Daniel Murray The Empathy Gap

In this episode, Daniel Murray and I discuss, his new book on empathy, starting with the journey of writing the book.

We then do a deep dive on Daniel's practical four-step framework for practicing empathy: being consciously curious, openly exploring, challenging mental models, and leading with empathy. 

The conversation highlights the distinction between empathy, sympathy, and kindness, and emphasises the importance of curiosity and understanding diverse perspectives. Daniel also addresses how leaders can balance empathy with decision-making in fast-paced environments. The discussion is insightful for anyone looking to enhance their empathy skills and build stronger, more trusting relationships.

What You'll Learn:

• The Nature of Reality: Understand the idea that our perceptions are often personal hallucinations of reality.
• Certainty and Comfort: Discover why our brains are wired to seek certainty and how this can be soothing yet potentially destructive.
• Human Behaviour Insights: Gain insights into why people might act in ways that seem illogical, like throwing a shared e-bike into a river.
• Plausible Narratives in Organisations: Learn how embracing uncertainty can lead to better problem-solving and innovation.

Key Takeaways:

• Empathy goes beyond simply understanding—it involves actively seeking to comprehend the emotions and motivations behind actions.
• Cultivating empathy requires conscious effort and a willingness to challenge personal biases.
• Embracing diverse perspectives while staying rooted in common values can lead to more effective and inclusive decision-making.
• In today's complex world, empathy is not just a personal virtue but an essential skill for leaders and teams.

00:53 The Journey of Writing a Book

02:00 Understanding Empathy

05:30 Empathy vs. Sympathy and Kindness

07:10 The Concept of Plausible Narratives

15:48 Empathy in Fast-Paced Environments

19:28 Building Trust and Emotional Connection

27:35 The Importance of Curiosity in Empathy

32:00 Steps to Develop Empathy

32:21 Exploring the Complexity of Gun Laws

33:15 The Role of Openness in Empathy

34:19 Understanding Neuroplasticity and Habit Formation

35:20 The Importance of Deliberate Practice

36:30 Challenging Assumptions and Mental Models

38:31 The Power of Diverse Perspectives

47:01 Leading with Empathy

50:19 The Role of Values in Diversity and Inclusion

Resources:

Explore Daniel Murray's insights further by reading his book, "The Empathy Gap," and discover how embracing empathy can transform your interactions and relationships.

Connect with Daniel Murray:

• Website: Daniel Murray 
• LinkedIn: Daniel Murray
• Instagram: Daniel Murray
• Book: The Empathy Gap

 

Support the Podcast:

If you enjoyed this episode, consider subscribing and leaving a review on your preferred podcast platform. Your support helps us bring valuable conversations like this one to a wider audience.

If you found these insights valuable, consider engaging with Daniel's work or exploring further resources on empathy and its impact on both personal growth and organisational success. Share this conversation with someone who could benefit from a deeper understanding of empathy and its role in navigating our complex world.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:08):
Daniel Murray. Welcome to the podcast.

Speaker 2 (00:11):
Thanks Paul, great to be here with you.

Speaker 1 (00:13):
Exciting Damie at your book has when did it release?
Very recently?

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Yeah, a couple of days ago. Came out in bookshops,
so it was a bit of a surreal moment of
walking in. I was actually in Sydney, went into the
Dimicks there on Pitt Street and yeah, I got to
go in and see it on the shelf and next
to all those other wonderful books and authors. It's pretty
exciting to hos.

Speaker 3 (00:35):
That's the cool bit, isn't it When you actually see
it in a bookstore and then you go, shit, this
is real.

Speaker 2 (00:42):
It's it's felt real for a while, but you're right
when you see it. You know, I was there underneath
diary of CEO Steven Bartler's book and some other familiar
faces around it. It's exciting, very exciting.

Speaker 3 (00:56):
Yeah, well you're in good company underneath there, all right,
So tell me there's it's just because I've just finished
my second book. How long did the did it take
you from the conception to actually getting the final edits.

Speaker 1 (01:11):
Off and off to print? How long do you recket?

Speaker 2 (01:14):
Oh? Look, it was a bit of a weird one
because I've been writing bits of this book for a
couple of years. Some of the frameworks and tools that
I've developed and put in the book have been around
for a bit longer. It was probably a good twelve
months or so from okay, I'm going to make this
a proper book, and really going through and refining and

(01:35):
pulling pieces together to then the part where a friend
of mine said, I don't self publish, don't talk to
my friends at Wiley, and that sort of started that process,
putting a proposal together, getting them across the line, and
then the editing and the proof as you probably know,
the proofing, the editing, the blood bath that comes back
when you realize you can't fell or punch away, as

(01:58):
well as this good. Yeah, it was a bit of
a journey, a bit of a journey, and good to be
at the end of it. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (02:05):
Now, your book is all about empathy, So just top level,
give us a kind of a definition of empathy.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
And what is that?

Speaker 3 (02:12):
What are the overlaps and the differences between empathy, sympathy,
and kindness.

Speaker 2 (02:20):
Yeah, there's a lot in there so that there are
lots of clinical or academic definitions with the book, I
really want to make it accessible for people to practice
and to put it into the world to do empathy,
not just to think about it. So I discuss empathy
as understanding why people do what they do, just as

(02:42):
simple as that. So what drives people, And sometimes that's emotions.
Sometimes that's very deeply an emotion drive. Sometimes it's much
more strategic or logical or rational. There's a whole bunch
of things that drivers. We're prett complex human beings, so
it's really trying to understand what's going on in another

(03:05):
person and what's driving them. I think some of the misconceptions,
the first one I talk about, which might be surprising
to people, is I don't think empathy is walking in
someone else's shoes. And the reason why I don't think
that's the case is if I was really struggling with something,
really having a hard time in a situation, you might

(03:27):
find that situation isn't very difficult at all. You might
walk on my shoes and go, actually, not a big deal.
Your experience in my shoes is not important to me.
My experience is important to me. And so if I
really want to understand someone, I've got to think it's
not about me. It's not about me as a good

(03:48):
proxy or any of those sorts of things. It's about
understanding somebody else and what's going on in their world.

Speaker 3 (03:54):
Yeah, it's more, but less walking in their shoes and
more in being in their personalized hallucination of reality is
what I talk about. Your experience is a personalized hallucination
of reality because all of your life experiences, your genetics,
go into the mix, and it's all very personalized, isn't

(04:16):
it so?

