February 25, 2025 • 52 mins
What if the secret to impactful leadership and thriving relationships lies in embracing honesty, even when it's uncomfortable? On the Uncommon Leader Podcast, we sit down with Todd Holzman, CEO and founder of Holzman Leadership, who shares a deeply personal story from his childhood that shaped his unwavering commitment to truthfulness—a lesson passed down by his father. As we explore Todd's upcoming book, "The Power of Candor," he provides insightful strategies for navigating the "honesty dilemma," where truthfulness and relationship preservation often collide.
This episode unpacks the real cost of sidestepping honest conversations, both in personal and professional spheres. Drawing from pivotal moments, including a significant leadership lesson from 1998 and a consultancy experience with Red Bull, we underscore the transformative power of candid dialogue. Todd's stories illuminate how confronting the fear of negative outcomes can lead to enhanced performance, conflict resolution, and averting unnecessary chaos in any arena, whether at home or in the workplace.
Diving into the intricacies of communication, we highlight the teachings of social scientist Chris Argyris and dissect the "candor gap" prevalent in healthcare and sales industries. Our conversation touches on emotional intelligence and the SIPA framework for difficult discussions, reinforcing the importance of introspection and self-awareness. Todd also reveals his motivations behind creating an app to democratize high-quality communication training, aiming to equip leaders and individuals with the tools to handle real-world conversations effectively and authentically. Join us as we challenge the norms of communication, advocating for a more honest and meaningful exchange in every interaction.
Thanks for listening in to the Uncommon Leader Podcast. Please take just a minute to share this podcast with that someone you know that you thought of when you heard this episode. One of the most valuable things you can do is to rate the podcast and leave a review. You can do that on Apple podcasts, or rate the podcast on Spotify or any other platform you listen.
Did you know that many of the things that I discuss on the Uncommon Leader Podcast are subjects that I coach other leaders and organizations ? If you would be interested in having me discuss 1:1 or group coaching with you, or know someone who is looking to move from Underperforming to Uncommon in their business or life, I would love to chat with you. Click this link to set up a FREE CALL to discuss how coaching might benefit you and your team)
Until next time, Go and Grow Champions!!
Connect with me
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I'm trying to encourage people, inspire people
to get to Cangar as well andhelping them make a choice about
whether they want to amplifythat in their lives through a
rigorous investigation of howthey're doing now, what the
unintended consequences are ofthat and the untapped
opportunities and what could bepossible for them at work and
(00:23):
lives for their people, theirteams, their families, all of it
.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
This is the Uncommon Leader Podcast.
I'm your host, john Gallagher,and I am excited about our guest
today.
Once we get into thisconversation and you leave today
, you're going to have many tipsthat are going to help you
communicate better with yourteam, with your family, with
your friends, and make a lot ofthose things happen.
So I'm excited about that.
I have Todd Holtzman with me,who has dedicated his career to
(00:54):
helping individuals andorganizations improve their
communication and relationships.
He's the CEO and founder ofHoltzman Leadership, and his
upcoming book, the Power ofCandor, is set to revolutionize
how we approach difficultconversations.
So, todd, I hope that wasgetting you teed up as well as I
could and getting ourconversation started.
How are you doing today?
Speaker 1 (01:15):
I am great.
I'm great, Sean.
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Absolutely Well, I won't give you any break.
Getting started, I'll give youthe same question I always ask
my first-time guests on theUncommon Leader podcast.
That's really to ask you totell me a story from your
childhood that still impacts whoyou are today, as a person or
as a leader.
Now we talked a little bitbefore the show about our age.
You've got to go back a littleways here.
I'm going to test your memory,but we won't reveal that
(01:38):
completely what we are.
Let's just say we're mature.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Yeah, what we are, but let's just say we're, we're
mature, yeah.
So let's see, it's probablycirca 1975, 76, and my dad had
brought home sony trinitroncolor 19 I mean, that was the
(02:04):
big time for TVs back then andyou know, it was kind of like
this prized possession of thefamily my father was at work and
my mom was in the kitchen doingwhatever, and I saw this nail
file and I looked at the screenand I looked at the nail file.
