I don't like a joke. I don't appreciate it. I don't. It's not real, I need it to be. Oh my God, every once in a while, especially when he was younger, he'd pick some up and some of them had. They would light up underneath and I'm like, absolutely not Like. I will let my kid wear the craziest shit, except for Skechers. Absolutely not.

Speaker 3: 2:03

No, I love it Speaking shit except for Skechers? Absolutely not. No, I love it Speaking of style. We launched some merch on our website. We are independent and we want to keep it that way, but if you feel so inclined, check out some of the merch that we put up there. We thought there's some pretty cool designs over there. To check Any purchase that you make helps us stay operational, so appreciate your support and you get a cool hat or sweatshirt or something.

Speaker 2: 2:28

Good hats for summer sunscreen. That all works out. It's all good stuff.

Speaker 3: 2:31

We had such a great conversation earlier this week with Jacqueline Carter. She's an author, speaker, a senior partner and a director for the North America Potential Project. She's an expert in leadership, development, mindsets and corporate culture and she just came out with this book More Human. This is an opportunity right for us to lean into our humanity in the workplace and really see AI as a partner, but also taking some precaution as we go through this evolution. What did you take away from this conversation?

Speaker 2: 3:07

We've been talking about the future of work and AI and even things like oh, we have to lean into our deeply human skills for the last 10 years. This is not something that's new. What I think is so different about what Jacqueline and More Human, the book and the potential project are talking about is they're making it really easy to lean into those more human skills that you really need to. In this conversation and also in the book, jacqueline outlines this trifecta of how to make yourself a more human leader. As technology takes on more and more of work. How do you lean into that humanity, that trifecta being awareness, wisdom and compassion, and I love that, because you and I have both seen this these deeply human skills as a laundry list of 30, 40, 50. And you're just like Jesus Christ. How many do I have? These are the top three. If you're going to do any, do these?

Speaker 3: 4:00

Yeah, I really liked that. I also liked the concept of moving away from either or. You could either have AI or humans. You can't have both, but this is a both and conversation. There's just a lot of power in that. Everybody's going through this shift. I don't think I get any news alerts that don't involve AI in the title these days, but if you and your team are moving through, this is a definite book to check out With that. We think you should check this conversation out. So here's Jacqueline.

Speaker 2: 4:50

So I think every day, maybe multiple times a day, I'm asking somebody, sometimes jokingly what timeline are we living in? Because it just feels like some fascinating times for various reasons, but really amazing times for opportunity. And I'm looking at this moment in time around AI, this moment in time around humanity. What made you see this as a moment in time, as like a fork in the road, especially for leadership?

Speaker 1: 5:17

So, as you guys know, I'm part of an organization that's a potential project.

Speaker 1: 5:21

We are a research and leadership development organization.

Speaker 1: 5:24

We've been focusing on researching and supporting leaders and global companies to be able to enhance their potential for the past 15 years, and what we're really excited about is we really do see this is an amazing moment in time in terms of human leadership and when we look at it, we really see that with artificial intelligence and, specifically, of course, generative AI, we have the opportunity to really make this major shift from management, which none of us really liked to be able to lift, into leadership, which is really about elevating our ability to be able to enable other people to realize more of their potential.

Speaker 1: 6:02

And if and I think that's the big if we're able to navigate this, we really see a potential opportunity for a future of work that is really quite inspiring and, I think, one that could be really quite hopeful and flush with possibilities. At the same time, we also see a lot of darkness, and I think that's really why it's never been more important to be a leader, and it's never been more important, as a leader, to be able to lean into the kind of choices that we need to make about the future of leadership.

Speaker 2: 6:32

One of the things I'm curious about is you mentioned these more human kind of aspects of things. Like we have this opportunity to really reach this different level of leadership potential. How do you define more human in an AI-powered world? What does that look like?

Speaker 1: 6:47

We come at it very much from a research and data perspective. So what we've done, like I said, over the past 15 years has really distilled what we see as being three core qualities of leadership excellence in terms of being able to bring the best of our human potential. And they're going to sound simple but simple is not easy. And they're going to sound like common sense, but common sense is not always common practice. So, fundamentally, a first core quality is awareness being able to be aware of what's going on internally and also aware of what's going on around.

Speaker 1: 7:16

The second core quality is wisdom, and this is very different than knowledge, but wisdom is basically the discerning capacity of mind, to be able to discern what's happening so that I can make wise choices.

Speaker 1: 7:27

And the third core quality is compassion, and compassion the way we define it is to be able to do the really hard things that we need to do as leaders, but to be able to do them in a human way.

