In this episode of The Quiet Warrior Podcast, Serena interviews Simon Copsey, a delivery and transformation consultant who helps organisations solve complex problems through scientific thinking and modern management theory.
Simon shares his journey from software developer to consultant and opens up about experiencing imposter syndrome when stepping into advisory and leadership roles. Together, they explore how introverts and quiet achievers can thrive in consulting environments that require communication, relationship-building, and collaboration across different personalities and levels of seniority.
A central theme of the conversation is the Theory of Constraints, a practical framework for clarifying organisational goals, identifying obstacles, and making assumptions visible so teams can work together more effectively.
This episode highlights the importance of trust, curiosity, and understanding different perspectives at work — especially for introverted professionals who prefer thoughtful, reflective approaches to problem-solving.
Key message:
People are good. They act for a reason. And curiosity creates connection, clarity, and influence.
As Simon says:
“Be curious before furious.”
Connect with Simon Copsey:
Landing page: https://curiouscoffee.club/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/simoncopsey/
For insights that light up your career and relationships without forcing you to change who you are:
Subscribe to The Visible Introvert newsletter: https://serenalow.com.au
Help more introverts find The Quiet Warrior Podcast by rating and writing a review:
https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-quiet-warrior-podcast-with-serena-low/id1635834564
Thank you for your support!
This episode was edited by Aura House Productions
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:01):
Hi, I'm Serena Dove.
If you're used to hearing thatintroverts are shy, anxious,
anti-social, and lack of goodcommunication and leadership
skills, then this podcast is foryou.
You're about to fall in lovewith a calm, introspective, and
profound person that you are.
Discover what's fun, unique, andpowerful about being an
(00:22):
introvert and how to make theelegant transition from quiet
achiever to quiet warrior inyour life at work anytime you
want, in more ways than youimagined possible.
Welcome.
Hello and welcome.
Today's guest on the QuietWarrior podcast is Simon Coffee.
(00:42):
Simon is a delivery andtransformation consultant to
senior leaders, helping themunwind complex obstacles in
weeks, not years.
So happy staff can deliverbetter software to customers.
(01:09):
Welcome, Simon Copsey, to theQuiet Warrior Podcast.
SPEAKER_01 (01:13):
Thank you for having me, Serena.
Lovely to be with you.
SPEAKER_00 (01:16):
Thank you.
Tell us a little bit about yourbackground and what you
currently do.
SPEAKER_01 (01:21):
Yeah, sure.
So I was a software developer, Ithink still recovering from
that.
But I kind of quickly got moreinterested in what's happening
behind the screen rather than onthe screen.
So I entered the deep dark worldof consulting and found that
often the things that get in theway of our staff aren't what we
think they are.
They're not things coming fromoutside the organization.
(01:43):
It's not that our staff aren'tskilled enough.
The only things often getting inthe way of our staff and our
company getting to where we mostwant it to be is um is things
that run a little bit deeper,things that are a bit hidden,
but all to do with how we manageand how we set policies that
just get in the way of staff.
So a long-winded way of saying alot of the time organizations
(02:05):
get in their own way uh withoutrealizing it.
And that's the thing I findreally interesting, uncovering
that and helping remove that sohappier staff can deliver better
things faster, as you put it.
SPEAKER_00 (02:15):
You mentioned the consulting industry.
So for people who are notfamiliar, what's what is it
about the consulting industrythat's unique?
And how does being an introvertor a quiet achiever, how does
that work in the consultingindustry?
SPEAKER_01 (02:32):
That's a good question.
So I consulting is really, Idon't know about use for it, but
I find it really hard to definebecause it does so many things.
I think that the the umbrella, Iguess, the what's in common
about whatever consultants do isthat they're helping others.
Um but that can come in manydifferent ways.
It can come from hide skills,uh, where a person who's
approaching a consultant, theyknow what the problem is,
(02:53):
they're pretty confident withthat, they know what the
solution is, and they just needsome extra help, people with the
knowledge.
And then there's the other side,which I guess is more kind of
advisory, where they don't knowwhat the problem is, they don't
know what the solution is, theyjust want some people to come in
and try and help them get to thebottom of things.
Um, I guess you'd call thatadvisory.
Um, I guess what's unique aboutit is, I mean, if we just
compare it to the other side ofmy career as a developer, I
(03:16):
could pretty much sit at my deskuninterrupted as long as I
understood the problem.
Yeah, I would need to talk topeople uh to kind of understand
what is the problem that we'retrying to solve, but most of the
time I could sit there and solvea problem somewhat in isolation,
be me versus the machine, right?
Whereas with cons uh withespecially advisory consulting,
I guess it's not your problem,it's someone else's problem.
(03:38):
And so you need to go in andoften they don't understand it
as much as they'd like to.
So a lot of it's aboutinteracting with other people
and trying to understand thedifferent um the different parts
of a complex problem, thedifferent pieces of the puzzle.
And that involves a lot of beingin front of people and asking
questions and uh uh a lot of Iguess uh opportunity for
(03:58):
imposter syndrome to arisebecause you're meeting these
people for the first time,you're not sure what they'll
think of you, you don't knowwhether they'll trust you, and
you really want them to trustyou because otherwise they won't
share the things that areimportant to help you solve the
problem.
Um, yeah, what comes up for youthere, Serena?
Did I answer the question aroundum uh did that picture of
consulting make sense and thethat that maybe how it leads to
(04:20):
anxiety?
SPEAKER_00 (04:21):
Like how you think about it.
Yes, I can think of a lot ofintroverts and quiet achievers
who are data-drivenprofessionals.
So as long as they're within therealm of their own competence,
like you say, sitting at yourown desk, it's a man versus
machine, you would solve theproblem and then you go home.
You do you can sort of minimizethe amount of talking you do.
But with consulting, you arethere to not only solve the
(04:44):
problem, but also identify andarticulate the problem.
And you would be working acrossthe different stakeholders, you
would be talking to different,you know, people at different
levels of the hierarchy, right?
Is that correct?
SPEAKER_01 (04:58):
Yeah, yeah, no, I think you put it really well.
Um, and I I think also what youhighlighted in my mind is it's
not an either or I'm I'm kind ofalmost turning a dichotomy, and
I need to be careful not to,because I realize everyone talks
to everyone all the time, andit's very important for
developers, you know, that youknow, I don't want to uh uh
exaggerate the image of uh youknow someone sitting in the
basement working in the dark,because that's not what
(05:19):
developers really do, but youknow, I guess that's probably
how I work.
Um and so for me it was atransition uh where, as you say,
we're talking to people atdifferent levels who uh
communicate in different wayswith different language, uh, you
know, from finance to uhtechnology uh to human resources
um and have differentpersonality types.
(05:40):
Um and and so it was it for me,it was like encountering this
full range of uh of uh the fullspectrum and full range of uh
communication styles and tryingto work out how do I navigate
that and get to the informationI need to help them.
So, yes, just wanted to makesure I didn't mislead or
misrepresent people.
SPEAKER_00 (06:00):
Yes, and that leads naturally to the next question.
How did you deal with theimposter syndrome?
SPEAKER_01 (06:06):
I don't think we ever deal.
I mean, you know better than me,Serena.
I think, but I don't think weever do deal with it fully.
You know, it's something that weum recognize and manage.
Um but I but I think um for me,I mean, it moving to consulting
was was a step for me because Inever really when I became a
consultant, there was no formaltraining or anything like that.
(06:28):
It was um so really, I wasn'treally a consultant, I was an
ex-developer, and I was tryingto find how to become a
consultant.
And so that in itself places abit of anxiety in anyone
switching to uh discipline isgonna feel a bit of anxiety.
Um, so so it's quite natural.
But I think one of the thingsthat helped me, it seems really
obvious in hindsight, and I'msure a lot of people get there
(06:50):
much more quickly than me, isfor me, um imposter syndrome is
um not being able to internalizeyour own successes, but maybe
also amplifying failures andmaybe actually playing them up
where they don't exist.
And so what was happening for mewas um I'd be sitting in a
meeting or a presentation, orI'd even be doing the talking.
And at the same time, my mindwould be trying to simulate or
(07:13):
imagine the thoughts of otherpeople, saying, Oh, you just
missed a word, they're not goingto understand what you're
saying.
You're not making any sense,you're not coherent.
Why would these people believeyou?
And all these questions just berunning in the background in my
head continuously whilst I wastrying to speak, and then I'd
lose my words because I've gotthis parallel thread in my head,
and it would just be like adownward spiral.
I'd be like, Simon, you're notgood at this, why are you doing
(07:33):
it?
Um, but it took me a reallyweirdly long amount of time to
realize that voice was metalking to myself, it wasn't
other people, and it didn'tnecessarily represent what they
thought, and a lot of the timeit didn't.
Yeah, I'm sure you know peoplewould think Simon is a bit weird
sometimes, uh, of course, youknow, saying perfect, but but my
brain was really overrating it.
But understanding that thedragons were within my head
(07:54):
really helped me.
That was the first thing.
Um, that it was me doing this tomyself.
Um, and I think the second thingwas just uh um starting to find
um growing more confident in theability to ask better questions
as a consultant, knowing whereto start.
I think that helped as well, andthat naturally improved my
confidence.
Both those things didn't resolveimposter syndrome, of course,
(08:16):
but it helped me maybe um settleit.
Um how about you, Serena?
Was it a similar journey foryou?
SPEAKER_00 (08:24):
I don't know that um I have completely dissociated
from the dragons as well.
I like to think of it as maybeit's uh it's another way of
looking at someone who cares toomuch as a you feel like an
imposter because you realizethat you are consciously
incompetent at the start,anyway.
(08:45):
When you're lacking theknowledge, you're lacking the
expertise or the data that youwant or that you believe you
should have.
And so you you're coming veryconscious of deficit, a skills
deficit.
And you're trying very hard toget to a better place so that
you can offer more value, youknow, deliver a better service.
So it's coming from a goodplace.
(09:05):
So I'm curious as to where thisinner voice comes from.
What's what's the root cause orwhat's the origin of this dragon
that you mentioned?
SPEAKER_01 (09:16):
No, I appreciate that.
I uh and just going back to yourpoint, I think you put it very
well.
Although I would love it to be apull rather than a push, rather
than a push from anxiety, I'dlove it to be a pull from kind
of curiosity and excitement, andgo, oh wow, this is a new
domain, so much to learn.