For some reason I thought nailfile and screen, why not?
(02:26):
So I scraped it.
And then I was just curious,you know, and apparently very
stupid, and I saw it scraped thescreen.
I was like, oh, I threw thenail file like a smoking gun
away, ran to my room and juststarted playing, know uh, to
soothe myself.
And then, you know, father comeshome later, I mean many hours
(02:50):
later, and comes to my room andwould ask me so you know how's?
How's your day been?
Oh, pretty good, uh, anythinginteresting happen?
No, not nothing, nothing Icould think of.
He goes, are you sure?
And I start thinking I do thatlike something's up, I don't
(03:13):
know what it is.
And then he goes and it's not,it's close to christmas and he
says santa doesn't like littleboys that lie.
And then I'm like like I havethe flashback.
Oh, my God, I'm so sorry.
I saw the nail file, I saw thescreen, I hit it, I didn't mean
to do it and I'm just crying,crying, crying, crying.
(03:36):
And you know, and he consoledme and he said it's not what you
did.
And he said it's not what youdid.
It's that the important thingis for you to be honest about
what you did.
And that was kind of a veryearly childhood memory about the
(03:58):
importance of honesty and hereally drilled that into me.
You know, say what you think,stand up for yourself.
Uh, don't lie, tell the truth.
The problem is is that it wasyou know he was fine when I was
doing that with other people,but when I was doing it with him
, you know we didn't see thingsthe same way, didn't go so well,
(04:20):
and my mom would often she was,was more kind of emotionally
reactive, would kind of react ina bad way.
So I often felt, you know, if Iwasn't honest I'd feel bad
right, because my dad had kindof inculcated this into me.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
But then if?
Speaker 1 (04:40):
I wasn't, things would go badly.
And I hadn't put like a term toit until probably 20 years
later, which I called thehonesty dilemma, and that has
informed my life and my workever since, because I think a
lot of people feel that wayevery day.
We all know, I mean, no parentwould ever tell their kid,
(05:03):
listen, the way to get ahead istry to like screw up the world
and lie as much as you possiblycan.
Most parents, either explicitlyor or implicitly, are trying to
teach their kids like try to dosome good in the world, and and
and and and tell the truth.
Um, but we all feel binds aboutthat leaders, managers,
(05:24):
salespeople because if we makethe truth the thing that we
prioritize, it's going to damagerelationships.
But then if we're too concernedabout damaging relationships,
then often the truthconversations are where candor
goes to die, and so, yeah,that's the early childhood story
(05:44):
.
And so so, yeah, that's theearly childhood story.
And since then, um, since I was, since 1994, I've dedicated my
life to helping people uh, solvethis dilemma and god, I love
the connection, love theconnection.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
That story, yeah, I remember again, I told you
before we got an episode.
I got you know like like fourlisteners total.
Three of them them are mymother, mother-in-law and wife
that listen to the show all thetime.
But I think about that and Ilisten back or have these videos
back as a kid, as I'm growingup as well, and I remember mom
just saying you know of all thethings, just don't lie to me,
(06:17):
tell me the truth and keep itout there.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
So I can understand, but then again you'll probably
hear if you have nothing nice tosay, don't say it.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
So and you'll probably hear if you have
nothing nice to say what Philcompletely said Don't say
anything and choose to saynothing.
So notice the next message.
There's the dilemma.
Right, that's the dilemma.
Tell me more about that honestydilemma, because it is a
barrier, right, for us inimproved communication.
The other side is, what I heardas well is that sometimes the
truth hurts and maybe there'soverlap with those two things.
But you mentioned the honestydilemma overlap with those two
(06:47):
things.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
But you mentioned the honesty dilemma.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I wason a it's on a podcast yesterday
actually, where someone askedme uh, kind of a similar
question, but not not sofine-tuned as that one, and I
mean, so I think I explained it.
It's like if you're not honest,bad things happen.
If you are honest you're nothonest, bad things happen.
And if you are honest, you'reafraid bad things are going to
happen, right?