Speaker 1: 7:37

So when I operate with compassion, say, I'm able to give really tough feedback, but do it in a way that helps you to be able to hear it, so that it supports you in your development journey, as opposed to you feeling degraded and depressed, and what we see from a data perspective is that only 16% of leaders are really ready to be able to lean into these core skills that we believe are critical in the age of AI. 60% have potential, but 24% probably really shouldn't be leaders. I think we've all seen leaders that have been promoted because they had great technical skills, but they really don't have these human skills that we know are critical for the future not only be able to leverage the benefits of AI and overcome the risks, but we know there's going to be massive transformation in the world of work in the coming years and we need leaders who can really lean into those human elements to be able to guide the workforce and create the work context of the future.

Speaker 2: 8:33

First of all, those data points resonate. I think all of us that have worked especially in corporate you're like, yeah, that tracks, that tracks. Maybe you haven't had a leader that leads with awareness, wisdom and compassion, or maybe you had one and you remember them for the rest of your life. Right, they just make or break your work experience. We're not seeing a lot of organizations invest in what we will call these deeply human skills. Yet, to your very good point, only a small percentage of people are ready. Most people aren't getting trained in those. I'm curious about that moment in time where the mindset shifts, where people start to pull in that direction. What does that look like? What's that mindset shift that separates someone that has that AI augmented leader trifecta of awareness, wisdom and compassion? What is that shift that people are making?

Speaker 1: 9:24

Yeah, I do love that you point out that not enough organizations are investing in it, and that's one of the things that we feel very privileged is we, of course, work with many global companies that are actually prioritizing the human development aspect in parallel with the AI advancements, and I think when we see organizations that say, yes, we've got to be able to roll out the technology, but at the same time, we want to make sure that we emphasize the human, the way that we see that, it's like a lot of organizations right now.

Speaker 1: 9:51

It's like they're rolling out high-end Ferraris but not teaching anybody how to drive, and that's just dumb, that's just a waste of money. And so the light bulb for us really goes on for leaders is when you know these aspects of awareness, wisdom and compassion and that's why I said they're common sense is because, when you dive into them, we all innately have these capabilities it's whether we have the permission to be able to develop them, the permission to be able to see the benefit and we again look at it very much from a research and data perspective Leaders that have these high awareness, wisdom and compassion are able to create the conditions where people feel more empowered, where greater trust, greater performance, greater job engagement, when you create the conditions where people know that there's a prize at the end and, at the same time, you give them a path to be able to support them in that development.

Speaker 1: 10:38

Oh, I can develop compassion. Yeah, I may have a set point where I'm good or not good, but there's a journey and I can see how to be able to take that journey and to be able to be supported along the way.

Speaker 2: 10:51

Yeah, yeah, I really love to. By the way, that it's three. Having been in talent development my entire career and we've been seeing this deeply human skills that you're going to need. It's a laundry list. It's typically a laundry list of at least 10. And to be able to have this distilled down into a framework of look, this is the three that will reap the most benefits that you really need to be focusing on Huge One question that might be a little controversial. I'm going to just ask it. Here we go. All these organizations are investing heavily in tech but not in the human aspect of it. Buying a Ferrari and not having someone know how to drive, would you say. People need to invest in the human first, or they are better suited to invest in teaching people how to drive first before they buy the car?

Speaker 1: 11:39

I love the question because one of the other things that we found in our research and it was a little bit surprising to us was that if you just like and we call them human purists so let's say, if you just invest in the human, which we were like, yay, this would be so great.

Speaker 1: 11:54

Imagine an organization that just invested in the human and we're like this would be awesome. But the reality is that the smartest human being is a little bit smarter when they leverage AI, so it really does have to be a both and and. That was, I think, one of the key insights that we came is this paradox. So the journey, we believe you need to start with the human, because if the human, like great tools in unskilled hands are not great tools, like you can do a lot of damage with a hammer or you can build a house with a hammer, so you need to be able to have the right skills. So you need to invest in the human development. But the opportunity now is to augment these great human capacities that we have. But we can augment them with AI. My awareness enhances when I leverage AI. My wisdom enhances when I leverage AI. My compassion even enhances when I leverage AI. So it's really a both and from our perspective.

Speaker 3: 13:10

I'd love to drill down further into what each of these look like in practice, alongside AI, because in the book there were some really good case studies, if that's okay. Yeah, awareness, when you think about that skill set, that human capability what does that look like daily, alongside the use of AI tools?

Speaker 1: 13:28

Absolutely. Definitions are always important, because awareness can sound like a really big word, but the way that we look at awareness is the ability to, like I said, be aware of what's going on internally and, at the same time, be aware, to the extent that I can, of what's going on externally, and we know. Let's just take a simple example situational awareness. Right, it's been for many leaders for a long time. We've been told that not everybody is the same and so we need to be able to be situational. And Mel, what you like is different, francesca, than what you like, but that's really hard. Like, how can I, as a mere human, be able to really keep track of oh? Can I, as a mere human, be able to really keep track of? Oh, when I communicate to Mel, it's a little bit different than when I communicate to other members of my team. And these are the kinds of things that AI is really good at. Ai is really good at being able to track what Mel is, what's important to you, what kind of messages resonate with you as opposed to what would be useful for other employees, and so again, and that's why that awareness of being able to be more aware of what's happening with my employees what's important to them can really then enhance me. My awareness is lifted. And these are just some examples.