Speaker 2 (04:17):
Absolutely absolutely? And you know the I was chatting to
someone the other day about this. They're saying, oh, look,
we're having this conflict in our workplace, et cetera. And
this happens in all walks of life. This is the truth,
and this is what that person thinks of happening. And
I always say, well, they don't worry about the truth.

(04:38):
Just think about these plausible narratives. So your plausible narrative
is it sound good, wonderful? You like it? Well done? You?
Their plausible narrative is something different to yours. Deciding who's
right and wrong is a waste of time deciding. How
do we start to understand each other's narrative so we
can bring these storylines together a much much better way

(05:01):
of thinking about it. Because at the end of the day,
to answer your other question, what empathy, sympathy, kindness, My
objective is to make empathy something that helps us bring
these narratives to be able to not be the same,
but to blend them together so that we can work together,
we can interact with each other, we can we can

(05:22):
get along and create a better, more collegiate or harmonious
sort of society where we're not we're not picking these
us and then battles all the time. And this is
where I think empathy can be that tool sympathy. The
way I understand sympathy is my feelings about your situation.

(05:46):
So it's very much self centered how I feel about
what's going on for you, and where that relates to
things like compassion kindness. If I feel bad for you
and I take action that I think will help you,
or I take action to relieve my feelings and feeling
bad about it. You know, like there's a poor person

(06:08):
who doesn't have, you know, who looks homeless on the
side of the road. If I throw them two dollars,
I feel less guilty good on me. That is not
helping that person necessarily at all, and it's really not
about the other person's about me. Yeah, so that's where
sort of sympathy can drive. I think myth myth aligned
compassion or kindness at times, whereas or it's a bit

(06:30):
more like nicenesses and I'm trying to be nice to
the person, whereas I would say being kind is hey,
what's going on in their world? What's really happening for them?
What do they need? And how can I help them
with that? And that takes more than just sympathizing. It
takes empathizing, and it's a much more challenging thing to

(06:53):
do and not something I think we can or should
do with everyone all the time. But when we really
see something, we want to step in too and understand.
Empathy is that tool for us to build that deep
understanding so we can take better decisions.

Speaker 3 (07:06):
And I want I want to come back to all
the time, because as you describe it, that takes time
and effort, right and to actually do that.

Speaker 1 (07:15):
So I want to circle back to that in a minute.

Speaker 3 (07:18):
But this idea of a plausible narrative, I actually really
like that, and because it links to what I said
about people's view of reality, being a personalized hallucination. And
anybody who says that this is absolutely the truth is
full of mad dog shit in my you know, any

(07:40):
scientists will tell you we you know, we we there's.

Speaker 1 (07:45):
Very few things in science that are absolute truths.

Speaker 3 (07:47):
It's just about certainty that that that they're not due
to chance and these sorts of things. Right, So when
did you come up with this idea of describing it
as a plausible narrative? And when you came up with that,
did you just kind of sit back and go, I've
kneeled it.

Speaker 2 (08:09):
I didn't sit back and think I've nailed it, because
that just might be my own delusion. Right, But it's
about it's about sitting with people. And this happened a
lot working with in big organizations where someone would say,
this person, and I'm sure you've seen this in your
personal this person is doing this because and then they

(08:30):
run off this huge sentence or a storyline, and I
could sit back and go, but what if it's not
because of that m and what happens for us? You know,
to go back to your point, what are brains like?
It's certainty. They don't like uncertainty, And so the narrative
the reality that we make up is our brain saying

(08:52):
you've got this, you understand everything. Everything's going to be okay,
and I'll put it. It's in this box everything everything's
going to sweep that. It can be quite soothing in
the moment, but really destructive in the long run. And
so what I kept finding, even working in big organizations
at times was we'd have the most beautiful plans, the

(09:12):
best PowerPoint deck and all that sort of stuff. You
see it in communities where people go, oh, this is
how it's going to work. It all makes perfect sense.
But then when you add humans to the mix who've
got all of their weird, wonderful craziness, then things can
go astray really fast. And I was chatting with a

(09:34):
friend about it the other day. Share bicycles, shared students,
you know, if you've got them in Melbourne and Sydney,
where you can go and jump on those little e
bites and stuff, and they make perfect sense, great sensible,
logical way of moving around a city. Think about the
effort it takes to pick one up and throw it
in the river. That's what effort. Yet people do that.

(09:56):
You go, well, now one would go to that effort
that seems like a lot of wasted energy to go
and throw that thing in the river. However, people seem
to do it all the time. And so if you
don't understand some of these strange and weird narratives that
people are building in their heads that justified the behavior,
you're never going to be able to stop those things
from happening or even feel better ways to work with

(10:17):
people going forward. So that sort of as a mathematician
at heart, which is a strange thing to admit to, sometimes,
I'd love it if the world was like maths.

Speaker 1 (10:28):
Predictable, certain certainty. And yes, yes, it's just not.

Speaker 2 (10:33):
And so the narrative idea gives us a bit of flexibility,
gives us some room to move, gives us a bit
of a way of getting away from that brain's desire
to put things in black and white.

Speaker 3 (10:45):
Yeah, and I think, look, everybody's been guilty of all
the lessers have been guilty of going why can't this
deckhead see things the way they are?

Speaker 2 (10:53):
Right?

Speaker 1 (10:53):
Of course, we've all been enough because.

Speaker 3 (10:56):
That is our plausible narrative, which the us seems not
plausible but certain and the truth. And so I really
do like this idea of saying applausible narrative because what
it does is as well as Mick you think about
how they might be seeing the situation, is that it's

(11:16):
always a little bit of seed of dit into your
own interpretation of this that you have at absolutely one
hundred percent yield.