And the question the guy askedme yesterday was do you think
(07:12):
that people avoid having, say,honest conversations because of
the risks, right, that theythink are embedded in having
those conversations and the badthings that could result from
them?
And I said yes in part.
But what people aren't reallyaware of of all the bad things
(07:34):
that are already happeningbecause they're avoiding the
truth of things in theseconversations?
Their relationships are alreadysuboptimized, their results are
already suboptimized, they'realready holding on to something
which is bothering them and sothey're feeling frustrated and
disappointed and demotivated andall of these kinds of things.
(07:55):
And that's a big reason whypeople avoid having honest
conversations, because if theywere aware of all the problems
the avoidance of honesty wascreating or that we're creating.
English is my first language,but sometimes grammar escapes me
(08:15):
.
They would be less likely to,much less likely to avoid them.
And then of course there's, youknow, the competence to ensure
those conversations go well.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
We got a mentor that has said this to me before and
it's one I've read from.
I've not met him before inperson, but it's from reading
his stuff.
He said the most expensive timeis the time between when you
know you need to have thatconversation and when you
actually carry that conversationout in an effective way.
Conversation and when youactually carry that conversation
out in an effective way andthen all that time in between.
There there is such anemotional barrier that exists
(08:50):
inside of that.
But also if it's a piece offeedback that you need somebody
to improve and you're justafraid to tell them, you're
losing all that productivity,you're losing all that
profitability, whatever.
It is in effectiveness thatyou're losing as well.
But that becomes the mostexpensive time.
I remember I had one of themost profound-.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Who said that?
By the way, that's brilliant.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Oh, that's a John Maxwell quote that I read inside
of his book, and I can'tremember which one it was,
because, unfortunately, thatentire road is out there, but it
is.
I mean, it's so true, right, Ihad a conversation, and I say
this I had an employee when Ifirst got into leadership back
in 1998 that I wanted to have atough conversation with and I
just didn't know how to have it.
I finally learned a framework tohave that conversation after
(09:31):
going to a week-long leadershipevent.
If this is all that I got outof that event, it was powerful.
I was ready to terminate thisindividual because he couldn't
get along with other people.
His behaviors were bad and Icouldn't figure out a way to
tell him.
I just wanted to be nicebecause I didn't want the guy to
be mad at me.
He was the same age as me, wecame from the same class and all
those things.
But I ended up being able, witha framework, to have that tough
conversation with him and heliterally said he said that has
(09:54):
got to be the best feedback I'veever gotten.
That's 1998.
That individual is still withthat same company now as an
executive director for theorganization and I was getting
ready to push him out the door.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
So I remember, um, I've got a few things I want to
say.
Sometimes you just got to pickone, john, you know well, I mean
good for you, um, you know,allowing the truth to be your
ally and having some faith thatthe best that could possibly
happen will be as a result ofprioritizing the truth, and good
(10:29):
for you for having faith inthis person as well, that they
could hear it.
We often give each other waytoo little credit and we
attribute too much weakness toeach other than is actually
warranted as a general rule.
But what it reminds me of andwhen I can mention clients rule.
But what it reminds me of, andwhen I can mention clients I can
.
When I can't, I can't.
We're working at my team and Iwere working at Red Bull years
(10:53):
ago consulting them.
We're in this beautiful skilodge in Park City, utah, called
Stein Erickson's and we ranthese things called bull shops.
We had to brand it properly forwhat they were doing, we'd have
like three and a half days inthe mountains.
It was ridiculously luxuriousand privileged to be able to
even do that.
And we had a bunch of the Iguess it was the GMs or
something around the table,running different geographies,
(11:14):
and one of the GMs is ready,just like you, ready to get rid
of this guy, and they're allagreeing with him.
I was like okay, so, if Iunderstand it, this is what you
think his gap is.
X, is that right?
Uh-huh, and this is what yourdata for this is.
Here's your examples.
Y, that's right, and this isall the problems that his
(11:35):
behavior is creating.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Z.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Yes, so have you told him all this?
No, so you're ready to fire aguy?
Speaker 2 (11:49):
because he's not behaving these ways.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
He's behaving in this way, which I can understand
right, because it is creatingproblems for sure, but you never
actually told him the truthabout these things and you're
blaming him for beingunchangeable and resistant to
change.