Speaker 1: 14:33

But we also see, like sentiment analysis. I sent out an email to my organization. Ai tools can let me know was it opened, did anybody read it, how long did they read it for when they responded? If they responded, what was the? Did anybody read it? How long did they read it for when they responded? If they responded, what was the sentiment associated with that response? And this is gold, because this can then enable me to be able to enhance my ability to communicate more effectively. And I think these are just some examples. But that's again from an external perspective. But then from an internal perspective, ai can help to be able to challenge me on maybe my biases, on my limitations, on my blind spots, to be able to support me in a development journey if I'm open to that. So these are just again some of the ways, but we just see it's a really an amazing tool to be able to support enhancing my awareness.

Speaker 3: 15:19

Awareness and wisdom and compassion are all critically important right For the future for this to be successful. But it stood out to me. It felt like compassion might be more of the linchpin here, because I think you had mentioned it's the one thing that AI can't replicate. What crystallized that for you from your research?

Speaker 1: 15:39

Yeah, and I would say the way that we see awareness, wisdom, compassion, they're all linked right. It's how, neurologically, how the theory of mind, how the mind works, like we perceive, then we discern and then we respond, and so very much that responsive capacity of mind in an ideal world for leaders that want to be effective, is compassion right To do those hard things and do it in a human way. And what's super interesting is that we really have been with great interest following the advances of AI. We know that right now, people actually prefer and sometimes feel like an AI chatbot is more empathetic than a busy leader, right, which is not surprising, because an AI chatbot has all the time in the world to say oh Mel, I'm so sorry that you're having that problem, how can I help? It isn't rushed to be able to get to the next meeting.

Speaker 1: 16:30

But the key thing and I think the reason why, mel, to your question, why it's the most important is because, even as AI gets better and better at being able to mimic human emotions, it's programmed, of course, with all the intelligence that we know around emotional intelligence, around human psychology, human behavior. Fundamentally, human beings were social beings. We feel each other, we thrive based on each other and fundamentally, even though and this was so interesting what the research shows is, even though people found that the AI chatbot was more engaging, they felt empty inside, they felt fooled when they found out that it was an AI chatbot, because, fundamentally, human beings prefer messy but authentic other human beings than perfect, programmatic, empathetic AI.

Speaker 3: 17:17

Yeah, of course, in the news, just like when video games were villainized, right, you think of some of the horror stories that are also coming out as well, because AI is essentially acting as a mirror of the person who's using it. It's interesting. I'm curious about these three pillars, because you mentioned what was it? 16% have these skills and 60% can use some training on it. That's a pretty big gap, and then 24%, who are never going to get there. Of these three pillars, which do you feel people struggle with the most?

Speaker 1: 17:49

Yeah, I love that question and maybe I'll just say this, and I hope it's okay but what we did find is, within that 16% one, in four women, only one in 10 men.

Speaker 1: 17:58

That's a whole nother podcast. I just wanted to say, yeah, exactly, very interesting data. It's really interesting around that 60%. A couple of things that surprised us. Sometimes a non-result is as interesting as a result.

Speaker 1: 18:12

One of the things that was surprised us is we were surprised that there wasn't more differential around level, so we expected to see a real difference in seniority and, specifically, around wisdom. We just made the assumption that people that were and, by the way, I should say that data that I shared that's not based on leaders rating themselves, that is, employees rating their leaders. So this is in the eyes of the employees. So, based on 360 data, do I see you, as a leader, as being able to demonstrate these qualities of awareness, wisdom and compassion, which is quite different than when leaders rate themselves? So what's interesting is that. I would say, though, that still, our experience working with leaders is that most more senior leaders have figured out how to manage their mind, how to manage their time, which is a lot around the importance of awareness. Do I know what to focus on? When am I able to read the tea leaves, to be able to say this is most important and I can let this go. Most of them have a good North Star, which is really around that wisdom capacity, and that's why it is the one that we emphasize.

Speaker 1: 19:15

I do think especially more senior leaders struggle with the compassion piece, and oftentimes what we do see, and what's really interesting, is that we see, as leaders rise in ranks, their ability to engage in a compassionate way in the eyes of their employees goes lower, and that we find really interesting.