Speaker 2 (11:24):
And well, of course I'll give you a really simple
example of this. Road rage goes down when people go
on holidays. So when people are at home, we're busy,
we're trying to get to drop the kids off at school,
pick up something, and go to an appointment, whatever the
case might be. Road rage where the first person I'm

(11:47):
beating the horn? Are you alpohol, get out of the road.
Right When we go on holidays, we're driving along the
a moalthy coast. We're looking out, how beautiful is this?
We're the ones puttering along and someone's behind us beeping.
Settle down? What's wrong with you? Relas it look how
beautiful it is? So we sort of forget that we're

(12:08):
very subjective in the way we see the world, and
we change at different times in different moments with whole
different stimulus going on. So I like this idea of
narrative because it just says Okay, our brain's just creating
this storyline. But I have some power to adapt the storyline.
And there isn't an absolute truth. It's just lots of

(12:28):
different ways that it could happen, and then I've got flexibility.
I think it's far more empowering to think, well, I
can shift between these different narratives than to say no, oh,
this is the truth and everyone else is wrong and therefore,
you know, let's burn them at the stake or whatever.
Ludicrous In my.

Speaker 3 (12:48):
I see that concept of world beautical stamen people who
was on holiday. It just reminded me as you were
talking about that about the Good Samaritan study.

Speaker 1 (12:57):
I don't know if you've heard of this one, and I'll.

Speaker 3 (12:59):
Probably probably get some details slightly wrong, so you can
put me up, and if you don't, listeners will put
me up. But basically my memory of this is there
are a bunch of people who were brought in It
was in a university study, and they were read a paragraph.
Some of them were primed with the parable of the
Good Samaritan, and then others were just read a control

(13:20):
thing and then they were told they had to get
across to do a talk on the other side. Of
the quad or something in the university, and there was
an old person who dropped a heap of books, and
they were looking to see who would stop and who
didn't stop, right, But they actually manipulated the condition where
some of the people had plenty of time and some

(13:42):
of them were.

Speaker 1 (13:42):
Quite tight for time.

Speaker 3 (13:44):
And it wasn't actually whether or not they read the
Good Samaritan that drove whether or not they stopped to help.

Speaker 1 (13:51):
It was when they had time. So even when people
had read the.

Speaker 3 (13:55):
Good Samaritan, but they thought there wasn't a lot of
flex in theirs, they just walked right past right as
sort of kind of goes to your point about how
are our own personal situation and actually changes how we
interact with reality one hundred percent.

Speaker 2 (14:11):
And I think they were actually theological students.

Speaker 1 (14:15):
They have to get right, actually, yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:17):
So they should have of stop should have also, well,
we all should stop potentially. But your points are really
good one, which is your brain prioritizers looking after you.
As much as we'd like to think it doesn't, it's not.
It's designed to look after you. It's perfectly designed and

(14:38):
has been created this way over you know, lots of
time of evolution to work in social groups. Yes, absolutely,
to care about others because of that social nature. Yet,
but its underlying function is to keep you safe. And
if that means I'm really busy and there's there's objects

(15:00):
in my way, there's problems my way, how do I
get past them as fast as possible to meet what
I'm trying to do. That's exactly what we should expect
it to do. And so this is where empathy takes work.
It takes effort. I have to actually put in some
some stoppages and blockages from the natural path I would

(15:21):
take of look after number one to think, Okay, I'm
I'm going to do something different. Now I'm going to
interrupt that natural flow and try something else, which is hard,
and we should acknowledge that it's hard, because if we
don't acknowledge it's hard, then what we tend to do
is go, well, you went those students who didn't stop,
They must be terrible people. They're bad and obviously they

(15:44):
don't believe in their religion or whatever. Right, But that's
not a useful way of looking at these people. They're
just humans and we're all fallible.

Speaker 3 (15:52):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Now that does bring in the question
that I was going to ask about the time and effort. So,
because this does take time, and it does take effort
to actually slow down, challenge your own assumptions and actually go. So,
how might Daniel in this situation, you know what might
he be thinking? And we're in fast piaced business like

(16:18):
when people are going, I don't have time for this
empathy stuff. That's all very nice, but there's deadlines here.
Whether that's an individual in a team or a leader.
What would you say to those people who are going, yeah, Daniel,
I get all of this, and it's great when I.

Speaker 1 (16:36):
Have time, but I've got a bloody deadline to meet.

Speaker 2 (16:39):
Yeah. Agree, So let me think of it this way.
There's the old phrase measure towards cut one.

Speaker 1 (16:48):
Yes, love it, love it? Yeah.

Speaker 2 (16:50):
Why does that exist? Well, because we know that when
we rush, when we don't, when we're not careful in
doing certain activities, there's a good chance we can make
mistakes and errors. In most big organizations, now, if someone said, hey,
we've got to make this decision, we could either do

(17:11):
some measurement and study, get some data behind it, or
we can just guess. I would suggest to you that
the vast majority of organizations today, people would say, maybe
there's gravi at least some data. Let's not just get right,
let's get some data and let's get some numbers in
what do the reports say? And you know, the idea

(17:31):
of data driven decision making? People go, oh, absolutely, we
should be getting lots of data, and I go one
hundred percent agree. Mathematician couldn't agree with you more. However,
some of the things that influence humans the most aren't
things you can measure and put in a spreadsheet very easily.
So things like emotions and values and relationships and culture.

(17:56):
You know, if you said relationship with my I could say,
my relationship with my wife is seventy three. What would
you do with that number? Okay, what does it mean?
How interesting or important is that number? In making it?
It's pretty much useful. But if you understood the relationship
I had with my wife, and you were trying to

(18:17):
sell me something or lead me or help me make
a decision in my financial world, for example, that would
be pretty important data. Would you agree the seventy three
I don't know what to do with that. But if
you spoke to me and understood the emotions and the
relationship and all those other hard to measure but really

(18:38):
important pieces, you'd make a better decision. And so what
I would say to people is, if you're going to
be working with another human and you need to make
decisions or you need to take actions around this person,
are you telling me that it's not worth understanding that data,
which is in most cases when you're dealing with another person,

(19:00):
that's all the gold, right, that's where all the really
important stuff is. So, yes, it's hard, Yes, it's challenging.
Can you make decisions about it? Of course you can
sometimes you have to. My challenge back would be if
you can better understand if you're talking on the phone
of someone who's had an insurance claient, understanding what the

(19:20):
context is of their life at the moment, it's going
to be much much more important for you to make
a decision. Then what's the policy? How do I put
you through this sassage factory and to pitch you at
the other end? Right? Yeah?

Speaker 1 (19:32):
Absolutely.