(12:11):
I mean, you actually can't makethat claim unless you've
actually given him the feedback.
So what you're doing is listen.
It may be the case that thehorse has already left the barn
and it's too late to recover thesituation, but I think you do
have to question the morality ofyour decision in light of this.
And it's interesting, it'sfunny.
(12:32):
I was angry about it.
I remember it.
I was a good bit younger thenand this is like 15 years ago so
.
But they agreed and he had theconversation and the person was
(12:53):
open to it and he turned his.
He turned his behavior around,his performance improved.
They didn't fire him and it'slike, yeah, uh, look at how much
chaos could have been avoidedhad they had the conversation
earlier.
And had they not look howcoincidental at all.
This guy's whole life was inthe balance.
(13:15):
And had these guys not come toutah and had that conversation
not occurred, all these badthings would have happened and,
of course, these guys wouldnever have learned anything
either?
The leaders themselves, andthis is why will I screw up your
next question or can I just saya little more about this candor
(13:37):
thing?
Todd, go ahead, come on.
So, okay, because I know wetalked a little bit before and
you spent a lot of time inhealthcare and consulting to
kind of healthcare entities, andwe have too.
We spend a lot of time withseveral global faculty 13 people
, more than half of whom areoverseas and the rest are here
stateside, lucky enough to notonly train leaders at very high
(14:08):
levels, like senior levels, likeCEOs of pharmas and things like
this, but also customer-facingteams, salespeople, msls,
patient access people all thelike, and we have had a kind of
privileged access to the waythey actually conduct these
conversations with customers.
(14:29):
And when we develop people, weask them bring to us a customer
conversation.
That didn't produce the resultthat you wanted and based upon
the work of one of my, my idols,uh, chris argers from harvard.
So chris taught at the businessschool, the law school, the
(14:52):
graduate school of education,where I studied, the kennedy
school of government, where Itaught.
For those of you who areinterested in him, imagine, uh,
imagine, I was going to say theEinstein of the social sciences,
a-r-g-y-r-i-s.
Chris wrote a bunch of stuff inthe Harvard Business Review.
I don't know.
(15:13):
He wrote I don't know a fewhundred articles, 30 books,
received 14 honorary doctoratesfor his massive contributions to
management, leadership,organizational behavior,
research, education,anthropology.
I mean amazing human being andhe developed a foolproof tool
(15:36):
that we use that helps you.
It's the best.
Next thing to like micingpeople up or filming them when
they're actually having realconversation.
So the point of me telling youthis is we get very accurate
data on how they're reallybehaving during these critical
conversations with customers.
Fine, the reason I'm explainingall this is that in every single
(15:57):
instance the culprit was acandor gap that they were either
not expressing important thingsthey were thinking and feeling
to the customer and or askingthe kind of questions that were
necessary so that the customerwould open up and share the
(16:19):
truth of what they were thinkingwith them.
That's number one, and numbertwo, by the way, largely unaware
that that was the reason whythe conversations weren't having
the impact that they wanted.
I'm not saying completelyunaware, just for the most part
unaware.
They would mostly say theexplanation was largely external
(16:40):
they're not giving me the timeI need, they're very busy.
They prefer the other therapy,insert explanation.
I wouldn't call them excuses.
I think those things are alsotrue.
But here's what the consequencesare, and this is why I have I
was just writing a post on thistoday have made Canada the cause
(17:03):
of my life is because the humantoll is huge and the level of
human suffering is incrediblyunderappreciated.
So we'll talk about threelevels of suffering For the
(17:23):
customer, for the salespeople,in this case, themselves, and
for the patient.
So the customer maybe this is ahealthcare, you know, hcp or
somebody like this feels likethe conversation has been a
waste of their time and they'renot getting any value out of it.
Because if you're not sayinganything valuable, you know.
If it's provocative, why wouldit be interesting and useful to
(17:44):
them?
Fine, and so, of course, thenif you're a sales rep, your
access to them goes down,because they don't spend time on
things they don't considervaluable.