Speaker 1: 19:33

And it makes sense because, of course, as you rise in ranks, you're making bigger decisions that affect more people, you have a bigger span of control and you don't necessarily have those same touch points, and so it makes sense that a leader might be seen as being less compassionate. But the key thing is that we also see leaders that use that as an excuse, and what we see is there's a real opportunity because we know, just because you have a big span of control, we know that doesn't mean that you can't show up with compassion. That compassion piece is probably the one that all leaders can develop and I would say, at more lower levels of leaders, we do see a lot of that awareness. Right, it is that starting point, because you can't really dive into wisdom and compassion if you don't have good awareness about what might be getting in your way, if you can't manage your mind and manage your time. We were surprised that there wasn't more differential by seniority, but that is our experience working with many leaders over the past decade.

Speaker 3: 20:27

It's really interesting to see that, but I could also see why it's probably the lowest with compassion just given when you grow, If your organization isn't going to give you opportunities to nurture these things while we're going through this massive technological shift at work. What are simple ways people can start to nurture these things while we're going through this massive technological shift?

Speaker 1: 20:50

of work. What are simple ways people can start to nurture these three qualities in themselves today? Yeah, yeah, I love that question and I've always been inspired by the quote be the change you want to be in the world If you want to be a good human being, which is really around. What these skills are? Be present, be wise, be caring and those are, I think, key things in terms of your own brand. And, of course, there's a lot of resources. Of course, our book is one resource to be able to provide some practical tools around it.

Speaker 1: 21:13

Probably the starting point is really around the intentionality, and we oftentimes, when we work with leaders, we look to be able to have simple brain hacks to be able to help you In this moment. Like, what's your intention? And right now? My intention is to be of service. That's my intention. If you ask me a question, I'm going to try to be of best service, and just those simple things can really help us as leaders. When I show up for my team, it's like I just want to be present and I want to be able to be able to support everybody in the best way possible. I'm just going to be a good listener. Whatever it is, the starting point for all of us is really around setting our intentions and using that as our North Star, because we know being a leader today is really hard. Let's be real, yeah.

Speaker 3: 21:56

I think if that's all you can do is set the intention and always go in with that's always a good starting point.

Speaker 1: 22:01

Then afterwards have opportunities for reflection, say how did I do? And then you get that learning cycle. So these were my intentions, this is how I wanted to show up in this meeting and then to give myself the space and the grace to be able to say, okay, how did I do, what did I learn? What do I want to implement for tomorrow?

Speaker 2: 22:19

I want to talk a little bit more about the both end, the both end because I feel like there is this reality, especially with folks right now.

Speaker 2: 22:28

their companies are probably like get to know AI, understand AI, your job's not going to go away. The person who knows how to use AI is going to take your job. We're hearing all of the tropes and we know that those folks that lean into these really more human skills are the ones that are really going to thrive, not only for themselves, but, honestly, for their team. Who wouldn't want to work with a leader like that? I'm curious about how people can start to tiptoe into this, especially that both end thinking and really make the power of AI and our human capabilities work.

Speaker 1: 23:00

It's really the best marriage of mind and machine and the way that we look at it, and this was really based on hundreds of interviews that we did and also our data collection but when we looked at each of these different qualities, there's a really nice kind of both and aspect of looking well, what's the best of tech and what's the best of human, and so, for awareness, the way that we framed it is in terms of AI is amazing at content, like more content than any of us could ever grasp, but human beings are amazing at context. Why am I here? What's important? What are my intentions, what else is going on, what else is relevant? And that ability to be able to marry that context setting with then leveraging content is a way to be able to get the best of both.

Speaker 1: 23:44

On the wisdom side, ai is amazing. Any question that you have, it'll give you an answer. And what humans, though, are really good at if we have the time and space is really good at being curious, beginner's mind like to being able to think outside the box and our critical thinking to be able to. When we get an answer from AI, I'm not really sure that's a good answer. What would be another question.

Speaker 1: 24:04

So this marriage of questions and answers is a way to again really have that both and thinking. And then, on the compassion side, the way that we looked at the both and was really human beings fundamentally are able to connect with their ability to care, their ability to create trust, their ability to look at you and say I care about you, you're important to me, and to be able to lead with heart. And AI, like I said, it's programmed with all of the best knowledge of human behavior, emotional intelligence, and so another both end is to be able to say okay, I care about you guys, and how can I be able to use that care and leverage AI to be able to help me? Because we have to have a difficult conversation or we need to move an agenda forward and I don't know where to start, but I want to be able to engage us in that process, and so those are some of the key things that we really see as being a way to be able to marriage the best of both minds and the best of both technology.

Speaker 2: 24:56

Do you see that changing as AI gets more eugenic and gets smarter? Do you see this changing or do you see these are evergreen?

Speaker 1: 25:06

It was one of the questions that we asked and that we continue to ask in our research, and so far we do see that these are evergreen, and that's why I think it's so interesting is that even though AI is getting better at, let's say, context, it still doesn't have the amazing wealth of understanding and experience that a human does.