Speaker 3 (19:33):
Now, when I'm running some workshops with leaders, particularly I
do a high performance teams workshop, and in part of
that I get everybody sitting around in a circle with
no tables in the way, and then I just thought
out there right, we're going to talk about the most
challenging thing we've ever had to deal with emotionally, right,

(19:55):
And I generally lead off on that, and it's it's
a tough session for a lot of people. And you
can see straight away some people tensing up and going
oh shit, And I actually say to them, now your
bringing is now whizzing around, going fucking else Should I
talk about this or will I just talk about the

(20:16):
lesser one? And I go hard, right, And then the
longer people with the more nervous they get. But and
it often becomes very emotional. But afterwards when we debrief,
people go, oh my god, and now really understand why
you do what you do. And I'll also get the
people to say Hyatt's had an impact on them and

(20:37):
their view of reality. And that's a very powerful session
for getting people to really it's not so much about
understanding the individuals, but just understanding how everybody has got
shit going on in their lives that impact why and
how they do things sometimes profoundly. Now, that is a

(21:01):
powerful session, but it takes a fur bit of time.

Speaker 1 (21:05):
So what would you say then.

Speaker 3 (21:07):
To people who who live in are operating in teams,
whether they're a leader or not about how they can
Is there any questions or is there a method that
they can use to help them to understand someone else's
view of the world without having to sit around and

(21:29):
get the tissues out.

Speaker 2 (21:33):
It's a great and it sounds like a fascinating workshop,
and I'd love to be applying the wall in some
of those. I'm sure it's some really interesting things come out.
Here's the challenge I have back with the question, though,
if you're looking for a trick to build trust quickly,
it's not going to work. Yeah, you might have heard

(21:57):
of this one before. Paul talked about it before that.
The model I always think about inside people's brains as
an elephant with a man riding on his back. Have
you heard this one? So the writer is that conscious, smart, intelligent,
you know, thoughtful, pragmatic brain, the strategic part of our brain,
and the elephant is our emotional core. It's that intuitive
and instinctive piece and the writer, the writer thinks he

(22:21):
is in full control until the elephant has strong emotions
besides its game off. It's all onto the elephant man.
And what you're talking about here is getting people to
really expose some of that emotional core. The reason why
it's so powerful because it builds trust. Elephants are the

(22:41):
things that determine if I trust someone or not. Not logic,
not rationality correct. And you know, if I said to you,
tell me someone you really trust, tell me the exact
things they did to build that trust. And now what
I'm going to do is I'm going to do those
same things. So then you have to trust me the same.
Right you would say no, because's the way you ask

(23:02):
the question. I definitely don't trust you. This sounds tough, right,
because it's emotionally. It's decided by the ell you feel trust,
you don't think trust. And so if you want to
build that relationship of trust, then you do have to
invest the time to actually genuinely take care and concern
for that person. You have to genuinely demonstrate you want

(23:25):
to know. Some of the easiest ways to do it
is actually ask someone a question and then just listen,
that's really interesting, tell me more about that. How did
that feel? And just shut up and listen. Don't try
and bring your experience in. Don't try and oh well,
yeah that happened to me once too.

Speaker 3 (23:41):
Oh hi, many fucking people do that right as soon
as people start talking and like they take over the
conversation about about them, And it's difficult not to do it,
isn't it, because it just triggers something in your brian
and you want to you want to kind of shore
and show that you're connected. But that can that can backfire?

Speaker 1 (24:04):
Really count it?

Speaker 2 (24:05):
Oh well, of course again again it's natural your brain goes, oh,
what about me? What about me? What about relate this
to my experience? And it does take conscious effort. I
remember working with a brilliant CEO, a gentleman named Peter
Harmer who ran I AG at the time, and we're

(24:25):
in a meeting and he got really upset, worked up
about something and he put his hands in the dest
and went calm down, Peter. And you know, he was
obviously very emotionally engaged in this conversation and the development
was ready to jump on in, but he knew that
to make a good decision in the team he had
to try and let others have space. And the CEO,

(24:50):
you know, comes in and says, I think we should
do this. Everyone else goes, okay, that's just for a
better and you don't necessarily get a great outcome. So
it's important to be able to park our elephants as
much as we might feel sad or gutted or upset,
whatever it might be. And you see this in people
like Louis Throu You see this in really great interviewers

(25:15):
and people have Andrew Danson does this very well. They
sit with things without putting themselves into it, without letting
their emotions overwhelm it. And it's a hard thing to do,
but really important to build that trust.

Speaker 3 (25:28):
Louis Throu I think it's exceptional at it really really good. Yeah,
you just need to watch Louis Throu about how to
how to really open help somebody to open up. And
it reminds me actually of motivational interviewing. You're familiar with
motivational interviewing, which I started years ago, and it was
a bit of a game changer for me actually in

(25:50):
dealing with clients and the Ore's approach that they have
of asking open ended questions right so that you get
somebody to talk, then giving people affirmations, you know, telling
them something that you'd like or admire or whatever, reflective
listening to your point earlier to actually listening in reflect

(26:12):
back the emotions I'm hearing that you're frustrated or whatever
it may be, right, and then in the yours approach
to then there's summarizing, but that's really about change talk.
You're summarizing change. That's that's when you're in a behavior
change thing. But it's that the open end of questions.
The aff for me is the reflective listening, because when

(26:33):
people feel that they've been heard and understood, that is
when you start to create that connection and that deeper
level of trust, isn't it absolutely?

Speaker 2 (26:45):
You know? What I see in people like Louis Thrue
is he can sit in a place where he's talking
to someone who he vehemently disagrees with, but he's still
open to hearing, you know, you know, rushing the challenge
and shoot down their ideas and thoughts, and because of
that you create this space for them to share more

(27:07):
and share more. And again people say to me, oh,
but it's wrong, they shouldn't say that. They're saying something
that's terrible, And my response is always, but do you
understand why they're saying it? And if you don't understand
why they're saying it, shutting them off too fast and
telling someone that I think what you're saying is terrible.

(27:28):
Often what people do is they don't stop thinking a
bad ideas, they just stop saying them. And herefore you
don't get access to the information that drives it. And
we've got to be able to build those bridges sometimes.

Speaker 3 (27:40):
How important is curiosity for building empathy.

Speaker 2 (27:48):
Vital? So when I started researching and studying this idea
of empathy is a way of building better decisions and
working more effectively in my career, I wanted a process
and I couldn't find a process for building empathy. So
I developed one. And the first step in the process

(28:10):
is what I call being consciously curious. And what I
mean by being consciously curious is acknowledging I have believed,
I have biases, I have heuristics, I have assumptions. I've
got a mind. I've got a head full of stuff
that's ready to make a judgment within a millisecond of
anything I see. It's all there, ready to go. Happy days.