Um, because that would feel likeit would uh help us uh with all
of us with imposter syndromefeel a little bit more uh at the
(09:36):
positive edge of it.
Um I don't know what the rootcause was.
I think um I never reallyexperienced a I think I've
always had some form of um, Ithink I've always had some form
of how to put it.
Um I guess imposter syndrome isabout um your feeling of value,
(10:00):
I guess.
Your um so I think I've alwayshad that.
Um there's always been uhbubbles around that in my life.
But I think um it was a changein career that really kind of
brought it to the workplace,that really kind of um um made
me question my um capability inwhat I did.
Up until that point, I thinkI've been quite fortunate and
(10:20):
not encountered it, but suddenlymoving discipline um kind of
removed any of those foundationsthat I had to quiet and the
dragons uh and it woke upsomewhere, somewhere new.
Um but I I'm no I'm no expert.
Uh that that's just my mypersonal experience, me trying
to uh add a narrative to whatI've what I've experienced to
draw a sense.
(10:41):
Um how about how about you,Serena?
Have you seen similar patterns?
SPEAKER_00 (10:45):
I'm thinking that maybe it's not a bad thing.
You know, we talk about impostersyndrome like it's it's such a
negative.
But what if it's just anexpression of this is where I
currently am at?
That I'm not as competent as Iwould like to be, and I'm very
conscious of it, that there areother people who know more than
I do, they have more experiencethan I am, and I'm not there
(11:06):
yet.
Therefore, I feel like animposter next to them.
But at the same time, we aregrowing and evolving all the
time.
And those of us who are lifelonglearners were very confident
with ourselves, particularly thewider people.
So you know, we we really do tryvery hard and we have high
standards for ourselves.
And sometimes we take it a bitfarther, we are perfect to think
(11:26):
about things.
But it's also coming from thatplace of I care enough to want
to get good at this thing sothat I can deliver value to my
customer, my client, or youknow, my community.
And so I am trying, and so I'mconscious of that.
I'm not there yet, therefore I'mI'm working at it.
And so, you know, that maybe theimposter syndrome is just a
(11:48):
recognition of a temporary phasewe're going through.
And we know that we will getbetter at it if we keep at it.
So it's not necessarily anegative.
What do you think?
SPEAKER_01 (11:59):
Yeah, yeah.
I don't disagree with that.
I do wish it was uh the feelingI think um I think if the drive
comes with less of that anxietyedge, more of the kind of
curiosity and kind of wonderedge, then I think um, or if
we're able to uh our bodiespermit us to feel that way,
that'd be that'd be lovely.
Um the last thing I want peopleto experience is the anxiety,
(12:21):
the worry, the concern, thefeeling of self-defeat or lack
of self-worth.
Um, you know, that that'sunnecessary, unhelpful, and can
take us further away from kindof exploring what's around us.
But uh if we're able to take itin a way, you say, then uh, you
know, where we see is uh oh,there's more to be learned here.
Uh yeah, I absolutely agree withthat.
But you know, all I know is Iknow nothing.
(12:43):
We'll never know that everythingabout the world is too complex.
There's always more to belearnt, and that's scary, but
also wonderful.
It'll be a very boring world ifwe knew everything.
SPEAKER_00 (12:52):
Yes, and I think in a way that not knowing and not
being competent yet also keepsus humble, it keeps us uh
grounded in reality.
SPEAKER_04 (13:04):
And so I think that's a good thing.
I think so.
SPEAKER_01 (13:09):
I think that's what um helps us understand others.
Um if we're not if we if webelieve we know everything, even
if we don't, um then yeah, asyou say, it leads us left away
from curiosity, away fromunderstanding, away to uh away
from uh the desire, the patienceto uh understand others other
(13:29):
points of views.
Um believing that our point ofview is uh a superset uh you
know more uh more full andthat's not helpful.
So yeah, yeah, that feels good.
SPEAKER_00 (13:41):
And that actually ties in nicely with what you do
as a consultant, because allthose qualities you just
mentioned, that curiosity, thatopenness, the ability to listen
to other people's points ofview, even especially when they
conflict with your own beliefsor your own way of doing things,
that openness that then buildstrust in REPL, those are all the
qualities you need to be a goodconsultant, isn't it?
SPEAKER_01 (14:06):
Um I'm still learning, but I I think I think
those are all qualities that arehelpful, particularly as you
say, like um uh if we're comingin to solve a problem the client
hasn't yet solved themselves andmaybe doesn't fully understand
themselves, then it means thatit's not something that you can
understand from any oneviewpoint, otherwise they would
(14:27):
have solved it by now.
Um, and that means in order totry and understand it, you need
to put together differentviewpoints.
No one viewpoint is sufficient,each viewpoint, uh each kind of
piece of understanding is partof the whole.
And that means you need to jointhem together, recognize that um
yeah, that that there's morethan just one viewpoint that's
(14:48):
necessary to get to anunderstanding of the problem.
And even then it will be itwon't be it won't be quite
right, uh and if they won'tquite fit together.
And if when they don't quite fittogether, it feels like
conflicts, but really they'rejust different views of reality,
and that's okay.
So, yes, so everything you said,yes, um, it's going to happen if
if if if a client's coming to usbecause they don't yet
understand a problem, it's toobig, too unwieldy, different
(15:10):
pieces in different minds.
We need to stick them together,which means we're going to have
conflicts about what's true,what's not.
And that's great.
That's just about building aclear understanding so we can
move forward together.
Um, so yeah, you worded itreally well.
I feel that is for particularlymore complex uh problems
necessary.
SPEAKER_00 (15:29):
You mentioned different viewpoints, but I'm
also thinking you would alsowork with different
personalities.
And because you and I are moreon the introverted side of the
spectrum, what has it been whathas it been like for you working
in the consulting industry withyour more extroverted
colleagues?
SPEAKER_01 (15:46):
Um bittersweet.
Um bitter initially and sweetafterwards.
Um and and to be clear, uh, youknow, I I say that with um a
sense of you know uh I guess uhyeah, I'm being a bit maybe uh a
(16:08):
bit callous.
I I meant that with a sense ofhumor.
The reason I say it that way isinitially, as as as I think we
all know, when when when weencounter people with a
different approach, it's quiteeasy to feel um uh it's more
easy to not get along.
And so when I'm working withextra extroverted uh
(16:31):
consultants, for example,previously, I'd always go,
they're just running intoproblems, they're not they're
they're running towardssolutions, they're not taking
the time to understand problems.
We need to go slower, we need toask questions, we need to take
our time, make sure we knowwhat's going on.
Um and uh that that's my view ofit, but that's my mental model
(16:51):
of extroversia, it's notnecessary, correct.
That's just how I view it.
Um and they'd be like, hey,well, Sam, why are you going so
slow?
No, it's really clear, it'sreally obvious.
We just, you know, we just thisthis is what we need to do.
Let's just get started.
Why why are you why are youdragging your feet?
It's obvious.
Um, and so that that would umand so you know, we'd always
want to work at differentspeeds, and uh that's happened a
(17:12):
few times, and that wouldinitially frustrate me, it would
frustrate them.
Neither of us are getting whatwe need in terms of uh
colleagues, in terms ofpartnership, and we both were
really frustrated, often forweeks.
Um, but the thing is that wewhat we're both trying to do is
we're both trying to worktowards solving the same problem
together, and we both want to doa good job.
It's just we have differentapproaches.
(17:34):
There's no bad people, uhneither of us are bad, we're
just different approaches.
We've been um acclimatized tosolving problems in different
ways and getting success fromthat.
And what so so initially that'sthat was the bitter that was the
bit, you know, we have to getthrough that.
But what it leads to is thatthat sweetness afterwards, which
is there's weeks of uh thatfrustration of trying to
understand what how we work andthe benefits of us.
(17:57):
Yeah, there's there's weeks ofuh feeling that friction, that
frustration.
But very quickly, what I startedto see during those first few
weeks is what those guys arereally good at doing.
They're really good at goinginto rooms, reading the
situation, understanding thepeople quickly, building a
rapport, getting to know them,putting people at ease, um,
getting talking, getting youknow the conversation flowing,
(18:19):
which then surfaced the thingsthat I needed to hear to know
where to start asking questions.
So they were really good atgetting things started.
And then they gave me time tothink, gave me time to listen
and come in with questionslater.
Then they'd listen to those uhand say, Oh, okay, yeah, let's
adapt our approach.
And so the the first few weekswere really hard because we
weren't acting in a way thatsupported each other.
(18:39):
But what we were able to do wasobserve each other to see how
can we act in the future tosupport each other and how can
we put our uh differentapproaches uh to best use.
And so after a few weeks, uhthings just worked really well.
We're able to uh kind of almostbe yin and yin and yangs, um,
you know, and be um if it wastwo introverts or two
extroverts, I think we'd do apretty bad job.
(19:02):
Whereas together I think itworked well.
So, yes, along with a way ofsaying I think we worked really
well together because during thefirst few weeks, although it
felt very difficult, we wereobserving each other, seeing
where we excelled and how welike to solve problems and the
benefits it offered to thesituation.
So then we could then actuallybring those together um later
on.
Um yeah, you made me think that.
Sorry, that was a very longanswer.
SPEAKER_00 (19:22):
What came up for you?
That's that's really good.
Um what I'm hearing is give ittime because when you have a
different personality, you needto make that adjustment.
And it's not easy to do itmentally because there's that
element of do I trust thisperson?
Can I work with this person, ordo they have the same goal as I
do?
So there has to be that uh, Iguess, uh humility as well, and
(19:47):
openness and empathy, and just awillingness to listen to a
different point of view and uhmaybe compromise in a few areas,
but always having that umultimate goal, which is the same
outcome, that common outcomethat you're working towards,
which is for the benefit of theclient and the organization.
So I think when you're guided bythat, then you you start and
(20:10):
also recognizing that each ofyou have got your own strengths.
And when you come from thatperspective, I think you quickly
discover how you complement eachother and why uh you are working
together as a team.
And it's actually a really goodthing for everyone because
you've got something they don'tand they've got something you
don't, and so on.
So yes, I really appreciatethat.
SPEAKER_01 (20:29):
I think you put that very you put that very simple,
yes.
Thank you, Tree.
And trust is an important thingthat we can talk about, yes,
absolutely.
And um people are good, yes,yes.