Speaker 1: 25:27

And I think that even when we look at agentic AI like it still is at this point in time and again we're looking at a horizon of the next three to five years it still needs to be told what to do, it still needs to have ground rules and it still is limited in terms of what it can do. And even though it's got a really big box, still is limited in terms of what it can do. And even though it's about a really big box, thinking outside that box is still something that is in the realm really of still of us mere mortals. So, at least for the next three to five years, we see these as evergreen and hopefully that, leading with heart, our aspiration, our hope is that will always be augment with AI, but something that is evergreen in terms of bringing out the best of our human leadership.

Speaker 2: 26:08

I also am really taken with your finding about even though AI can communicate with emotion, if you will people. When they found out that the bot or the chatbot was a chatbot, they were left feeling empty. I'm very taken with the fact that people still innately want a human right and I wonder if that's never going to change, even when AI becomes like minority report and singularity and all this good jazz. I wonder if there's some sort of magic, juju, that we're always going to want a human, no matter what, and these things are always going to be the case.

Speaker 1: 26:40

Yeah, I deeply hope so, and I do think that is the case. The problem, though, is that these are at risk Our human connectivity. We know that there's an epidemic of loneliness and this was before Gen AI came out and we know that organizations that are heavily AI dependent people feel even less connected and more lonely. Why? For a number of reasons. One, because people overuse the technology. Right, they use the technology to be able to send a message that really should be a conversation, but we also know that because, when an organization that's heavily embedded with AI, people aren't asking each other questions. They're using AI to be able to ask the questions, so they're not turning to their neighbors.

Speaker 1: 27:21

And the other thing, critical thinking. We know that 74, the recent study this wasn't ours, but a recent study showed 74% of leaders are so overwhelmed that they would prefer to have a chatbot make their decisions, and that's scary, but real right, and so I think that the problem right now is that our awareness, our wisdom and compassion is under threat because of AI it's creating. We're more distracted. We have the risk of, I will say, instead of being wiser, actually being dumber if we delegate our decisions to AI, and being more disconnected and what we really need to do, and I think that's why conversations like this are so important. We need to be really intentional about overcoming these real risks of artificial intelligence, so that we were able to leverage the benefits and not get sucked into kind of the dark side of where the future of work could be going if we're not careful.

Speaker 2: 28:13

Yeah, yeah, I wonder what you'd recommend. Let's say somebody is I'll take myself, for example, and I know a lot of people I talk to are the same way right, they have a large language model. They're using gpt, cloud perplexity, whatever doesn't matter, they're using that. It's their little assistant on this side. They're using it more and more each day.

Speaker 2: 28:34

they're reaping the benefits of the efficiency of it and maybe, slowly, they're talking to humans less and less by 30 minutes yeah, how do they like break that cycle potentially and or make sure that they're like carving out space for more of the more human attributes? Like you know how people have phone addictions, it's just put it away.

Speaker 1: 28:55

You walk away from it.

Speaker 2: 28:56

What what do people need to be really thinking about, so they don't get into the trap of only using their large language model?

Speaker 1: 29:04

First of all, I love the question because I do agree. We do know that people are addicted to their phones Many programs actually that we do with leaders. One of the most simplest intervention that we do is we take away their devices and you should see the looks on their faces Like it's just we've taken out their heart, like how could you like what? I'm going to be disconnected. And it's so interesting that they actually do go through withdrawal symptoms because they're not like, oh my gosh, what if somebody needs me? And it's really interesting.

Speaker 1: 29:31

Many of us are addicted to our technology and I do think that with these tools, because they are the large language models, as you said, they talk to us really nicely, they're designed to please, they're really engaging, to be able to have conversations with, and they never get mad at us like real human beings, real colleagues do, and they're designed to suck us in. These are money, these are not altruistic devices that have been created for the best of intentions, and so they're designed to suck us in all different kinds of ways. So what I love about your question is that we need to be able to make sure that we stay in the driver's seat. Back to the Ferrari analogy, we need to be able to make sure that we stay in the driver's seat. Back to the Ferrari analogy we need to be able to make sure that we're in the driver's seat of our technology and that we recognize, because many of us think we're smarter than our smartphones and we're not Like.

Speaker 1: 30:16

Our smartphones are designed to be addictive and until we wake up to that fact, we'll say, oh, I'm not addicted to my phone. It's like all right, let me take it away. Oh, wait a minute. So I think that we need to be aware that these tools are designed to be able to suck us in and really promote use, which, again, is wonderful because they're really useful to be able to help support us in our daily activities. We need to be really practical. Like you say put the device away, get up, go for a walk, put the device away, have a conversation, put the device away, have a conversation, put the device away, take some time for reflection in terms of your to enhance your creativity, enhance your ability to be able to think outside the box. So I think that you need brain hacks to be able to help you to not get sucked into the technology, because they're designed to be addictive. They put us in echo chambers, and that's another risk that we need to be intentional about to overcome.