As a sales rep, you're miserable, right, at least with some set
of customers.
You're feeling very frustrated,you're disappointed, you're
demotivated, you're deflated,all of it.
(18:04):
And getting up out of bed dayin, day out, man, talking to
these customers when they wantto give you a few minutes, I
mean I couldn't do it.
But then you start to thinkabout the patients.
Well, the consequences of thisis that in these instances, the
patient ain't getting themedicine they need.
(18:25):
Oh, that's right, all right,and some of these patients you
know.
The best case scenario isthere's an opportunity to
improve a patient's life, a lifeand it's being squandered or
delayed.
The middle case is they'resuffering from some horrible
(18:46):
disease.
They eventually get themedicine, but they suffer longer
than necessary.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
The worst case scenario is they actually die
and when we've had back to thattime gap, by the way, too back
to that time, how long it takesto get the information they need
yep it's you're saying thatpartially triggered for me to
say this.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
And so and by the way , this is not my analysis, it is
our analysis, but it's theiranalysis so we take them through
a process of taking a hard lookat their case studies.
We ask them so what is it thatyou did or didn't do that's
preventing you from makingprogress?
After we help them understandwhat good looks like so they
could better analyze themselves,and they end up being pretty
(19:25):
insightful and they say what arethe unintended negative
consequences on customers, youand patients?
What I'm telling you is whatthey said, and so you know how
this work can be, john is, youhave a sense of mission about it
(19:52):
, but you keep gettingre-enrolled in it, because your
clients teach you things thatmake the difficult work of
helping people get better atthis worthwhile.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
Well, Todd, look, I mean, I love the passion that
you have for making that happenIn the world of healthcare it
exists Again in that consultingspace that I've been in as well.
How many times, frankly, aphysician and I'm not taking
shots of physicians they got atough job.
But in a three-minuteconversation they have with a
patient, how much time do theyhave to use candor with a
(20:16):
patient that say, if you don'tchange your behavior, you are
going to die at some point intime, because we're all going to
die?
But they don't want to havethose conversations, they don't
want the patient to be upsetwith them, and I make up that
that's one of the biggestbarriers to candor is the desire
, whether it's a leader, as afamily member, as a physician,
whatever that is to be liked,and we don't want someone to be
(20:39):
upset with us.
And so I have two questions.
The candor piece of it.
Let's even go down to thebasics of that.
How do you define candor incommunication?
And then the second piece ofthat is what attributes are
needed to be effective in thatdelivery, Because I make up.
I could also communicate withcandor, but do it by yelling at
(21:01):
someone or whatever that is.
So how do you define it?
And then, what are theattributes needed to be
effective at it?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Okay, let me address the first question.
If I lose the thread in thesecond question, just please
bring it back so maybe I couldsay what it isn't first.
So it isn't about sayingeverything you think and feel.
My partner, olga, who has areality show sitcom that's on
(21:33):
now on Apple TV Okay, shamelessplug called Olga Knows Best and
unfortunately I'm in it becauseit's about her life, so I have
no choice.
She would love that.
Right.
Let me teach all of our clientsto just be fully self-expressed
, say whatever you think andfeel.
Great for a reality show man,but not great for real life.
(21:56):
And actually a managing directorof talent at one of our FTSE
100 banking clients told us thatwe tried something like that.
We instituted a value years ago, before we ever came along,
called something like straighttalk or whatever it was, or
direct conversations, and shesaid it gave license to every
sociopath to say what theythought and felt, regardless of
how unkind it was.
(22:17):
So what we like to say and Ilike to say what they thought
and felt, regardless of howunkind it was.
So what we like to say and Ilike to say, like candor without
compassion can be cruel, it'sequally okay.
It's equally not about only yousaying what you think and feel,
because none of us asindividuals are omniscient, and
(22:39):
so a piece of truth, hopefully,or some aspect of reality exists
in my head.
But we've all got pieces of thepuzzle and we have to combine
these puzzle pieces to form amore complete picture of what's
actually true.
And I was talking to thedefinition I'm going to give you
(23:01):
.
I have shamelessly stolen it,but it came from one of our
clients.