SPEAKER_00 (20:38):
What are some of the things that undermine trust?
Or what are some things we arenot taught as managers and
leaders?
SPEAKER_01 (20:46):
Um so I guess trust is the ability to predict
others, and um I think oh sorry,that's the two very good
questions there about and Ithink that we're very connected
also, could themselves lead tovery interesting answers.
So I think trust is interestingbecause um often as managers,
one thing I hadn't appreciatedwas the purpose of a goal.
(21:09):
Um often what we do as managersis we um or managers and
managers, we give each managertheir own goal and say, okay, if
you're looking after this team,we want to make sure that team
does really, really well.
Here's your goal for that team.
Hey, you are behaving, uh,here's your team, here's your
goal.
We want that team to do reallywell to get them running towards
that goal.
Um, so if they're lucky, eachteam gets one goal, maybe they
(21:32):
have several, but uh, let's saythat they're in a good
situation, you need to have onegoal.
But what we neglect and whatwe're not taught often as
managers is that umorganizations generally consist
of teams that need to worktogether to achieve an outcome.
That's why we haveorganizations, that's why we
have teams.
Um, that's what that's why we'retogether in the first place.
(21:52):
And organizations trying toachieve something that no one
person or often one team canachieve in isolation.
Um, so by giving each team adifferent goal.
Goal, we incentivize them tooptimize for that.
But if they're all trying tosatisfy their individual goals
and they need to work togetherto actually help the
organization achieve its goal,they generally won't be dancing
(22:13):
well together.
They generally won't becooperating.
And if they're not cooperating,then how can trust emerge?
If trust is the ability topredict the uh behavior of
another team or another person,they're not going to trust each
other.
They're going to say, well, why?
I've asked you for help.
You're not helping me.
And the other people think thesame thing.
Um, they're not cooperating.
If they're not cooperating,cooperating, trust will emerge
(22:34):
if trust won't emerge.
So I think that's maybe onething.
Um, so like to try, you know, uhthe one thing that we're often
not taught uh as managers, asum, that relates to trust in
particular is we need we need tosynchronize teams.
We need teams to work at thesame time on the uh to the same
end.
If they don't, um we will theorganization won't succeed and
(22:57):
staff will be frustrated andconflicting.
Um there's probably more we cansay that's a very big question.
I love it.
But before I before I continue,I just want to see what comes up
for you and just pause for asecond here.
SPEAKER_00 (23:10):
I think sometimes when when people are put into
that managerial role, it's notvery clear and I don't mean the
KPIs, but but not everyone whois put into that leadership role
necessarily has a a sense ofwhat it means to be a good
leader.
So you raise some interestingpoints about you know looking
after your own team, but thenalso at the same time having an
(23:32):
eye to the the greater the thebigger picture in order to work
in, I think, with other teams orthe uh organizations for greater
good.
And that requires not justlooking after your own, but also
looking after, you know,scanning the environment and you
know, seeing what else ishappening and how all this is
working together.
(23:55):
And sometimes quite achievablethat can be very detail-oriented
and not not quite able to seethe uh the bigger picture so
well.
So I wonder if there are somethings we can teach managers,
teach leaders to in order forfor people to work more in the
sync together.
SPEAKER_01 (24:15):
That's a good one, yeah.
Um sorry, your point around umoptimizing the team versus
optimizing the whole um is andhow we can make that practical
is a really, really good umsuggestion.
I ideally uh I'm a bit of a uhI'm a bit harsh on
(24:36):
organizations, but I don't Ifeel that that an organization
should make this easy formanagers.
If a manager has to work out whya team exists and how that fits
in the whole organizationwithout any support, I think
that's a bit um uh that's anunfair is a strong word, but
it's it's not an idealsituation.
(24:56):
We can make it easy.
Um, so I think um understandinghow the team contributes to the
whole is is important.
So whilst each team should havea goal, those goals should fit
together to a super goal, andthat super goal, you know, you
know, then should fit togetherto a super goal.
So we should all understand umwhy, and that also helps teams
(25:16):
understand a sense of purpose.
Why am I here?
Why do I exist?
You know, then they get thatsatisfaction of, you know, I'm
not just adding a leg to achair, I'm creating a place for
our customers to sit and rest,right?
You know, they understand whatwhat their their what their um
efforts are leading to.
Um and that, you know, we canuse um a necessity-based logic
for that.
We can have a gold tree um wherewe say this is what we've got
(25:38):
our purpose of the wholeorganization.
In order to do that, these arethe things we need to do.
Um, in order to do that, theseare the things we need to do,
and this is how you know whichteam is working where.
And that also helps those teamsunderstand how they need to work
together and what their purposeis.
Um, and in that way, as theyoptimize, they understand not
just what they're optimizing forimmediately, but the goal of the
(26:00):
goal, what should they beoptimizing for?
So maybe they can find a betterway of fitting.
Um, and that that's all comingfrom theory of constraints,
Goldratt and also Dan Heath, youknow, people that are smarter
than me.
Uh if it makes sense.
If it doesn't make sense, thenit's probably my my doing.
Um, so I so I think umunderstanding the place in the
organization is is necessary,but it uh and I think uh uh
(26:20):
managers have a role to play inunderstanding that, but I hope
the organization makes it easyfor them because it's an
organizational question, it'smore complex than one person can
probably um decipher.
Um but if it's not obvious toyour point, you know, a
practical approach, hmm.
I guess um I think one thing tobe clear on maybe is um um you
(26:41):
know if what makes it verydifficult, I don't know about
you, but if if if I find I havemultiple to-do lists, um it's
impossible for me to prioritize.
Which which because if I have ifI have 10 to-do lists, then 10
things are a priority at once.
So where do I start?
Where do I end?
(27:02):
And it's the same with uh andand also how do I sort those
to-do lists if I so I think whatwas really important any one
team is to have a single goal,um, a single method by which we
prioritize work, a single um,and then we we can collapse work
down into a single list.
Um to put it um maybe uh better.
(27:26):
When when we're as as adeveloper, what we often do is
we rewrite our code to make itbetter.
And when we rewrite that code tomake it better, we we tend to
have we can only particularly wecan only choose one particular
aim of how we rewrite it.
What are we trying to optimizefor as we rewrite that code?
One could be to make it morereadable so that the next person
comes along, can understand itbetter and better maintain it.
(27:47):
But another goal could be tomake it perform better.
So when the machine reads it, itruns faster.
And typically they take us inopposite directions.
But if both are a priority forthe developer, if they don't
choose between the two, they'llgenerally make progress against
neither goal.
Similar, if you try and walk intwo directions at once, you'll
make no progress.
So for an organization, I'msorry, for an individual team to
(28:11):
make progress in a particulardirection, it needs to pick a
direction.
Um, and for that to fit into theorganizational direction, we
need to know what uh directionthe organization is going trying
to go in.
And that's why I like uh goaltree, which is from the theory
of constraints.
I'm happy to talk more about it.
Um, it allows us to understandnot just what is the one thing
the team is trying to optimizefor, but how that fits into the
(28:31):
organization's goal and makesure it's compatible the
assumptions fit so that we'renot you know trying to jam two
things together that shouldn'treally be going together.
Um, I'm gonna pause becauseagain, you maybe reflect.
I appreciate that.
I just want to make sure it'staking us where you want to go.
SPEAKER_00 (28:44):
Well, my next question would be tell us about
the theory of constraints,because I think most of us have
not heard of it.
SPEAKER_01 (28:51):
I'd be very happy to.
I don't think many people haveheard of it, and that the name
doesn't do it justice.
So the theory of constraints, Ithink, was created by Ellie
Goldwright.
And what Ellie Goldwright was auh physicist, uh, and my
understanding was Hughes.
Uh he experienced this way ofthe world feels often feels
complex, and the scientificmethod could be a way of trying
to help us understand or justsee the simplicity behind that
(29:14):
uh inherent complexity.
Sorry, the inherent uhsimplicity behind the
complexity.
Um and he wanted to bring thatto social science, uh to, for
example, organizational change,because it all seemed quite um
uh it didn't it didn't seem likethere was a strong um scientific
approach there.
And so the the theoryconstraints a number of things
to it, but one of the uh bitsthat I find most helpful is the
(29:38):
thinking processes, and thethinking processes is how you
apply the scientific method toorganizations or other social
systems.
Um first question is a series offive steps, um, all of which you
uh there's visual tools, so youcan then get other people to uh
collaborate with you and to uhum improve um what you have on a
(30:03):
piece of paper.
Um, because organizations arecomplex, no one person can see
the whole, and if you don't getother people involved, you'll
you're not optimizing theorganization, you're optimizing
what's in your head, what youthink the organization is, which
is wrong.
It's probably uh uh fictitious.
So the first step is what's thegoal?
Um you need to articulate that,use a goal tree.
Um so what is uh manyorganizations, we stopped paper,
(30:27):
they say that their goal is toincrease profits now in the
future.
Fine.
Um in a capitalist culture,that's generally how it is.
Whether it's right or wrong is avalue judgment.
Um that's great.
But in order to do that, thenthere's a number of necessary
conditions to achieve that.
Uh so what are they?
You need to provide a secure andsatisfying workplace.
If you don't, your staff willleave and you can't create
(30:48):
increased profits in the future.
So, what's the point?
So there's a number of uh thennecessary conditions to get
that.
But you you you list these outand you have a few layers that
at least understand helps youunderstand what is the goal and
what are the necessaryconditions to achieve the goal.
So you can then know as anorganization what is the
direction you're trying to go inand what you're optimizing for.
(31:08):
The second one is um the currentreality tree.
What are the key obstacles thatare getting in the way of
getting us close to the goal andwhere are they coming from?
The third one is the futurereality tree.
Given we now understand what thekey constraints that lie between
us, where we are, and the goal,um, what should we do about it?
(31:29):
Um and then the fourth one, andthen it then it continues.
Um there's there's also yeah,there's there's some other key
ones there, but those are thethe the some of the ones that we
we go through.
But all the the the thing that'scritical in all of those is
we're laying out ourassumptions.
So we're we're doing thisvisually, we're writing out our
(31:49):
assumptions.
We don't just say in order toincrease profits now in the
future, we must do this.
We have a because we have abecause part of that, and that
way we can get other people toscrutinize our assumption, like
scientists do um in what intheir experiments, they lay out
their assumptions because theywant their assumptions to be
disproven.