Speaker 2: 31:07

Yeah, yeah. It's a very odd feeling when you realize you are addicted to your phone, even the muscle memory of reaching for your phone the other day. I have Claude and I have chat GPT and I have found I have started going straight there as opposed to wait. What do I really think? What do I really need to be researching? And so it's almost not getting rid of the muscle or not making sure I have atrophy or like human atrophy or addiction, and it is a job that is a very intentional practice, but I think it's needed, yeah.

Speaker 1: 31:41

What I loved about what you said is exactly that it's got to be a practice. Exactly, it's so easy, let's say, I've got to brainstorm, I need to write a new article, and it's so easy to go into whatever tool that you're using and say, all right, write an article for me in the style of HBR. I could even write an article that Jacqueline Carter would write in HBR, because it does have access to the web and it's so tempting to the web and it's so tempting. What I loved about what you said is no, I've got to force myself. It's like going to the gym. I've got to force myself to make sure I continue to go to the gym.

Speaker 1: 32:11

And that's the other analogy that we use oftentimes when we're talking about AI and how it can augment. It's like looking at it like an exoskeleton, right, so an exoskeleton. We know that it helps us to be able to enhance our strength. And AI can be like an exoskeleton that can really help us to augment our mind and augment our heart. But if we don't, at the same time, develop our mind and our heart, it's going to atrophy. If we just let that exoskeleton do all the work, our muscles will atrophy.

Speaker 1: 32:41

And I think what you said is exactly. It's a practice to be wait a minute. What do I think? How would I write this article? Wait a minute, what do I know before I go to my tool? What would be a good way to be able to create this presentation or to be able to have this conversation and then augment with the tool to be able to help you but don't lose the muscle? And I think that's exactly it. We're really at risk of losing some of these core, fundamental muscles, like critical thinking, like emotional intelligence, because we're over relying on our technology.

Speaker 3: 33:12

The addiction to your phone is so real. I don't know if I don't remember where I saw this, but someone mentioned if you start to have this little indent on your pinky finger where you hold your phone, that means like you forever have changed like the bone structure of your finger from where you hold your cell phone and like you forever have changed like the bone structure of your finger from where you hold your cell phone. And I looked down and I was like, is that a dent? And I started to slowly back away. For anyone listening, check your pinky when you think about getting into some of those ethical guardrails, as we're talking about not letting these muscles atrophy. We're introducing this to teams. Francesca and I are trying to advise folks on, like how to introduce this to your team without fear, like testing and learning in a safe way. Given everything that you've researched, what's like a one sentence AI policy for a leadership?

Speaker 1: 34:01

team. Oh, I love that One sentence. Policy I would say is human in the driver's seat is do not, do not allow these tools to overcome your human judgment, your human responsibility, your human accountability, and be aware of the seductive nature of these technologies to be able to to delegate decisions. If I was going to have one word policy, it would be always human in the driver's seat. And then, of course, you said just one. But I do think we are deeply concerned about considerations about using these technologies in terms of the environmental impact. We are concerned about data security and privacy, which is already a concern. It was a concern before artificial intelligence and now all of this information. And who's storing this information? How is it being used? So there's a long list, but the one is the human in the driver's seat.

Speaker 3: 34:53

By the way, the smartest policy possible when you're looking at that workday class action lawsuit, exactly, yeah, okay, I love to hear it when you think about the case studies, because you had multiple that were highlighted in the book, case studies that during your research that kept you up at night could be good or bad, but was there one case study in particular that kept you up at night?

Speaker 1: 35:14

There was one. We didn't put it in the book. So we had the privilege of being able to talk to chief people officers, chief learning officers, ceos as well as tech leaders, chief learning officers, ceos as well as tech leaders. And probably the story that scared us the most and we were shocked by this and I will not say the name of the company, but it was a story we were sitting down with the chief human resource officer of a global technology company and she told us a story about a senior executive in the organization that had been basically deep faked by somebody posing as the CEO of that company and was about to transfer millions of dollars and it scared the bejeebies out of us and this was actually like a year and a half ago and I think it gets back to.

Speaker 1: 36:02

We all think that we're smarter than our smartphones, we think we're smarter than our devices, but this it was just. It was unbelievable because I would think, oh, that would never happen to me. And when and when she talked about this case, like the guy had emails from his CEO, he had text messages, he had video little snippets telling him he was on a secret project and not to tell anybody about it and it had been an extensive scam that had been over multiple months, and this guy had absolutely no idea and he had been completely hoodwinked by it and it was just like whoa, that was yeah. So that was really scary.

Speaker 3: 36:39

Yeah, as the video continues to get better and better On TikTok right. Has anyone seen the fake Tom Cruise? Oh, fake, Tom Cruise is crazy.