So Ed Jenkins I Ed British guy.
I think he still lives in theUK.
I think he might be working forAstraZeneca now, I'm not sure,
but he was working for adifferent farmer when we worked
together.
I think he might be working forAstraZeneca now, I'm not sure,
but he was working for adifferent farmer when we worked
(23:21):
together and we had gone throughthis.
He had gone through thisprogram.
He was the franchise head forimportant therapy for the United
Kingdom and I think upreporting into him.
He had kind of commercialleaders and salespeople and he
had medical leaders andsalespeople.
So he and all these differentlevels went through our kind of
candor program and it delivereda great result.
You know, despite the companygoing through a big reorg,
(23:43):
despite them losing their withthe FDA.
They didn't get the approvalfor the earlier line of therapy.
People kept using what theylearned and they grew orders
which was amazing and I didn'tthink would happen because
you're in the middle of reorgand then you don't get approved
(24:06):
for earlier therapy and thenyour competitor does, and all
the HTPs are looking at thecompetitor's drug and say why
are you going to buy anythingfrom you, okay?
So I asked Ed amongst otherscan you help me understand why
the program delivered?
And it seemed like it delivereda result.
Well, first of all, do youthink it did, Okay?
And if so, what actuallyhappened?
I mean, I have some sense ofwhy it happens, but we're not
(24:27):
there watching people whatthey're doing with it.
They're not inside of people'sheads, so I don't know 100% what
they're actually doing.
And this is the definition ofcandor.
That now is kind of our Northstar as a firm.
And he said I always thought ofthese conversations that either
something to win or to avoid.
Because now I understand thatcandor is treating every
(24:51):
conversation as a collaborativesearch for the truth in order to
make things better.
And I have to say, john, thatreally hit me two years ago, I
guess maybe two and a half andit's like wow, somebody finally
explained to me what the heckI've been doing and I was very
(25:13):
grateful for it.
And so that's how we think ofit, and I think this is why this
is a mind shift for people.
Um, because in some ways theconversations seem tougher for
people because of how they'rethinking about the conversation,
like, oh, I've got to convincethem they're wrong and I'm right
(25:35):
.
But if you think a bit, as thisconversation is meant to do
some good in the world, maybeit's also a way I'm trying to
serve this person as well.
So you're trying to servesomething outside of yourself
this person, the team, theimpact this team has on
(25:59):
important things and people thenit kind of shifts your
orientation.
So then, and then if you startto think of.
Okay, I'm trying to do somegood through the conversation,
but I have to treat it as acollaborative search for the
truth and I have to have kind ofcourageous humility.
This is maybe this is avariable, one of the variables
(26:19):
you were talking about oraspects of it.
It's like, okay, I have thecourage to express the truth of
what I think, but I have to havethe humility to be open to and
to even invite people to tell mewhere I'm wrong, because what I
care about is not being right.
I care care about what's true.
So then a lot of you who arelistening and thinking about
(26:41):
having tough conversations itdoesn't mean it makes the
conversation easy, by no means.
You are right to be worriedabout these things.
It's not in your head.
You don't need somepsychotropics to help you deal
with your anxiety.
Most of the time your limbicsystem is telling you something,
probably for most often forsome good reasons.
(27:02):
But if you think of it, if youkind of orient yourself that way
the truth on behalf of servicethen I think it totally affects
the way you approach it.
Then you can say to somebodylisten, I'm worried, some of the
things that you're doing arekind of damaging your
credibility with the team, whichI know is important to you and
(27:26):
may impact your ability to kindof, you know, get the kind of
bonus.
You're looking at the end ofthe year and I've been thinking
about that and I got some thingsto share with you.
That, I think, could be helpful.
You interested in talking aboutit?
I don't see why that.
It's not that that conversationwon't be upsetting, but it
doesn't mean the person will beupset with you.
(27:48):
They'll be upset with thereality of the situation.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Hey listeners, I want to take a quick moment to share
something special with you.
Many of the topics anddiscussions we have on this
podcast are areas where Iprovide coaching and consulting
services for individuals andorganizations.