And so that's what the theory ofconstraints is trying to do with
(32:10):
each of those tools.
Whenever you uh create thesediagrams, whenever you try and
answer these questions, we layit, it gives you a formula for
or a way of laying out yourassumptions so they can be
disproven because that's whatwe're trying to do.
Um, and if your assumptions arewrong, your solutions will be
wrong, your um understandingreality will be wrong.
I said a lot there.
Was it helpful in some way?
SPEAKER_00 (32:32):
Yes.
I think it was helpful for thoseof us that have never heard of
the theory of constraints.
I think particularly the idea oflaying out your assumptions so
that they can be scrutinized.
So that requires a level oftransparency and trust.
When you are formulating yourgoals, you would be using that
(32:54):
goal tree, you would be layingout all the assumptions for each
goal and making sure that theyline up with the super goal.
And then you're allowing othermembers to come and scrutinize
those assumptions.
That takes a lot of trustbecause some people are not
going to feel comfortable havingtheir assumptions scrutinized.
Some types of leaders would justwant to bypass that kind of
(33:17):
discussion and the possibilityof having their assumptions
questioned.
SPEAKER_01 (33:23):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
So I think, yeah, and sorry, youplayed it back really well.
So I think the it depends onwhat level you want to do this.
Um, if you're trying to optimizea team in isolation or whether
you're trying to optimize a goalor a department, that's the
layer, you know, you pick whereyou have where you want to
optimize and you optimize.
Ideally, you want to do it uh ata boundary that makes sense.
Ideally, you do it across thewhole organization.
Um, but you start where you are.
(33:45):
Um, and so yeah, then you layout your goal and what is
necessary to achieve it, and youget your assumption, you you
kind of put your assumptions outthere to be scrutinized.
Um, but yeah, yeah, no,ultimately it is it is scary.
Um but but I think this um comeswith an appreciation of
uncertainty, um uh anappreciation that we can't see
everything ourselves, that theworld is too complex for any one
(34:07):
mind to understand.
Um, and um I don't I don't thinkit lessens the how scary it
feels, but um, I would muchrather my colleague to tell me
I'm wrong than now than acustomer to tell me I'm wrong in
five years when we're bankruptor something, right?
You know, there's as much uh umand yeah, but I don't I can't I
(34:31):
can't disagree with what yousaid.
It is it is scary.
Um but there are there are waysof making it feel easier.
Um yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (34:38):
And more importantly, I think it's an
intellectually honest way ofdoing things where you identify
those assumptions first, youquestion the assumptions, you
make sure they're really solidbefore you build the thing and
before you present the solutionto the client.
So it's also it's thinking aheadand anticipating problems that
might come up.
(34:58):
And it's ultimately for the goodof the client.
It's for a positive outcome.
So it's actually uh I find itthe way you've explained it as a
very intellectually rigorous butalso honest way of doing things.
SPEAKER_01 (35:12):
Yeah, I I appreciate yeah, I appreciate you put it
very well.
Uh, and uh I'd love to takecredit, although uh it's it's
it's not mine to take credit forin any way.
I think um I think one thing toto um this so this could be used
on a number of different complexproblems, but there's there's
something else that's uh veryimportant there.
Sorry, just to maybe uh youcause me to reflect.
(35:33):
I I really don't like what yousaid about the um the um
conference that must take aleader to use this kind of tool
with their own staff.
I think there's another way offlipping it actually and saying,
why wouldn't we do it this way?
Which is that often what it'sreally tempting to do is uh um
in an organization create changeby kind of designing up front,
(35:56):
thinking it through.
You don't want to uh missanything, so you put a lot of
thought into it, so important toyou, and then you present it to
everyone and go, hey, this is Ithink because this is what we're
gonna do, and this is how we'regonna make things better because
we've all been suffering and wewant to get to a better, get a
player, better place.
Um first of all, yeah, we'll bewrong because if it's you know
one person can only see so much,and therefore uh he can't, you
(36:18):
know, he's not done all thedifferent uh he's not been in
all the different roles,experienced all the different uh
parts of the organization, uh,even even you know the most
experienced leaders haven't.
And so they're gonna be missingout a lot of input that can make
their ideas even richer andtheir solutions more uh likely
to succeed.
But the other part of it is, Iguess, fair process that by
(36:38):
involving people in the change,they are um that there's a lot
of focus on or a lot of concernsabout people resisting change,
that people don't want tochange.
And I think people uh this isgoing back to Eddie Gold.
Anything good I say always comesfrom other people.
Um Ellie Goldwright suggeststhat um people love change.
(37:01):
You know, I I had I got married,I chose to get married, I chose
to have a baby, I you know,people love change, but only
when that change is animprovement.
So if people are resistingchange, it's not because they're
bad people, they're frustratingpeople, they're just dang, dang
annoying.
Um, they're just they areresisting change because they
don't see the improvementinvolved in them.
(37:21):
And so by getting people toscrutinize the change early, by
getting them involved in theprocess, although it's scary,
um, and it takes a verydifferent approach.
You're sweating more now, so youbleed less later.
If you really care about thischange succeeding, once you get
people involved at thebeginning, they scrutinize it,
they improved it, theyunderstand the reason why you're
(37:42):
doing what you're doing, andthey're able to also input into
that, and therefore design thechange to be more successful.
You don't just have a moresuccessful uh design coming out
that you can try, you also havepeople who abort into it, and
the change will take on a lifeof its own.
So I think there's a huge reasonto involve people at the very
beginning.
You can, you know, not justtheir viewpoints, not just their
(38:04):
input to make it more effective,but also you know, you'll you'll
have them as part of uh thechange itself.
SPEAKER_00 (38:13):
I'm reminded of design thinking.
So you come up with the initialidea, but you don't finesse it
until you've given other peoplea chance to have their voice
heard and to get involved.
So you're co-opting them earlyand you're ready, you're you're
prepared to make those littleadjustments so that the final
outcome is something thateverybody who is involved has uh
(38:33):
had a chance to see, to commenton, as a proof of concept, and
then you develop the thing.
So it makes perfect sense.
It sounds very smart, like asmart way to do things.
SPEAKER_01 (38:44):
I think there's um I think there's a strong
connection between the two, bothof them are visual.
Um the theory of constraints,particularly uh it's all it
really is is based on um logic.
It's just uses logic,philosophy, or science, really.
Um, so that you it makes youquestion your idea using a few
simple rules like um coherence.
(39:05):
Like, you know, your idea has tohas to um fit together.
If it doesn't even fit togetherwith itself, then it's not gonna
work.
Um so yeah, absolutely.
It is very simple and veryvisual and gets people involved
early.
So yeah, I I could see yeah,connection design thinking makes
a lot of sense.
Yeah, that's good, good cool.
SPEAKER_00 (39:22):
What's the one takeaway you want our
introverted listeners to learnfrom our conversation?
SPEAKER_01 (39:29):
I th I think I think it's what you said, which is you
know what we both coalesced on,I think, a lot uh in during this
chat and our previous chat,Serena, was that people are
good.
People do things for a reason.
Um if we forget people are good.
SPEAKER_04 (39:46):
We if we think people are bad, it doesn't
there's nothing we can do aboutit.
SPEAKER_01 (39:53):
We've reached, you know, that's that's the end of
the that's the end of theconversation, that's the end of
us being able to change things.
Uh as Ellie Goldwright says, wewill just bitch and loin and
that forgive my words, butthat's all we can do.
Whereas if we accept people aregood and that people do things
for a reason, it means there'ssomething to learn.
Um, and there's something,there's there's a way forward
together.
(40:13):
This that people are doing wedidn't understand that reason,
we can talk to them and we cankind of um improve things.
I think it's fundamentalattribution bias.
Um, and that's what Iexperienced.
When I was working withextroverts, I was like, oh,
these are bad people.
Why am I paired with these?
And then I just I'd just bitch amoan and I'd uh not really make
any progress.
When I suddenly realized, hey,these guys are really good.
(40:35):
They're doing things for areason.
It gave me an avenue to improvethings.
And it was only then that itgave me the avenue for improving
things.
I had to accept these peoplewere good, um, which is you know
silly of me.
Um, but uh so um I guess thefinal thing uh uh uh the
takeaway is is for me is peopleare good, people do things for a
reason.
Um, and that means that whenthey're not behaving the way you
(40:58):
expect it, whether they'reextroverts, where are they just
you know different, differentaverts?
Um by understanding why peopledo the way they do and assuming
they're good and they're doingthings for a reason, it gives
you uh the opportunity to seekto understand before being
understood to understand whythey're doing the way things the
way are, they why they're doingthings the way they are, and
therefore how you can worktogether with them and how they
(41:20):
can work together with you to dothings better.
SPEAKER_00 (41:24):
Beautiful.
And what's the best way forpeople to connect with you and
find out more about your work?
SPEAKER_01 (41:29):
Yeah, sure.
I have a weird domain name.
Uh it's curious copy.club, notdot com, but dot club.
I should have got with donggovernment.com.
Um and uh there's I like towrite articles and there's a
free book there about um how wecan help organizations get out
of their own way.
Um but also if you want to havea virtual coffee, I'd like to
learn from other people, justchat.
So um please, please come sayhi.
SPEAKER_00 (41:51):
Beautiful.
We'll make sure to have yourlink in the show notes for
people to connect with you atthe Curious Coffee Club.
So thank you so much, Simon, forjoining us today, sharing your
time, your wisdom about thetheory of constraints, about
what it's like in the consultingindustry.
About how introverts canactually uh uh arise by using
(42:13):
our own strengths, but also byuh recognizing and appreciating
the strengths of people withdifferent personalities and how
we can all work together for thetopical goal of optimizing
what's happening within our ownteams, our own departments, our
own organizations and usingscientific thinking.
(42:34):
But I think the thing that Ireally would take away from
today's conversation is what yousaid about people always doing
things for a reason.
I guess because we don't knowthat reason initially uh simply
a reason to get curious.
I think you already came upquite a few times about
conversation today.
So start with the assumptionthat people are good people.
Get curious about why they dothe things they do, why they uh
(42:57):
show up the way they do, whythey speak, or communicate or
act the way they do, and at thesame time communicate why we
think the way we do.
And then we can find some roomin the middle to you know to
collaborate for that callingoutcome.
So thank you so much for joiningus today.
SPEAKER_01 (43:12):
Thank you very much, Serena.