(28:33):
My brain thinks it's all correct and I'm awesome. But
what I need to do to be consciously curious is go, Okay,
I'm here to meet Paul. I'm just going to put
all that stuff to the side. I'm fronting up with
a blank sheet of paper, and I'm really interested. And
so this conscious curiosity is easy to say, hard to do.
But that's the fundamental part of empathy, is it's not

(28:58):
about the reason why it is so important. But if
I don't, if I'm not consciously curious, what I'll do
is I'll ask questions. I'll explore with a view to
validating what I already think is true exactly.

Speaker 1 (29:14):
And I think that's hugely important. I really like that
as a first step, actually.

Speaker 3 (29:20):
Because all people need to do is just pause this
podcast and google cognitive biases, list of cognitive biases, and
you will see a huge list of cognitive biases. And
if you read through it, you realize that most of
us do most of these things quite a lot of
the time, right And we have, as you said, all

(29:42):
these heuristics, all these shortcuts that we have.

Speaker 1 (29:45):
To do to be able to exist in the world.

Speaker 3 (29:48):
But it makes our thinking become a little bit more
narrow And if you hang out with the same people,
and if you're going to test your assumptions on people
who generally I agree with you, you're just bunching off
the echo chamber, aren't.

Speaker 2 (30:03):
You absolutely, and where we're becoming even better experts are
doing that than we've ever been before. You know, I
you don't have to look far past or far into
something like Facebook to find groups of people who are
just just consciously just constantly seeking more and more data

(30:24):
that validates what they believe and completely ignoring anything to
the contrary. And we've done it for a long time.
Humans are experts are doing this, have done it for millennia.
But in a world you know, I've said this at
a conference the other day, Paul, the world has never
been more complex than it is today. Right, Never ever

(30:46):
in human history has it been as complex it is
as it is today. And it is the simplest it
will ever be again. Today today is the simplest. In
the future. Things are only scaling up ter the complexity,
and the more we train ourselves to be sure to
be closed to think. You know, I don't want to

(31:08):
make it political, but going back to the good old
days making it great again, it's all all it's all
complete rubbish. We have to be open and curious and
working together to find new ways of connecting this in
this future. Otherwise we'll just keep diverging, keep creating more
groups of us and them, and I think that's the

(31:28):
path where humanity starts to fall apart and do terrible
things to each other.

Speaker 3 (31:32):
Look, I think you're right, and I think with you know,
you see it, and I think a lot of it
has started in the United States, of that polarization of
the US and them and of the lack of de
be it that there's no spreading around the world.

Speaker 1 (31:49):
And as you will, no social media has got a
lot to do with it.

Speaker 3 (31:52):
With Eccule Chambers, I think people are becoming more and
more unconsciously rigid rather than consciously curing.

Speaker 1 (32:00):
And it's a bad thing. So I love your first
thing in the process. Tell us about the other steps
in the process. Let's explore those a little bit.

Speaker 2 (32:09):
Yeah, so there's four steps that we've got to go through.
Being consciously curious is important, then is to openly explore
and openly explore. The second step is about asking questions,
speaking and sitting in people's experience, trying to gather as
much data as we can. And what I mean openly explore,
it's really not rushing to find the answers I want.

(32:30):
And you know, if we take the US as a
good example, there people are very black and white on
things like gun laws. Oh well, people are pro guns
because they like guns, because they're gun toting hillbilities and
want to shoot everything. Sure, that's a good first thought assumption,
very fast. But what if it's that they're actually deeply

(32:52):
afraid of not being able to protect their family. Because
I love for my family is something that I can
relate to really strongly, and if I had a dpp
if and not being out of well, I could empathize
with that pretty quickly. How do I explore that? How
do I ask questions to understand that and understand the
real context behind that? What else will cause people to

(33:12):
think that way? This openly explorer about sitting in that
unknown world and just gathering that data.

Speaker 3 (33:21):
In this, sorry Daniel to jump in, but in this
do you have to cultivate a sense of openness?

Speaker 1 (33:28):
And the reason I'm asking that question.

Speaker 3 (33:32):
I mean people will at work and a lot of
them will have done like a Myersprings test or a.

Speaker 1 (33:40):
I can't remember what the other.

Speaker 3 (33:42):
The disk test and these sorts of personality ones. But
most serious psychologists will tell you that they're kind of
pop psychology, and the most validated one is the Big
five personality traits, one of which is openness to experience.
I'm just wondering, I don't know if you've seen any
research whether that is linked to empathy, whether people who

(34:03):
are higher in openness are actually higher in empathy.

Speaker 1 (34:09):
So that's that's one question.

Speaker 3 (34:10):
Then the second one is that do we have to
with this openly explore? Do you have to prime yourself
to be open to having new knowledge and having your
assumptions challenged.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
Yeah, I think they fit together. So I haven't seen
research on that particular, because I know the Big Five
there are. What I always say with those of the
personality profiles is there are different underlying habits that we have,
and neurologically, what's going on here is our brain is

(34:43):
connecting these different neural pathways. There's trillions dollars, incredibly complex,
but the more we use them, the more they become
habitual and the go to. And so what we know
is that after a certain period of our lifetime, we
start to form pretty strong habits and we keep enforcing
in those pathways. This is important because it's for some

(35:05):
people they think, well, that's just how I am and
I can't change. Bullshit.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
No, that's right.

Speaker 3 (35:10):
That's how you've become because of your repeated behaviors. Donald
had the Scottish neuroscientists right, nerve sales that fire together,
wire together.

Speaker 2 (35:18):
Exactly right. So neuroplasticity means you can always change your
entire life. There's no sort of stop to that. But
you change through deliberate practice, not through yes. And so yes,
you have to prime yourself, particularly if you're not someone
who is always that curious. You have to prime yourself
to go, Okay, this is a time when I really

(35:40):
want to understand when the hell's going on him. This
is a time where I need to be able to
park my assumption and just sit with the uncertainty and
the discomfort that will exist in this next conversation. I'm
going to actively stop going oh but what about or no,
that's not right, or yeah. It takes practice, and you've

(36:03):
got to catch yourself sometimes knowing that you thought you
weren't going to do it, and then you just did
it anyway because you're human, and I'm going to practice
again and practice again. So yes, I'm sure there are
people who are much better at this. Also the word
naturally and what that means, But that who have become
better at this over time, and there are people who
are a long way down the scale and need to

(36:24):
work harder. Yes, that's all true. But the deliberate practice
will make you better no matter where you are on
that scale.