If you've been inspired by ourconversation and are seeking a
catalyst for change in your ownlife or within your team, I
invite you to visitcoachjohngallaghercom forward
(28:16):
slash free call to sign up for afree coaching call with me.
It's an opportunity for us toconnect, discuss your unique
challenges and explore howcoaching or consulting can
benefit you and your team.
Okay, let's get back to theshow.
That's awesome.
So I love that.
I mean what I'm hearing yousaying.
The attributes that need to bethere courage and humility are
(28:40):
the kind of entry If you getinto the conversation.
You've got to have both thosethings ultimately overcoming.
What Mark Twain would say isthat we can make up a lot of bad
things that are about to happen90% of them which will never
occur in terms of the quote thathe has, but there still may be
a bad response to it, but thepiece that comes after that is
(29:04):
even that specific behavioralobservation that goes along with
it.
So I have courage, I havehumility, but I better have
specifics to be able tocommunicate with the individual.
Back to your point not to beright, not to be right
necessarily, but so that theycan take an action from it and
do something different.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Well, let's use your framework, right?
You were telling me a littlebit about this before.
What was the framework?
You?
Speaker 2 (29:20):
had situation, behavior, impact and action.
What do I need you to do?
Going forward Yep.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
All right.
So let's take the first three,because if you dump the, the A
is certainly important in thatframework If you introduce the A
too soon, then what happens tothe leaders?
This is one of the big trapsthat we see in the data set of
like 50,000 conversations thatwe've studied People jump to
action too quickly before theyhave agreement on the problem.
So you're trying to getagreement on the SIP right for
(29:48):
situation, impact and behavioralexamples.
Is that right?
Did I get that right?
Okay, fine, so I think that's awonderful framework.
You can see in that example thatI was giving, all I did was put
a frame around it.
That's right.
Right, it's like I'm expressingmy intent of sharing all this
stuff with you, and this issometimes when converse without
(30:12):
the frame, if you throw it.
I'm not saying this is alwaystrue, but sometimes it'll be
true If you go.
I got some feedback for you.
Here's the situation, you know,here's the impact, here's the
behavioral examples.
Great, if you don't put theframe around it.
I want to talk to you aboutsomething.
Yes, right.
You know that I think is, andsometimes you can name the
(30:33):
impact that is havingpotentially this impact on you
and things that you and we careabout, then they could easily
attribute to you're just tryingto give them a hard time, right,
you know?
And when you're receiving andoftentimes when we're talking to
(30:53):
each other no-transcriptemotional to some degree,
they're going to be provocative,they might be upsetting,
because if we're talking, if wedisagree with each other, well,
that's what we can do over abeer, right.
But if I'm talking aboutsomething important, that
probably I'm not sure if this isright, but let me say it out
(31:15):
loud and see what you think.
I'm probably talking to youbecause I don't think you're
either taking action onsomething properly or I don't
think you're aware of somethingthat you need to be aware of.
Or I don't think.
Maybe you are aware of it, butyou aren't taking it seriously
enough.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
I think you're spot on.
I often refer to some of thoseconversations.
If you're not getting a littleblood on the carpet, it's
probably not really worth theconversation.
And to your point that happensI mean fights happen at your
point Drinking it.
Right, you throw a beer mug atthe other person, kind of thing
that's proverbial.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
So I'm fine for conversations where we're
shooting the shit, that's fun,right, or we're in the UK, just
recreational.
But if I'm talking to you aboutsomething that matters to me,
it means, by definition, I don'tthink it's mattering enough to
you.
I don't think it's matteringenough to you, I don't think
you're dealing with it properlyor even think you're seeing it.
(32:13):
So embedded in these importantconversations is going to be
conflict, you know, bydefinition.
Now, because of that, becausethe conversation will almost
always generate some discomfortfor people.
When people feel uncomfortable,they're more likely to make
negative attributions about yourmotives and about what your
(32:33):
intent of having theconversation is.
So if you do some good framing,it kind of cleans that up,
provided they believe you.
But also this is what ChrisVoss talks about from the Black
Swan Group it gives people amoment to kind of brace
themselves and get ready for itso they don't get hijacked by
(32:54):
their limbic systems.