Yes, be curious before you'relovely to be with you.
SPEAKER_00 (43:17):
If you're looking for ways to become visible
without having to actextroverted, subscribe to my
newsletter, The VisibleIntrovert, at Serenalo.com.au.
See you on the next episode.
I'm so grateful that you're heretoday.
If you found this contentvaluable, please share it on
your social media channels andsubscribe to the show on your
(43:38):
favorite listening platform.
Together we can help moreintroverts thrive.
To receive more upliftingcontent like this, connect with
me on Instagram at Serenaloo,Quiet Warrior Coach.
Thank you for sharing your timeand your energy with me.
See you on the next episode.
Hi, I'm Serena Dove.
If you're used to hearing thatintroverts are shy, anxious,
anti-social, and lack of goodcommunication and leadership
skills, then this podcast is foryou.
You're about to fall in lovewith a calm, introspective, and
profound person that you are.
Discover what's fun, unique, andpowerful about being an
(00:22):
introvert and how to make theelegant transition from quiet
achiever to quiet warrior inyour life at work anytime you
want, in more ways than youimagined possible.
Welcome.
Hello and welcome.
Today's guest on the QuietWarrior podcast is Simon Coffee.
(00:42):
Simon is a delivery andtransformation consultant to
senior leaders, helping themunwind complex obstacles in
weeks, not years.
So happy staff can deliverbetter software to customers.
(01:09):
Welcome, Simon Copsey, to theQuiet Warrior Podcast.
SPEAKER_01 (01:13):
Thank you for having me, Serena.
Lovely to be with you.
SPEAKER_00 (01:16):
Thank you.
Tell us a little bit about yourbackground and what you
currently do.
SPEAKER_01 (01:21):
Yeah, sure.
So I was a software developer, Ithink still recovering from
that.
But I kind of quickly got moreinterested in what's happening
behind the screen rather than onthe screen.
So I entered the deep dark worldof consulting and found that
often the things that get in theway of our staff aren't what we
think they are.
They're not things coming fromoutside the organization.
(01:43):
It's not that our staff aren'tskilled enough.
The only things often getting inthe way of our staff and our
company getting to where we mostwant it to be is um is things
that run a little bit deeper,things that are a bit hidden,
but all to do with how we manageand how we set policies that
just get in the way of staff.
So a long-winded way of saying alot of the time organizations
(02:05):
get in their own way uh withoutrealizing it.
And that's the thing I findreally interesting, uncovering
that and helping remove that sohappier staff can deliver better
things faster, as you put it.
SPEAKER_00 (02:15):
You mentioned the consulting industry.
So for people who are notfamiliar, what's what is it
about the consulting industrythat's unique?
And how does being an introvertor a quiet achiever, how does
that work in the consultingindustry?
SPEAKER_01 (02:32):
That's a good question.
So I consulting is really, Idon't know about use for it, but
I find it really hard to definebecause it does so many things.
I think that the the umbrella, Iguess, the what's in common
about whatever consultants do isthat they're helping others.
Um but that can come in manydifferent ways.
It can come from hide skills,uh, where a person who's
approaching a consultant, theyknow what the problem is,
(02:53):
they're pretty confident withthat, they know what the
solution is, and they just needsome extra help, people with the
knowledge.
And then there's the other side,which I guess is more kind of
advisory, where they don't knowwhat the problem is, they don't
know what the solution is, theyjust want some people to come in
and try and help them get to thebottom of things.
Um, I guess you'd call thatadvisory.
Um, I guess what's unique aboutit is, I mean, if we just
compare it to the other side ofmy career as a developer, I
(03:16):
could pretty much sit at my deskuninterrupted as long as I
understood the problem.
Yeah, I would need to talk topeople uh to kind of understand
what is the problem that we'retrying to solve, but most of the
time I could sit there and solvea problem somewhat in isolation,
be me versus the machine, right?
Whereas with cons uh withespecially advisory consulting,
I guess it's not your problem,it's someone else's problem.
(03:38):
And so you need to go in andoften they don't understand it
as much as they'd like to.
So a lot of it's aboutinteracting with other people
and trying to understand thedifferent um the different parts
of a complex problem, thedifferent pieces of the puzzle.
And that involves a lot of beingin front of people and asking
questions and uh uh a lot of Iguess uh opportunity for
(03:58):
imposter syndrome to arisebecause you're meeting these
people for the first time,you're not sure what they'll
think of you, you don't knowwhether they'll trust you, and
you really want them to trustyou because otherwise they won't
share the things that areimportant to help you solve the
problem.
Um, yeah, what comes up for youthere, Serena?
Did I answer the question aroundum uh did that picture of
consulting make sense and thethat that maybe how it leads to
(04:20):
anxiety?
SPEAKER_00 (04:21):
Like how you think about it.
Yes, I can think of a lot ofintroverts and quiet achievers
who are data-drivenprofessionals.
So as long as they're within therealm of their own competence,
like you say, sitting at yourown desk, it's a man versus
machine, you would solve theproblem and then you go home.
You do you can sort of minimizethe amount of talking you do.
But with consulting, you arethere to not only solve the
(04:44):
problem, but also identify andarticulate the problem.
And you would be working acrossthe different stakeholders, you
would be talking to different,you know, people at different
levels of the hierarchy, right?
Is that correct?
SPEAKER_01 (04:58):
Yeah, yeah, no, I think you put it really well.
Um, and I I think also what youhighlighted in my mind is it's
not an either or I'm I'm kind ofalmost turning a dichotomy, and
I need to be careful not to,because I realize everyone talks
to everyone all the time, andit's very important for
developers, you know, that youknow, I don't want to uh uh
exaggerate the image of uh youknow someone sitting in the
basement working in the dark,because that's not what
(05:19):
developers really do, but youknow, I guess that's probably
how I work.
Um and so for me it was atransition uh where, as you say,
we're talking to people atdifferent levels who uh
communicate in different wayswith different language, uh, you
know, from finance to uhtechnology uh to human resources
um and have differentpersonality types.
(05:40):
Um and and so it was it for me,it was like encountering this
full range of uh of uh the fullspectrum and full range of uh
communication styles and tryingto work out how do I navigate
that and get to the informationI need to help them.
So, yes, just wanted to makesure I didn't mislead or
misrepresent people.
SPEAKER_00 (06:00):
Yes, and that leads naturally to the next question.
How did you deal with theimposter syndrome?
SPEAKER_01 (06:06):
I don't think we ever deal.
I mean, you know better than me,Serena.
I think, but I don't think weever do deal with it fully.
You know, it's something that weum recognize and manage.
Um but I but I think um for me,I mean, it moving to consulting
was was a step for me because Inever really when I became a
consultant, there was no formaltraining or anything like that.
(06:28):
It was um so really, I wasn'treally a consultant, I was an
ex-developer, and I was tryingto find how to become a
consultant.
And so that in itself places abit of anxiety in anyone
switching to uh discipline isgonna feel a bit of anxiety.
Um, so so it's quite natural.
But I think one of the thingsthat helped me, it seems really
obvious in hindsight, and I'msure a lot of people get there
(06:50):
much more quickly than me, isfor me, um imposter syndrome is
um not being able to internalizeyour own successes, but maybe
also amplifying failures andmaybe actually playing them up
where they don't exist.
And so what was happening for mewas um I'd be sitting in a
meeting or a presentation, orI'd even be doing the talking.
And at the same time, my mindwould be trying to simulate or
(07:13):
imagine the thoughts of otherpeople, saying, Oh, you just
missed a word, they're not goingto understand what you're
saying.
You're not making any sense,you're not coherent.
Why would these people believeyou?
And all these questions just berunning in the background in my
head continuously whilst I wastrying to speak, and then I'd
lose my words because I've gotthis parallel thread in my head,
and it would just be like adownward spiral.
I'd be like, Simon, you're notgood at this, why are you doing
(07:33):
it?
Um, but it took me a reallyweirdly long amount of time to
realize that voice was metalking to myself, it wasn't
other people, and it didn'tnecessarily represent what they
thought, and a lot of the timeit didn't.
Yeah, I'm sure you know peoplewould think Simon is a bit weird
sometimes, uh, of course, youknow, saying perfect, but but my
brain was really overrating it.
But understanding that thedragons were within my head
(07:54):
really helped me.
That was the first thing.
Um, that it was me doing this tomyself.
Um, and I think the second thingwas just uh um starting to find
um growing more confident in theability to ask better questions
as a consultant, knowing whereto start.
I think that helped as well, andthat naturally improved my
confidence.
Both those things didn't resolveimposter syndrome, of course,
(08:16):
but it helped me maybe um settleit.
Um how about you, Serena?
Was it a similar journey foryou?
SPEAKER_00 (08:24):
I don't know that um I have completely dissociated
from the dragons as well.
I like to think of it as maybeit's uh it's another way of
looking at someone who cares toomuch as a you feel like an
imposter because you realizethat you are consciously
incompetent at the start,anyway.
(08:45):
When you're lacking theknowledge, you're lacking the
expertise or the data that youwant or that you believe you
should have.
And so you you're coming veryconscious of deficit, a skills
deficit.
And you're trying very hard toget to a better place so that
you can offer more value, youknow, deliver a better service.
So it's coming from a goodplace.
(09:05):
So I'm curious as to where thisinner voice comes from.
What's what's the root cause orwhat's the origin of this dragon
that you mentioned?
SPEAKER_01 (09:16):
No, I appreciate that.
I uh and just going back to yourpoint, I think you put it very
well.
Although I would love it to be apull rather than a push, rather
than a push from anxiety, I'dlove it to be a pull from kind
of curiosity and excitement, andgo, oh wow, this is a new
domain, so much to learn.
Um, because that would feel likeit would uh help us uh with all
of us with imposter syndromefeel a little bit more uh at the
(09:36):
positive edge of it.
Um I don't know what the rootcause was.
I think um I never reallyexperienced a I think I've
always had some form of um, Ithink I've always had some form
of how to put it.
Um I guess imposter syndrome isabout um your feeling of value,
(10:00):
I guess.
Your um so I think I've alwayshad that.
Um there's always been uhbubbles around that in my life.
But I think um it was a changein career that really kind of
brought it to the workplace,that really kind of um um made
me question my um capability inwhat I did.