Speaker 1: 36:49

What is this? And I think it's great. Yeah, it is really scary, and I do think that we are so susceptible to, if we see something, even if somebody says that it's created by artificial intelligence, we have a tough time unseeing it. It's part of our neurology, right, like we trust what we see and that is how our brain has been designed and wired over so many centuries, and so, even if somebody says, oh yeah, that was fake, it's no, it still sticks with us because we saw it, so it's real. And so I think one of the bigger, larger concerns that we have is just around the continued what's real, what's not real, fact versus fiction, but not only that like how we are so influenced by our quote, unquote peers, our tribes and how. Again, social media and I think that's one of the things that we focused a lot on.

Speaker 1: 37:37

Human beings have always had an amazing history of introducing new technologies without necessarily looking at the negative potential consequences.

Speaker 1: 37:45

Social media was designed to make us better connected, and how's that working out?

Speaker 1: 37:50

Email was supposed to save us a ton of time, I don't know, and so I think that's for us. One of the big things is that really started to scare us when we started to look at this technology is how fast it's moving, how fast it's being pushed, like every organization right now and if they're not, they should be is pushing adoption of AI, and they should right, because they got to get ahead all their competitors, so every organization is pushing adoption, but I don't think we're spending enough time thinking about wait a minute like what are the potential consequences of this adoption and are we taking the time to pause and say what are we potentially at risk? And that's really a lot of the work that we do with leaders is we talk about the adoption and how to be able to embrace it and we talk about I think, francesca, to your point like how to have the brain hacks that you say, put away the device. Let's just make sure I'm still using that muscle that I have as a good leader, as a good human being.

Speaker 3: 39:04

Okay, Jacqueline, are you up for some rapid round?

Speaker 1: 39:07

I am. I'm a little bit scared, honestly, Mel, because I don't know what's coming. But bring it on, I love it.

Speaker 3: 39:12

I promise these are harmless and fun, and hopefully you will have fun with them too. Okay, it is 2030, not far off, by the way. What's work going?

Speaker 1: 39:22

to look like no idea. Very simple Anybody that tells you that they know what the future of work looks like is making things up. I can tell you two things, though, that I know for sure about the future of work in 2030. The first thing is it is fundamentally AI enabled and it doesn't look anything like what we see it as today. And the second thing and this is both my prediction and also my aspiration, so there's a little bit of hopefulness is that those of us that are able to double down on the best of our humanity will be the ones that are thriving in the world of work in 2030.

Speaker 3: 39:57

I love to hear that. What's one thing about corporate culture? You're ready to see die already. You're actually excited it might be gone by 2030.

Speaker 1: 40:07

I do think that there are so many.

Speaker 1: 40:09

You guys, of course, have been around the halls of corporate, of the corporate world, for so long.

Speaker 1: 40:14

There are so many bureaucratic tendencies box checking, ticking, activities reports that nobody reads, emails that are just out of control, activities reports that nobody reads, emails that are just out of control. And I guess I am really excited about the opportunity for us to rethink work so that what work really becomes is the opportunity for us to really thrive in terms of human connection, ultimately, the opportunity for us to be able to inspire each other, to be able to connect with each other. That's the way we get great ideas, that's the way we build trust, that's the way we engage our customers in a way that makes them feel, wow, these are awesome people to work with, and I just think there are still so many bureaucratic elements of work today that we've been talking about for years to be able to let go of. So I hope to see those shift, and probably I'll say one thing is meetings where nobody knows why they're there and there's no agenda and everybody thinks it's a waste of time. Any time we can do that, let's do it now.

Speaker 3: 41:12

There was a tool that was out a few years ago. Francesca and I were like how do we tap into this? That used to tell people. I forget who is using it, but I read this article where one organization, anytime they set up a meeting, it told you the potential cost of that meeting based on who was in the room.

Speaker 1: 41:28

And I'm like genius we all need that Nice and of course, it's something we can get into. But a lot of AI tools, if we use them well, like they, can give us a summary. Was this a good use of time? Did everybody contribute what?

Speaker 1: 41:40

were some things that could this. There's a great tool right now that you can say could this meeting have been an email? Ai can really help us to be able to look at the quality of our human interaction and help us to be able to lean more into that. If we use it well, if we use it that's the key word.

Speaker 3: 41:59

You might have already answered this, but I want to ask just in case you have a different response but what is the greatest opportunity most organizations are missing out on right now?

Speaker 1: 42:08

Yeah, human potential. I think that right now, there is so much focus on AI and, of course, we just wrote a book and we're doing research on it and I think there's so much focus on the technology and organizations are missing out on and they're investing and organizations I get it like they're investing so much money on the technology they're missing out on the opportunity to really develop and support and leverage the best of our human capabilities, and that is what's gonna enable us to be able to use these tools well and be able to get the return on investment of these amazing technologies.