Speaker 3 (36:31):
And that's the point of the framework, right, is that
deliberately practice the framework. So we've got firstly being consciously
curious and then openly explore by I assume there's there's
an element of asking skillful questions in there and then
asking people to tell you more and exploring emotions.

Speaker 1 (36:50):
What's the what's the third one?

Speaker 2 (36:54):
Yeah? Before the other thing is you can brainstorm and
age outside of yourself about another person when you don't
have access to talk to them. So, you know, if
I was to think why might someone become a suicide bomber?
I don't agree that. I think the terrible thing to do. Don't.

(37:14):
Don't think it's a great action to take. However, if
I just assumed, oh, that's because they're evil, Okay, tick
a box, that's a good assumption for me to take.
It's a short, quick assumption. Is it particularly useful? What
do I do? Now? Do I go to around people
and go, hey, make sure you're not evil, don't be evil?
Is that going to really have an impact? No, So

(37:34):
I can still without knowing them talking to them, I
can probably imagine that it's a pretty effective way of
causing damage when you don't have many resources. It could
be driven by religion, it could be driven by a parent,
it could be driven by a love. That can be
driven by politics and a sense of nationalism.

Speaker 3 (37:51):
It can be it's a huge and a big one
is a lack of hope in your current situation.

Speaker 2 (37:57):
Absolutely lack of hope. It could be want my children,
my generations of family to have a better life. And
this is the only course of action I feel empowered
I can take. So when I start the brainstorm there again,
I don't think any of these are good, valid reasons
to do that, But that's not really the point. The

(38:19):
point is, if I'm going to try and influence and
change the decision someone's going to make, I've got to
have this visibility of these things, right at least understand
that these things could exist, because it gives me more
starting points to have conversations and explore further. So it
is asking questions, but it's not the only way. If
you've worked at a big company. Sometimes people up there

(38:40):
make a decision and you sit there and go, what
are these idiots doing there to make our life hard?
And quickly I'll go to a team, Are they're idiots,
they don't like us? Or where on the out I
make an assumption. I start communicating that assumption. It spreads
like wildfire. If instead I sat with my team, I said, hey,
they thought this, and one of my team goes, good,

(39:01):
their dicads, Okay, they might be What else could be
driving them?

Speaker 1 (39:05):
Mhm?

Speaker 2 (39:06):
You know that it's acius us so much more opportunity.
And what it then does is it allows us to
do step three, which is challenge my models. What are
those assumptions by a p heuristic? You know all those
things I've already got. What's the story? The plausible narrative? Again?
What's that? What it was that before? Now I'm going
to make a conscious decision to potentially alter it. Right

(39:29):
before I thought this, they are all just evil. Now
I go, well, actually, some people are going to be
doing it for different reasons. And once I can change
my mind and alter my mental models, that I can
use all the powers back to me. Isn't it now?

Speaker 1 (39:47):
For some people, the force is very strong in them.

Speaker 3 (39:52):
I what I think by that is the sense that
that that I am right and my model is right.
What sort of is there any guidance techniques that you
can give to people to being open to challenging their model,
or to deliberately challenge their model, because I think it's

(40:13):
a hugely important thing. I mean, I will often just
to give me a kind of case in point that
leverages off what you'd said earlier on, I tend to
read news from opposite sides of the political spectrum right
and it's a really interesting experiment going on to CNN

(40:36):
and then jumping across the Fox News and it's like
two different words. But even here in Australia, you read
the Guardian and then you read the Australian Right and
very very different takes.

Speaker 1 (40:46):
And it gets you then.

Speaker 3 (40:47):
To see that yes, there are different ways of interpreting things,
of viewing the world of all of this sort of stuff.
So what sort of things or what advice would you
give to people to be more deliberate about that, or
to to help them become more effective and challenging their model.

Speaker 1 (41:05):
Because I think that this is this is really huge.

Speaker 2 (41:09):
It's it's hard because there isn't an easy way. I
think doing things like you're doing are really really useful,
exposing yourself the stuff you don't agree with, being able
to sit there and go, hey, I can hold this,
I can look at this idea, I can hold it
in my mind. I can interrogate it and think about
it without believing it, without accepting that it's true. And

(41:33):
one of the things often say, particularly for people making
decisions leaders in teams, that's not even in a relationships.
Do you want to be right or do you want
to get the right outcome? Because sometimes you don't get both.

Speaker 1 (41:46):
Yeah, yeah, and.

Speaker 2 (41:48):
It's obvious, right, we want the better app.

Speaker 1 (41:52):
You can get both, but you'll pess people off.

Speaker 2 (41:55):
Potentially potentially well sometimes you can. Yeah, but I know
lots of people who will burn things to the ground
to stand on the smoldering actions and say, well, see
I was right. Take that ball, I was right. A
cool where we now right? Instead of saying, hey, how

(42:16):
do we move forward here? And we saw this. This
is a study done quite a long time ago, and
the modern context it's probably made it worse, where they
would show a very similar news article to people who
are pro Palestinian and pro Israeli, and both of them
would record report back how biased the same article was

(42:38):
in opposite directions directions we are when we see the world,
we don't see it in any sort of objectivity. We
see it through huge amounts of bias. And one of
the tips I always give people is to go, but
what if you're wrong? So in any situation, you know,
let's make a decision in a business, so we need

(42:58):
to you know, customer buy it. It must have been
because it was too expensive. Okay, cool, write that down.
What if we're wrong? Because if we're wrong, we might
well reduce the price and still not sell anything. Right,
we might do a whole bunch of marketing on this
new price and get no results. It would be bad,
wouldn't it. Okay, cool, Before we just dive headfirst into

(43:21):
this shallow pool here, let's step back and go what
if we're wrong? What are the other things? And interestingly enough,
I think there's elements from practices like risk management which
are really useful here.

Speaker 3 (43:33):
Yeah, yeah, I was just about to say, stuff, get
go ahead with this because this is.