Up until that point, I thinkI've been quite fortunate and
(10:20):
not encountered it, but suddenlymoving discipline um kind of
removed any of those foundationsthat I had to quiet and the
dragons uh and it woke upsomewhere, somewhere new.
Um but I I'm no I'm no expert.
Uh that that's just my mypersonal experience, me trying
to uh add a narrative to whatI've what I've experienced to
draw a sense.
(10:41):
Um how about how about you,Serena?
Have you seen similar patterns?
SPEAKER_00 (10:45):
I'm thinking that maybe it's not a bad thing.
You know, we talk about impostersyndrome like it's it's such a
negative.
But what if it's just anexpression of this is where I
currently am at?
That I'm not as competent as Iwould like to be, and I'm very
conscious of it, that there areother people who know more than
I do, they have more experiencethan I am, and I'm not there
(11:06):
yet.
Therefore, I feel like animposter next to them.
But at the same time, we aregrowing and evolving all the
time.
And those of us who are lifelonglearners were very confident
with ourselves, particularly thewider people.
So you know, we we really do tryvery hard and we have high
standards for ourselves.
And sometimes we take it a bitfarther, we are perfect to think
(11:26):
about things.
But it's also coming from thatplace of I care enough to want
to get good at this thing sothat I can deliver value to my
customer, my client, or youknow, my community.
And so I am trying, and so I'mconscious of that.
I'm not there yet, therefore I'mI'm working at it.
And so, you know, that maybe theimposter syndrome is just a
(11:48):
recognition of a temporary phasewe're going through.
And we know that we will getbetter at it if we keep at it.
So it's not necessarily anegative.
What do you think?
SPEAKER_01 (11:59):
Yeah, yeah.
I don't disagree with that.
I do wish it was uh the feelingI think um I think if the drive
comes with less of that anxietyedge, more of the kind of
curiosity and kind of wonderedge, then I think um, or if
we're able to uh our bodiespermit us to feel that way,
that'd be that'd be lovely.
Um the last thing I want peopleto experience is the anxiety,
(12:21):
the worry, the concern, thefeeling of self-defeat or lack
of self-worth.
Um, you know, that that'sunnecessary, unhelpful, and can
take us further away from kindof exploring what's around us.
But uh if we're able to take itin a way, you say, then uh, you
know, where we see is uh oh,there's more to be learned here.
Uh yeah, I absolutely agree withthat.
But you know, all I know is Iknow nothing.
(12:43):
We'll never know that everythingabout the world is too complex.
There's always more to belearnt, and that's scary, but
also wonderful.
It'll be a very boring world ifwe knew everything.
SPEAKER_00 (12:52):
Yes, and I think in a way that not knowing and not
being competent yet also keepsus humble, it keeps us uh
grounded in reality.
SPEAKER_04 (13:04):
And so I think that's a good thing.
I think so.
SPEAKER_01 (13:09):
I think that's what um helps us understand others.
Um if we're not if we if webelieve we know everything, even
if we don't, um then yeah, asyou say, it leads us left away
from curiosity, away fromunderstanding, away to uh away
from uh the desire, the patienceto uh understand others other
(13:29):
points of views.
Um believing that our point ofview is uh a superset uh you
know more uh more full andthat's not helpful.
So yeah, yeah, that feels good.
SPEAKER_00 (13:41):
And that actually ties in nicely with what you do
as a consultant, because allthose qualities you just
mentioned, that curiosity, thatopenness, the ability to listen
to other people's points ofview, even especially when they
conflict with your own beliefsor your own way of doing things,
that openness that then buildstrust in REPL, those are all the
qualities you need to be a goodconsultant, isn't it?
SPEAKER_01 (14:06):
Um I'm still learning, but I I think I think
those are all qualities that arehelpful, particularly as you
say, like um uh if we're comingin to solve a problem the client
hasn't yet solved themselves andmaybe doesn't fully understand
themselves, then it means thatit's not something that you can
understand from any oneviewpoint, otherwise they would
(14:27):
have solved it by now.
Um, and that means in order totry and understand it, you need
to put together differentviewpoints.
No one viewpoint is sufficient,each viewpoint, uh each kind of
piece of understanding is partof the whole.
And that means you need to jointhem together, recognize that um
yeah, that that there's morethan just one viewpoint that's
(14:48):
necessary to get to anunderstanding of the problem.
And even then it will be itwon't be it won't be quite
right, uh and if they won'tquite fit together.
And if when they don't quite fittogether, it feels like
conflicts, but really they'rejust different views of reality,
and that's okay.
So, yes, so everything you said,yes, um, it's going to happen if
if if if a client's coming to usbecause they don't yet
understand a problem, it's toobig, too unwieldy, different
(15:10):
pieces in different minds.
We need to stick them together,which means we're going to have
conflicts about what's true,what's not.
And that's great.
That's just about building aclear understanding so we can
move forward together.
Um, so yeah, you worded itreally well.
I feel that is for particularlymore complex uh problems
necessary.
SPEAKER_00 (15:29):
You mentioned different viewpoints, but I'm
also thinking you would alsowork with different
personalities.
And because you and I are moreon the introverted side of the
spectrum, what has it been whathas it been like for you working
in the consulting industry withyour more extroverted
colleagues?
SPEAKER_01 (15:46):
Um bittersweet.
Um bitter initially and sweetafterwards.
Um and and to be clear, uh, youknow, I I say that with um a
sense of you know uh I guess uhyeah, I'm being a bit maybe uh a
(16:08):
bit callous.
I I meant that with a sense ofhumor.
The reason I say it that way isinitially, as as as I think we
all know, when when when weencounter people with a
different approach, it's quiteeasy to feel um uh it's more
easy to not get along.
And so when I'm working withextra extroverted uh
(16:31):
consultants, for example,previously, I'd always go,
they're just running intoproblems, they're not they're
they're running towardssolutions, they're not taking
the time to understand problems.
We need to go slower, we need toask questions, we need to take
our time, make sure we knowwhat's going on.
Um and uh that that's my view ofit, but that's my mental model
(16:51):
of extroversia, it's notnecessary, correct.
That's just how I view it.
Um and they'd be like, hey,well, Sam, why are you going so
slow?
No, it's really clear, it'sreally obvious.
We just, you know, we just thisthis is what we need to do.
Let's just get started.
Why why are you why are youdragging your feet?
It's obvious.
Um, and so that that would umand so you know, we'd always
want to work at differentspeeds, and uh that's happened a
(17:12):
few times, and that wouldinitially frustrate me, it would
frustrate them.
Neither of us are getting whatwe need in terms of uh
colleagues, in terms ofpartnership, and we both were
really frustrated, often forweeks.
Um, but the thing is that wewhat we're both trying to do is
we're both trying to worktowards solving the same problem
together, and we both want to doa good job.
It's just we have differentapproaches.
(17:34):
There's no bad people, uhneither of us are bad, we're
just different approaches.
We've been um acclimatized tosolving problems in different
ways and getting success fromthat.
And what so so initially that'sthat was the bitter that was the
bit, you know, we have to getthrough that.
But what it leads to is thatthat sweetness afterwards, which
is there's weeks of uh thatfrustration of trying to
understand what how we work andthe benefits of us.
(17:57):
Yeah, there's there's weeks ofuh feeling that friction, that
frustration.
But very quickly, what I startedto see during those first few
weeks is what those guys arereally good at doing.
They're really good at goinginto rooms, reading the
situation, understanding thepeople quickly, building a
rapport, getting to know them,putting people at ease, um,
getting talking, getting youknow the conversation flowing,
(18:19):
which then surfaced the thingsthat I needed to hear to know
where to start asking questions.
So they were really good atgetting things started.
And then they gave me time tothink, gave me time to listen
and come in with questionslater.
Then they'd listen to those uhand say, Oh, okay, yeah, let's
adapt our approach.
And so the the first few weekswere really hard because we
weren't acting in a way thatsupported each other.
(18:39):
But what we were able to do wasobserve each other to see how
can we act in the future tosupport each other and how can
we put our uh differentapproaches uh to best use.
And so after a few weeks, uhthings just worked really well.
We're able to uh kind of almostbe yin and yin and yangs, um,
you know, and be um if it wastwo introverts or two
extroverts, I think we'd do apretty bad job.
(19:02):
Whereas together I think itworked well.
So, yes, along with a way ofsaying I think we worked really
well together because during thefirst few weeks, although it
felt very difficult, we wereobserving each other, seeing
where we excelled and how welike to solve problems and the
benefits it offered to thesituation.
So then we could then actuallybring those together um later
on.
Um yeah, you made me think that.
Sorry, that was a very longanswer.
SPEAKER_00 (19:22):
What came up for you?
That's that's really good.
Um what I'm hearing is give ittime because when you have a
different personality, you needto make that adjustment.
And it's not easy to do itmentally because there's that
element of do I trust thisperson?
Can I work with this person, ordo they have the same goal as I
do?
So there has to be that uh, Iguess, uh humility as well, and
(19:47):
openness and empathy, and just awillingness to listen to a
different point of view and uhmaybe compromise in a few areas,
but always having that umultimate goal, which is the same
outcome, that common outcomethat you're working towards,
which is for the benefit of theclient and the organization.
So I think when you're guided bythat, then you you start and
(20:10):
also recognizing that each ofyou have got your own strengths.
And when you come from thatperspective, I think you quickly
discover how you complement eachother and why uh you are working
together as a team.
And it's actually a really goodthing for everyone because
you've got something they don'tand they've got something you
don't, and so on.
So yes, I really appreciatethat.
SPEAKER_01 (20:29):
I think you put that very you put that very simple,
yes.
Thank you, Tree.
And trust is an important thingthat we can talk about, yes,
absolutely.
And um people are good, yes,yes.
SPEAKER_00 (20:38):
What are some of the things that undermine trust?
Or what are some things we arenot taught as managers and
leaders?
SPEAKER_01 (20:46):
Um so I guess trust is the ability to predict
others, and um I think oh sorry,that's the two very good
questions there about and Ithink that we're very connected
also, could themselves lead tovery interesting answers.
So I think trust is interestingbecause um often as managers,
one thing I hadn't appreciatedwas the purpose of a goal.
(21:09):
Um often what we do as managersis we um or managers and
managers, we give each managertheir own goal and say, okay, if
you're looking after this team,we want to make sure that team
does really, really well.
Here's your goal for that team.
Hey, you are behaving, uh,here's your team, here's your
goal.