Speaker 3: 42:43

Yeah, okay, it's getting a little personal. What music are you listening to right now? What's on your playlist?

Speaker 1: 42:50

Oh my gosh. Okay, that was a real I. It's so funny. I have to say that I was just with a girlfriend over the weekend and we were laughing about like eighties music that we still love to be able to go back to as a go-to, and so I have to say I'd love to try to pretend that I'm hip and current, but people would laugh at me if I tried to pretend that yeah, 80s, 90s, those are my go-to. But I love, actually I love Pink these days. I don't know why. She just really is inspiring to me and I guess she's current. So maybe that would be my lead into modern music tech in this age, my lead into modern music tech in this age Perfect.

Speaker 3: 43:26

I'm not going to judge your 80s and 90s because I'm right along with you. I was listening to Cyndi Lauper yesterday on my drive Girls just want to have fun.

Speaker 1: 43:31

How can you go wrong with?

Speaker 3: 43:32

that no judgment. What are you reading right now? It could be an audio book. It could be like the old school turn the page. What's on your reading docket?

Speaker 1: 43:43

I'll tell you what book I just finished which I just loved. I just finished Nexus and I am old school, I have tried, I travel all the time and I tried to use audiobooks and I just I love actually. I'm a tactile reader, I just love being able to like actually, and so Nexus is a really thick book, and so carrying it around has been a real chore, but that means every time I open it up and I just loved it.

Speaker 1: 44:05

I think that he that I think that he provides such a fantastic, interesting insight on democracy and information technology and and just recognizing some real risks that we're facing with these new technologies and and, of course, the state of the world. And so I love books like that, so it's a great read. Okay, who do you really admire? Love books like that? So it's a great read. Okay, who do you really admire? Oh my gosh, there's so many people that I admire.

Speaker 1: 44:31

As soon as you said that, I guess that's what Rapid Fire is all about the first person that came to mind is Michelle Obama she just came to mind but I also, I guess, in my work I've been so privileged to work with senior leaders and I could name so many of them but particularly chief people officers right now that are really in a challenging position where they know the future of work, as we've talked about, is going to radically change and they need to hold that space where there's so much fear and, at the same time, and they need to be honest, because there are changes coming in terms of workforce transformation and anyway so I just I really admire a lot of the chief people officers, so a big shout out to all of them that are standing in this space of, at this major inflection point, work and being able to lead with courage, with care, but also with clarity and with integrity and with integrity.

Speaker 3: 45:26

Yeah, I know HR always has the tough job right. Because, you're in the sandwich between the board and the employees and what that looks like. You're always in the middle, but always with the best intentions, hopefully, and if they read your book, for sure they'll have some good guidance there. What's a piece of advice that you want everyone to know?

Speaker 1: 45:50

I think that was such a good question. I think lean in. I think that it is at least in my career and my life, I've always trusted my gut, even when I was afraid, and I always liked the definition of courage is to step into places that scare you, and I think that there is a lot for us to be fearful of, whether it's fearful of social rejection right, there's so much tension in terms of having a tough conversation or whether it's concerns about will I have the skills that I need in the future, and I guess, just yeah, leaning into the places that scare you and recognizing that you're not alone and being willing to have courage and take risks and I'm not saying I always do that, but that's advice I try to give myself and hopefully maybe that'll be helpful for others.

Speaker 3: 46:32

Yeah, I think it's good advice, right Like we're in a time where we're all learning, so now's a good time to have that courage. Where can listeners stay in touch with you? Stay in touch with what you're doing? What's the best way to stay connected?

Speaker 1: 46:45

Yeah, absolutely. You can follow me and find me on LinkedIn and please feel free to reach out. But also, as I said, I represent an amazing organization, potential Project, wwwpotentialprojectcom and a lot of the research that I shared is freely available. So if you don't want to buy the book, that's okay, but a lot of the research we post on our website and we love to, and you can also follow us on Potential Project, where we share, because this is an ongoing research and insights and, yeah, a great way just to be able to keep in touch and reach out.

Speaker 3: 47:15

Perfect, and we'll link to all of that in our show notes too, so folks can get easy access to that. Thanks for joining us today, jacqueline.

Speaker 1: 47:29

Thank you so much.

Speaker 3: 47:29

I just love this conversation and thank you so much for both being intentional and also really future focused in our discussion today. Appreciate it. This episode was produced, edited and all things by us myself, Mel Plett and Francesca Ranieri. Our music is by Pink Zebra and if you loved this conversation and you want to contribute your thoughts with us, please do. You can visit us at yourworkfriends.com, but you can also join us over on LinkedIn. We have a LinkedIn community page and we have the TikToks and Instagram, so please join us in the socials and if you like this and you've benefited from this episode and you think someone else can benefit from this episode, please rate and subscribe. We'd really appreciate it. That helps keep us going. Take care, friends. Bye friends.