Speaker 2 (43:40):
Just good practice. To go what else could be true?
How can we change this? What if we're wrong. And
I really challenge anyone to tell me that they know
all the answers, they've got it all right. You know,
the people when they say oh, I know everything and
I've got everything right immediately cause others to go bullshit. Yeah,

(44:02):
until you've become president, you know. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (44:06):
And I think I think the best teams will will
actually have some people to to, you know, if they're
they're coming to a decision or they think this is
the decision. Have some people actually go away and create
a case for why we're wrong.

Speaker 1 (44:22):
Right, So why did this feel? If you project forward?

Speaker 3 (44:27):
Because that's all about challenging assumptions that we often have,
those assumptions that are are either maybe not wrong, but
maybe not complete and can lead you down the wrong path,
right if you don't challenge those assumptions.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
And look, one of the things that I think is
so important, the conversation around DEI and the attack on
diversity that's going on and all that sort of stuff
that's floating around. I have someone I get why it's
probably gone too far in some spaces. The sure, let's
get back to the nuts and bolts of this. If
we can get people who see the world differently surrounding

(45:06):
us and adding different perspectives and different points of view.
That makes that stronger. But without doubt, if I can
get people who can see the things that I can't see.
If I just fill the room with people who believe
what I believe, I've got a good horsepower. I'm just
kind of maybe heading the wrong.

Speaker 1 (45:22):
Direction and very quickly, very quickly exactly right.

Speaker 2 (45:25):
And so Paul, this is where how do we how
do we get people to do this sort of stuff?
We'll bit with interest and curiosity about people who disagree
with you, bring them closer to you and go, that's fascinating.
I don't totally disagree, but I'm interested.

Speaker 1 (45:39):
And be anymore yeah, in that.

Speaker 2 (45:42):
Space, and don't try and get an answer or who's right?
Throw that stuff away and just sit with it and go,
there's something in here. And you know, that's where we
find so much gold when we do it authentically. But
it takes that trust building that we talked about. The
excess you you mentioned earlier become really crucial because if

(46:04):
I ask people who don't trust me to tell me
what they think, they will modify what they say based
on what the relationship we have. What they think all
that sort of stuff clouds and it gets real messy,
real powers.

Speaker 3 (46:17):
And then often they will agree in the meeting, and
then they will go out and they will sabotize the
decision because I often say to this, people need to
feel heard if they're going to be committed to a decision,
even if they don't agree with that decision, if they've
actually been heard and it's been discussed, then they're much.

Speaker 1 (46:36):
More likely to get on board.

Speaker 3 (46:38):
But if you just shut them down, often they'll go
out and those sabotage and it fucking destroys organizations. I've
seen it, and it spreads like a cancer to your
point earlier on, then they go to their team and
go these decads and blah blah blah blah blah. Right,
and then it just it just gathers legs and spreads
like a cancer. Absolutely, So we got the first three,

(46:59):
So be consciously curious, openly explore, challenge your model, your
mental models.

Speaker 1 (47:04):
And then what's the fourth one?

Speaker 2 (47:06):
And to your point, it's what I called leading with
empathy with which is what I mean by that is,
make decisions, take action, navigate through this world with your
new found data and understanding about the situation. So your
point that you just raise there is an exact example
I talk about often. You have to make a decision,

(47:28):
maybe as a leader or a business owner or whatever it.
But you got to make a call. We're going to
do X or Y. You talk to your team, you
gather information, you get their perspectives, to hear them. But
then at the end of the day, you've got to
make a call. And sixty percent of your team thought
it was a twenty percent b the rest thought both
are terrible. What do you do? You have to be

(47:52):
able to use all that information to go team, I've
heard you, I've listened, this is what we're doing. Now.
At best percent of them might be a little bit
happy that you've chosen their but what about the rest?
And to your point, as a leader, your job is
not to go well, I made the decision because of
the majority, I made the decision because it'll make most

(48:14):
people happy, or I'm not making a decision because I
need to make everyone happy and not everyone agrees. All
of that stuff is not leadership. In my view, Leadership
is saying I've listened. I have to own this decision.
This is what we're doing, this is why this is
how I've thought about it, and we're going to announce
take action. And you know that's a real challenge for

(48:37):
lots of people in organizations is to be able to
hand on heart they I've just I've made a call
now to your point. If I do that, but I've
not listened to anyone, it's the captain's call from the
you know, my behind closed doors, then everyone in that
room's got the right to have the ship. God said.

(48:58):
But if I've listened to you and I can sit
and come back to you and go, hey, point, I
know this decision isn't the one you would have wanted.
I understand this, but look at this is what we
were facing. This is the sort of stuff. Is how
I thought through it, and I know this isn't exactly
what you wanted. So I wanted to talk to you
through this because I want to make sure we're on
the same page with how we're going to move forward,
and it's really important that we've got your commitment to

(49:20):
stake those steps. Now.

Speaker 3 (49:23):
I love the way that you bring that up, because
as you were talking about all of this, I'm thinking
about the high Performance Teams model that I used that
was created by pat len Chuney. And at the bottom
is trust, but it's a deeper trust based on vulnerability
and understanding, not predictive trust, which is all the stuff

(49:43):
that you've talked about. Then it's about engaging in productive conflict,
as he sell, So it's that debate, hearing the other
sides of the story, which is very aligned to what
you're saying. Then it's about commitment, right because only when
you've had the productive conflict, you've had the conversations, you've
explored other ideas, can you expect people to commit and

(50:04):
they have to commit even if they don't agree to it.
Everybody has to commit. And then the next step is
holding people accountable to what they've actually committed to and
to their plans, which I think is is really critical.
So it's very very aligned with that high Performance Team's model.

Speaker 1 (50:24):
And I wanted to go back to.

Speaker 3 (50:28):
Where we talked about that that that diversity of opinion,
because you know, the whole diversity thing, as you said,
is very polarizing, right there were there's there's people who
think we need more of it, there's people who think
we've gone too far and we need less of it.
So how do you how do you get that balance
as a leader. Let's think particularly or if you're an individual,

(50:52):
you've got a team, and how much.

Speaker 1 (50:55):
Diversity do we need? Like where does it stop? And
and and then.

Speaker 3 (51:02):
Is it you know, are you looking to peck people
who have an opinion but aren't emotionally completely welded to
that opinion or is there any guidelines here about how
to make this process efficient and not just get completely
stuck because there's fifteen points of view that people are

(51:22):
just like, this is the way it has to be.