We want that team to do reallywell to get them running towards
that goal.
Um, so if they're lucky, eachteam gets one goal, maybe they
(21:32):
have several, but uh, let's saythat they're in a good
situation, you need to have onegoal.
But what we neglect and whatwe're not taught often as
managers is that umorganizations generally consist
of teams that need to worktogether to achieve an outcome.
That's why we haveorganizations, that's why we
have teams.
Um, that's what that's why we'retogether in the first place.
(21:52):
And organizations trying toachieve something that no one
person or often one team canachieve in isolation.
Um, so by giving each team adifferent goal.
Goal, we incentivize them tooptimize for that.
But if they're all trying tosatisfy their individual goals
and they need to work togetherto actually help the
organization achieve its goal,they generally won't be dancing
(22:13):
well together.
They generally won't becooperating.
And if they're not cooperating,then how can trust emerge?
If trust is the ability topredict the uh behavior of
another team or another person,they're not going to trust each
other.
They're going to say, well, why?
I've asked you for help.
You're not helping me.
And the other people think thesame thing.
Um, they're not cooperating.
If they're not cooperating,cooperating, trust will emerge
(22:34):
if trust won't emerge.
So I think that's maybe onething.
Um, so like to try, you know, uhthe one thing that we're often
not taught uh as managers, asum, that relates to trust in
particular is we need we need tosynchronize teams.
We need teams to work at thesame time on the uh to the same
end.
If they don't, um we will theorganization won't succeed and
(22:57):
staff will be frustrated andconflicting.
Um there's probably more we cansay that's a very big question.
I love it.
But before I before I continue,I just want to see what comes up
for you and just pause for asecond here.
SPEAKER_00 (23:10):
I think sometimes when when people are put into
that managerial role, it's notvery clear and I don't mean the
KPIs, but but not everyone whois put into that leadership role
necessarily has a a sense ofwhat it means to be a good
leader.
So you raise some interestingpoints about you know looking
after your own team, but thenalso at the same time having an
(23:32):
eye to the the greater the thebigger picture in order to work
in, I think, with other teams orthe uh organizations for greater
good.
And that requires not justlooking after your own, but also
looking after, you know,scanning the environment and you
know, seeing what else ishappening and how all this is
working together.
(23:55):
And sometimes quite achievablethat can be very detail-oriented
and not not quite able to seethe uh the bigger picture so
well.
So I wonder if there are somethings we can teach managers,
teach leaders to in order forfor people to work more in the
sync together.
SPEAKER_01 (24:15):
That's a good one, yeah.
Um sorry, your point around umoptimizing the team versus
optimizing the whole um is andhow we can make that practical
is a really, really good umsuggestion.
I ideally uh I'm a bit of a uhI'm a bit harsh on
(24:36):
organizations, but I don't Ifeel that that an organization
should make this easy formanagers.
If a manager has to work out whya team exists and how that fits
in the whole organizationwithout any support, I think
that's a bit um uh that's anunfair is a strong word, but
it's it's not an idealsituation.
(24:56):
We can make it easy.
Um, so I think um understandinghow the team contributes to the
whole is is important.
So whilst each team should havea goal, those goals should fit
together to a super goal, andthat super goal, you know, you
know, then should fit togetherto a super goal.
So we should all understand umwhy, and that also helps teams
(25:16):
understand a sense of purpose.
Why am I here?
Why do I exist?
You know, then they get thatsatisfaction of, you know, I'm
not just adding a leg to achair, I'm creating a place for
our customers to sit and rest,right?
You know, they understand whatwhat their their what their um
efforts are leading to.
Um and that, you know, we canuse um a necessity-based logic
for that.
We can have a gold tree um wherewe say this is what we've got
(25:38):
our purpose of the wholeorganization.
In order to do that, these arethe things we need to do.
Um, in order to do that, theseare the things we need to do,
and this is how you know whichteam is working where.
And that also helps those teamsunderstand how they need to work
together and what their purposeis.
Um, and in that way, as theyoptimize, they understand not
just what they're optimizing forimmediately, but the goal of the
(26:00):
goal, what should they beoptimizing for?
So maybe they can find a betterway of fitting.
Um, and that that's all comingfrom theory of constraints,
Goldratt and also Dan Heath, youknow, people that are smarter
than me.
Uh if it makes sense.
If it doesn't make sense, thenit's probably my my doing.
Um, so I so I think umunderstanding the place in the
organization is is necessary,but it uh and I think uh uh
(26:20):
managers have a role to play inunderstanding that, but I hope
the organization makes it easyfor them because it's an
organizational question, it'smore complex than one person can
probably um decipher.
Um but if it's not obvious toyour point, you know, a
practical approach, hmm.
I guess um I think one thing tobe clear on maybe is um um you
(26:41):
know if what makes it verydifficult, I don't know about
you, but if if if I find I havemultiple to-do lists, um it's
impossible for me to prioritize.
Which which because if I have ifI have 10 to-do lists, then 10
things are a priority at once.
So where do I start?
Where do I end?
(27:02):
And it's the same with uh andand also how do I sort those
to-do lists if I so I think whatwas really important any one
team is to have a single goal,um, a single method by which we
prioritize work, a single um,and then we we can collapse work
down into a single list.
Um to put it um maybe uh better.
(27:26):
When when we're as as adeveloper, what we often do is
we rewrite our code to make itbetter.
And when we rewrite that code tomake it better, we we tend to
have we can only particularly wecan only choose one particular
aim of how we rewrite it.
What are we trying to optimizefor as we rewrite that code?
One could be to make it morereadable so that the next person
comes along, can understand itbetter and better maintain it.
(27:47):
But another goal could be tomake it perform better.
So when the machine reads it, itruns faster.
And typically they take us inopposite directions.
But if both are a priority forthe developer, if they don't
choose between the two, they'llgenerally make progress against
neither goal.
Similar, if you try and walk intwo directions at once, you'll
make no progress.
So for an organization, I'msorry, for an individual team to
(28:11):
make progress in a particulardirection, it needs to pick a
direction.
Um, and for that to fit into theorganizational direction, we
need to know what uh directionthe organization is going trying
to go in.
And that's why I like uh goaltree, which is from the theory
of constraints.
I'm happy to talk more about it.
Um, it allows us to understandnot just what is the one thing
the team is trying to optimizefor, but how that fits into the
(28:31):
organization's goal and makesure it's compatible the
assumptions fit so that we'renot you know trying to jam two
things together that shouldn'treally be going together.
Um, I'm gonna pause becauseagain, you maybe reflect.
I appreciate that.
I just want to make sure it'staking us where you want to go.
SPEAKER_00 (28:44):
Well, my next question would be tell us about
the theory of constraints,because I think most of us have
not heard of it.
SPEAKER_01 (28:51):
I'd be very happy to.
I don't think many people haveheard of it, and that the name
doesn't do it justice.
So the theory of constraints, Ithink, was created by Ellie
Goldwright.
And what Ellie Goldwright was auh physicist, uh, and my
understanding was Hughes.
Uh he experienced this way ofthe world feels often feels
complex, and the scientificmethod could be a way of trying
to help us understand or justsee the simplicity behind that
(29:14):
uh inherent complexity.
Sorry, the inherent uhsimplicity behind the
complexity.
Um and he wanted to bring thatto social science, uh to, for
example, organizational change,because it all seemed quite um
uh it didn't it didn't seem likethere was a strong um scientific
approach there.
And so the the theoryconstraints a number of things
to it, but one of the uh bitsthat I find most helpful is the
(29:38):
thinking processes, and thethinking processes is how you
apply the scientific method toorganizations or other social
systems.
Um first question is a series offive steps, um, all of which you
uh there's visual tools, so youcan then get other people to uh
collaborate with you and to uhum improve um what you have on a
(30:03):
piece of paper.
Um, because organizations arecomplex, no one person can see
the whole, and if you don't getother people involved, you'll
you're not optimizing theorganization, you're optimizing
what's in your head, what youthink the organization is, which
is wrong.
It's probably uh uh fictitious.
So the first step is what's thegoal?
Um you need to articulate that,use a goal tree.
Um so what is uh manyorganizations, we stopped paper,
(30:27):
they say that their goal is toincrease profits now in the
future.
Fine.
Um in a capitalist culture,that's generally how it is.
Whether it's right or wrong is avalue judgment.
Um that's great.
But in order to do that, thenthere's a number of necessary
conditions to achieve that.
Uh so what are they?
You need to provide a secure andsatisfying workplace.
If you don't, your staff willleave and you can't create
(30:48):
increased profits in the future.
So, what's the point?
So there's a number of uh thennecessary conditions to get
that.
But you you you list these outand you have a few layers that
at least understand helps youunderstand what is the goal and
what are the necessaryconditions to achieve the goal.
So you can then know as anorganization what is the
direction you're trying to go inand what you're optimizing for.
(31:08):
The second one is um the currentreality tree.
What are the key obstacles thatare getting in the way of
getting us close to the goal andwhere are they coming from?
The third one is the futurereality tree.
Given we now understand what thekey constraints that lie between
us, where we are, and the goal,um, what should we do about it?
(31:29):
Um and then the fourth one, andthen it then it continues.
Um there's there's also yeah,there's there's some other key
ones there, but those are thethe the some of the ones that we
we go through.
But all the the the thing that'scritical in all of those is
we're laying out ourassumptions.
So we're we're doing thisvisually, we're writing out our
(31:49):
assumptions.
We don't just say in order toincrease profits now in the
future, we must do this.
We have a because we have abecause part of that, and that
way we can get other people toscrutinize our assumption, like
scientists do um in what intheir experiments, they lay out
their assumptions because theywant their assumptions to be
disproven.
And so that's what the theory ofconstraints is trying to do with
(32:10):
each of those tools.
Whenever you uh create thesediagrams, whenever you try and
answer these questions, we layit, it gives you a formula for
or a way of laying out yourassumptions so they can be
disproven because that's whatwe're trying to do.
Um, and if your assumptions arewrong, your solutions will be
wrong, your um understandingreality will be wrong.
I said a lot there.
Was it helpful in some way?
SPEAKER_00 (32:32):
Yes.
I think it was helpful for thoseof us that have never heard of
the theory of constraints.
I think particularly the idea oflaying out your assumptions so
that they can be scrutinized.
So that requires a level oftransparency and trust.
When you are formulating yourgoals, you would be using that
(32:54):
goal tree, you would be layingout all the assumptions for each
goal and making sure that theyline up with the super goal.
And then you're allowing othermembers to come and scrutinize
those assumptions.
That takes a lot of trustbecause some people are not
going to feel comfortable havingtheir assumptions scrutinized.
Some types of leaders would justwant to bypass that kind of
(33:17):
discussion and the possibilityof having their assumptions
questioned.
SPEAKER_01 (33:23):
Yeah, no, absolutely.
So I think, yeah, and sorry, youplayed it back really well.
So I think the it depends onwhat level you want to do this.
Um, if you're trying to optimizea team in isolation or whether
you're trying to optimize a goalor a department, that's the
layer, you know, you pick whereyou have where you want to
optimize and you optimize.
Ideally, you want to do it uh ata boundary that makes sense.
Ideally, you do it across thewhole organization.
Um, but you start where you are.
(33:45):
Um, and so yeah, then you layout your goal and what is
necessary to achieve it, and youget your assumption, you you
kind of put your assumptions outthere to be scrutinized.
Um, but yeah, yeah, no,ultimately it is it is scary.
Um but but I think this um comeswith an appreciation of
uncertainty, um uh anappreciation that we can't see
everything ourselves, that theworld is too complex for any one
(34:07):
mind to understand.
Um, and um I don't I don't thinkit lessens the how scary it
feels, but um, I would muchrather my colleague to tell me
I'm wrong than now than acustomer to tell me I'm wrong in
five years when we're bankruptor something, right?
You know, there's as much uh umand yeah, but I don't I can't I
(34:31):
can't disagree with what yousaid.
It is it is scary.
Um but there are there are waysof making it feel easier.
Um yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (34:38):
And more importantly, I think it's an
intellectually honest way ofdoing things where you identify
those assumptions first, youquestion the assumptions, you
make sure they're really solidbefore you build the thing and
before you present the solutionto the client.
So it's also it's thinking aheadand anticipating problems that
might come up.
(34:58):
And it's ultimately for the goodof the client.
It's for a positive outcome.
So it's actually uh I find itthe way you've explained it as a
very intellectually rigorous butalso honest way of doing things.
SPEAKER_01 (35:12):
Yeah, I I appreciate yeah, I appreciate you put it
very well.
Uh, and uh I'd love to takecredit, although uh it's it's
it's not mine to take credit forin any way.
I think um I think one thing toto um this so this could be used
on a number of different complexproblems, but there's there's
something else that's uh veryimportant there.
Sorry, just to maybe uh youcause me to reflect.
(35:33):
I I really don't like what yousaid about the um the um
conference that must take aleader to use this kind of tool
with their own staff.
I think there's another way offlipping it actually and saying,
why wouldn't we do it this way?
Which is that often what it'sreally tempting to do is uh um
in an organization create changeby kind of designing up front,
(35:56):
thinking it through.
You don't want to uh missanything, so you put a lot of
thought into it, so important toyou, and then you present it to
everyone and go, hey, this is Ithink because this is what we're
gonna do, and this is how we'regonna make things better because
we've all been suffering and wewant to get to a better, get a
player, better place.
Um first of all, yeah, we'll bewrong because if it's you know
one person can only see so much,and therefore uh he can't, you
(36:18):
know, he's not done all thedifferent uh he's not been in
all the different roles,experienced all the different uh
parts of the organization, uh,even even you know the most
experienced leaders haven't.
And so they're gonna be missingout a lot of input that can make
their ideas even richer andtheir solutions more uh likely
to succeed.
But the other part of it is, Iguess, fair process that by
(36:38):
involving people in the change,they are um that there's a lot
of focus on or a lot of concernsabout people resisting change,
that people don't want tochange.
And I think people uh this isgoing back to Eddie Gold.
Anything good I say always comesfrom other people.
Um Ellie Goldwright suggeststhat um people love change.
(37:01):
You know, I I had I got married,I chose to get married, I chose
to have a baby, I you know,people love change, but only
when that change is animprovement.
So if people are resistingchange, it's not because they're
bad people, they're frustratingpeople, they're just dang, dang
annoying.
Um, they're just they areresisting change because they
don't see the improvementinvolved in them.
(37:21):
And so by getting people toscrutinize the change early, by
getting them involved in theprocess, although it's scary,
um, and it takes a verydifferent approach.
You're sweating more now, so youbleed less later.
If you really care about thischange succeeding, once you get
people involved at thebeginning, they scrutinize it,
they improved it, theyunderstand the reason why you're
(37:42):
doing what you're doing, andthey're able to also input into
that, and therefore design thechange to be more successful.
You don't just have a moresuccessful uh design coming out
that you can try, you also havepeople who abort into it, and
the change will take on a lifeof its own.
So I think there's a huge reasonto involve people at the very
beginning.
You can, you know, not justtheir viewpoints, not just their
(38:04):
input to make it more effective,but also you know, you'll you'll
have them as part of uh thechange itself.
SPEAKER_00 (38:13):
I'm reminded of design thinking.
So you come up with the initialidea, but you don't finesse it
until you've given other peoplea chance to have their voice
heard and to get involved.
So you're co-opting them earlyand you're ready, you're you're
prepared to make those littleadjustments so that the final
outcome is something thateverybody who is involved has uh
(38:33):
had a chance to see, to commenton, as a proof of concept, and
then you develop the thing.
So it makes perfect sense.
It sounds very smart, like asmart way to do things.
SPEAKER_01 (38:44):
I think there's um I think there's a strong
connection between the two, bothof them are visual.
Um the theory of constraints,particularly uh it's all it
really is is based on um logic.
It's just uses logic,philosophy, or science, really.
Um, so that you it makes youquestion your idea using a few
simple rules like um coherence.
(39:05):
Like, you know, your idea has tohas to um fit together.
If it doesn't even fit togetherwith itself, then it's not gonna
work.
Um so yeah, absolutely.
It is very simple and veryvisual and gets people involved
early.
So yeah, I I could see yeah,connection design thinking makes
a lot of sense.
Yeah, that's good, good cool.
SPEAKER_00 (39:22):
What's the one takeaway you want our
introverted listeners to learnfrom our conversation?
SPEAKER_01 (39:29):
I th I think I think it's what you said, which is you
know what we both coalesced on,I think, a lot uh in during this
chat and our previous chat,Serena, was that people are
good.
People do things for a reason.
Um if we forget people are good.
SPEAKER_04 (39:46):
We if we think people are bad, it doesn't
there's nothing we can do aboutit.
SPEAKER_01 (39:53):
We've reached, you know, that's that's the end of
the that's the end of theconversation, that's the end of
us being able to change things.
Uh as Ellie Goldwright says, wewill just bitch and loin and
that forgive my words, butthat's all we can do.
Whereas if we accept people aregood and that people do things
for a reason, it means there'ssomething to learn.
Um, and there's something,there's there's a way forward
together.
(40:13):
This that people are doing wedidn't understand that reason,
we can talk to them and we cankind of um improve things.
I think it's fundamentalattribution bias.
Um, and that's what Iexperienced.
When I was working withextroverts, I was like, oh,
these are bad people.
Why am I paired with these?
And then I just I'd just bitch amoan and I'd uh not really make
any progress.
When I suddenly realized, hey,these guys are really good.
(40:35):
They're doing things for areason.
It gave me an avenue to improvethings.
And it was only then that itgave me the avenue for improving
things.
I had to accept these peoplewere good, um, which is you know
silly of me.
Um, but uh so um I guess thefinal thing uh uh uh the
takeaway is is for me is peopleare good, people do things for a
reason.
Um, and that means that whenthey're not behaving the way you
(40:58):
expect it, whether they'reextroverts, where are they just
you know different, differentaverts?
Um by understanding why peopledo the way they do and assuming
they're good and they're doingthings for a reason, it gives
you uh the opportunity to seekto understand before being
understood to understand whythey're doing the way things the
way are, they why they're doingthings the way they are, and
therefore how you can worktogether with them and how they
(41:20):
can work together with you to dothings better.
SPEAKER_00 (41:24):
Beautiful.
And what's the best way forpeople to connect with you and
find out more about your work?
SPEAKER_01 (41:29):
Yeah, sure.
I have a weird domain name.
Uh it's curious copy.club, notdot com, but dot club.
I should have got with donggovernment.com.
Um and uh there's I like towrite articles and there's a
free book there about um how wecan help organizations get out
of their own way.
Um but also if you want to havea virtual coffee, I'd like to
learn from other people, justchat.
So um please, please come sayhi.
SPEAKER_00 (41:51):
Beautiful.
We'll make sure to have yourlink in the show notes for
people to connect with you atthe Curious Coffee Club.
So thank you so much, Simon, forjoining us today, sharing your
time, your wisdom about thetheory of constraints, about
what it's like in the consultingindustry.
About how introverts canactually uh uh arise by using
(42:13):
our own strengths, but also byuh recognizing and appreciating
the strengths of people withdifferent personalities and how
we can all work together for thetopical goal of optimizing
what's happening within our ownteams, our own departments, our
own organizations and usingscientific thinking.
(42:34):
But I think the thing that Ireally would take away from
today's conversation is what yousaid about people always doing
things for a reason.
I guess because we don't knowthat reason initially uh simply
a reason to get curious.
I think you already came upquite a few times about
conversation today.
So start with the assumptionthat people are good people.
Get curious about why they dothe things they do, why they uh
(42:57):
show up the way they do, whythey speak, or communicate or
act the way they do, and at thesame time communicate why we
think the way we do.
And then we can find some roomin the middle to you know to
collaborate for that callingoutcome.
So thank you so much for joiningus today.
SPEAKER_01 (43:12):
Thank you very much, Serena.
Yes, be curious before you'relovely to be with you.
SPEAKER_00 (43:17):
If you're looking for ways to become visible
without having to actextroverted, subscribe to my
newsletter, The VisibleIntrovert, at Serenalo.com.au.
See you on the next episode.
I'm so grateful that you're heretoday.
If you found this contentvaluable, please share it on
your social media channels andsubscribe to the show on your
(43:38):
favorite listening platform.
Together we can help moreintroverts thrive.
To receive more upliftingcontent like this, connect with
me on Instagram at Serenaloo,Quiet Warrior Coach.
Thank you for sharing your timeand your energy with me.
See you on the next episode.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.