Speaker 2 (51:25):
How do lock that lane sots? Let's start by going, Wow,
it's gray, and it's messy, and is the complexity explodes
as soon as you get a bunch of people in
a room. Okay, so let's accept that that's just the
nature of the beast here we're stepping into it. Therefore,
the wrong ways to go about diversity and inclusion by

(51:46):
metricating it with specific processes that say that there is
a simple and clear answer to this huge, messy, you know,
completely complex space. So I think the answer to your
question is not, well, you put a quota in place,
so you do this, you do that, And that's not
to say that those can't be useful tools. But my

(52:09):
real question before people even look at this whole what
diversity do need is what are you trying to achieve?
What's your outcome here? What are you trying to do? So,
if I work where I work with mining companies like
php Afford used you and they're trying to bring more
people in, trying to bring more resources, they need more
female workers because otherwise fifty percent of the population is

(52:32):
just ruled out because of how their gender. Well, that's stupid.
They've also found that they're often women are much better
at driving machinery because they don't push them too hard exactly.
Put that aside, So how do you navigate through it?
I think the first thing is to go it's going
to be hard, whether the paradox we have to grapple with.

(52:55):
We like people working with people who are like us.
It's easy. We finish each others sentences, we agree at
field nights. We need to work with people who are
not like us. But it's harder, it takes work, and
it takes time to build trust. So how do you
do that? Well? I think this is where you have
to be inclusive of a whole bunch of factors like gender, rate,

(53:19):
all that stuff. You can be very inclusive of those things,
but exclusive on your values. This is what we stand for,
This is our mission, this is what we believe. And
I don't mean values like integrity, honesty, communication, right, I mean,
let's really bring these down a few levels. I wrote
another book on this before, but let's bring these few

(53:41):
down a few levels to the We will always and
we will never type statements of how we will show up,
what we believe, what we're trying to achieve, how we'll
treat each other, because it's in that context of those
values that we can interact in a way that creates trust,
creates certainty, creates that sense that we're aligned, and then

(54:01):
you can have lots of diversity in argument, but we're
on the same page because we're still really committed to
the mission we're on.

Speaker 1 (54:08):
Yeah, I like it. I like it.

Speaker 3 (54:10):
And that requires that businesses have proper values, not the
fluffy bullshit that me and you have seen so many times.
I'm always like, your values have to be or should
be behaviorally based, where you, Daniel can say to me, Paul,
you're not behaving in accordance with this value. They should

(54:31):
be there as a as a guide or a north
Star for making decisions.

Speaker 1 (54:38):
I like that.

Speaker 3 (54:39):
So we want the diversity of opinion and background and
rais and all of that stuff. But we're in the
same company that has the same values and as these
values that we're using to make these decisions.

Speaker 2 (54:52):
Absolutely, and so to your point, if where you asked earlier,
you know, if we're making decisions and people aren't agreeing
and they don't want to commit, you know, we've said
maybe we're we're an organization that says to drive the
amount of energy electricity we need to be functional in
the next twenty years. We can't just use green energy, right,

(55:15):
We've looked at the numbers. It's just not going to work. Now,
someone in my team might go, I absolutely vehemently disagree
with that, and we might say, well, okay, I understand it.
I respect your decision. I can see how that wouldn't
be a problem. But if that's going to be an
issue for you, then let's talk about how we part

(55:35):
ways respectfully and graciously and carefully. You. I want to
be kind to you, I want to support you in that,
but what I don't want you to sit here is
with this cognitive dissonance every day that you're in a
place that you don't think he's doing the right thing
because that's not good for us and it's not good
for you. And you know, sometimes people think empathies being

(55:56):
nice to people. It's not. It's been kind and you know,
kindness of saying hey, Paul, we need this standard from
you and you're not making it. So maybe this isn't
the right spot, Maybe this isn't the right job, maybe
this isn't the right role. Maybe we need to do
a lot more training. But this gap is a big problem.
And I want to support you and help you be

(56:16):
successful and happy. This is not going to happen here.
What can we do that's empathy for you, and that's
caring about you, not coddling you and going, oh, well,
let's just give it a few more months while everyone
else in the team is pissed off because you're not
pulling your way. All that stuff goes on, right, and
we just destroy people's confidence in their future career because

(56:36):
we're not we don't care enough, or we're not brave
enough to hold that uncomfortable conversation and sit in that
emotion and be real with someone.

Speaker 3 (56:48):
Yeah, I look, I completely agree on that, Daniel. This
has been excellent. I really like the idea of empathy
being based on those plausible narrative and the process, the
four step process that you have. So anybody who wants
to have better connection with other humans. So unless you
want to go and live on an island by yourself,

(57:11):
the empathy gap, I think would be a very useful resource.
Why can people go to find out more about you?
Buy the book as a speaker? If they want to
bring in or consult in their business, what's the best
place to send them?

Speaker 2 (57:24):
Yeah, look, Daniel Murray dot au is the easiest handle
to find me. That's my website. You can come and
connect with me. I'm on LinkedIn all the time, as
many of us are these days, and Empathic Consulting dot
com is our business side as well. But any of
those parts will leads through to me. And yeah, the

(57:46):
books hopefully everywhere now, working hard to get it everywhere
we can, and always always welcome those conversations, you know, Paul,
I've really enjoyed this something. We could talk for hours.
But I had a person who who messaged me on
LinkedIn and they really challenged They said, I think this
is bullshit. You know, I think empathy and sympathy are

(58:06):
largely the same thing, and it's a weakness. And I
really enjoyed that conversation because it gave me insight to
what's really going on in the world around us. And
i'd encourage anyone if you've heard this year, listen to
this and go yeah, but it's not quite yeah. You know,
I want to push back and reach out. I'm not
going to tell you you're wrong, and you know, I

(58:28):
don't wish you to blow smoke up as about it.
I want us to really talk about it because the
future is going to be shaped by all of us
if we work together, or it's going to be torn
apart when we want to be right and wrong and
throw sticks at each other.

Speaker 1 (58:42):
Yeah. Very cool, excellent Daniel.

Speaker 3 (58:44):
Thank you, good statement, and I wish you all the
success in your book.

Speaker 2 (58:49):
Cheers mate, Thank you,