So this is why I make it andit's not the only thing we talk
about, certainly not but why Imake a big point around framing
before you dive into the kind ofsedo model, you know it's so
funny it was excellent, by theway, you and I and I love the,
the context you've shared interms of the action coming in
(33:17):
too early.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
So I had a conversation just a couple days
ago with a coaching client uh,who's gonna have a tough
conversation.
I said how you gonna start thisconversation.
Take me through how you'regoing to start it.
So I'm going to ask as soon asI walk in, I'm going to ask him
are they in or not?
I'm like stop, that's theaction portion of this.
Let's get to this to your point.
Let's put a frame around thisconversation before you bring
(33:38):
them to are you in or not, kindof thing, because that's the
action you want.
You want some differentbehavior.
You go in that aggressive andyou are going to have a fight on
your hands because they'regoing to go, you know, into
defense mode.
Uh, all all these things aregoing to happen.
Whatever's coming out is anattack on me that's right in my
wording.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Yeah, that's right.
I mean, you know, uh, you know,you gotta, you gotta earn the
right to say that, yes, exactlyright.
These conversations.
There is a temperature at whichthe ingredients need to be
baked before they cohere, and wewere talking a little bit
before, and if you don't want totalk about this, fine.
(34:17):
Is this the example where this?
Speaker 2 (34:21):
person's worried about them blowing up.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Yeah, absolutely so let's look at that.
For a second right, theperson's concerned that the
person they're going to get thisfeedback to is going to blow up
.
So then they do something whichensures they will blow up.
Yep, so what's reallyinteresting is, you know why is
that?
Because I would bet that atsome level, he knows better.
(34:54):
The reason I say that is I'llmake two bets with you, one
which we will not be able tovalidate, one.
If somebody else were going todo the same thing and came to
him for coaching or her, he'dprobably say don't do that.
so it means he has a rules inhis head that says doing that is
a violation of some rule, right, like, don't jump to action
(35:17):
before we actually discuss theproblem rule, and most people
have that in their head.
But I also my other bet whichwe could validate is I bet you
would have told him that heprobably got it pretty quickly
is that true?
Speaker 2 (35:31):
oh, I think so absolutely.
I mean again, if we go backthrough that conversation, he's
gonna say that makes sense,right, I shouldn't do it so?
Speaker 1 (35:38):
so what?
What is that quick?
It means he a priority.
Before he ever heard from you,had a rule in his head that said
not to do something like that.
So then the question becomes soif all that's true, then why
does he violate his own rule?
And because the reason I'mbringing this up is because what
we have found, so this guy,chris Argyris, upon whose
(36:01):
extraordinary research noteverything, but much of what we
do is based.
So what Chris I'll give a verylayman's explanation of it
discovered is that we've got ourprinciples and we've got our
programming, and the two areoften in contradiction to each
other, contradiction to eachother.
(36:24):
So people believe in I shouldhave the courage to express what
I say, what I think.
I should be deeply curiousabout what other people think.
I should also see theseconversations as collaborations,
where we're trying to makesense out of reality together
and, on that basis, trying tofigure out what to do about it
Right.
So we see, believe these things.
(36:47):
What chris discovered when hefirst did this research in the
70s with 15, 15 000 people we'venow, we've now since worked
with all 50 000 um is that whenpeople have any kind of concern
about that, there's going to bea conflict, that the
conversation might be upsetting,that it might be threatening
and or embarrassing anythinglike this, that these principles
(37:13):
get short-circuited and getreplaced with programming that
drives people to keep things toocomfortable, that makes them
want to win and not make thingstoo competitive, win and not
lose the conversation and besuper controlling in the
conversation.
And a clinical psychologist I'mfond of, a guy named Jordan
(37:34):
Peterson, which I'm sure a lotof listeners have heard of says
that our principles are storedin a different part of our brain
than is our programming.
Oh, wow, okay, so we can readthese great books, watch YouTube
videos, even listen to us talk,and that will hopefully improve
(37:55):
the warehouse of information inour brains that stores our
principles.
But the programming, when wefeel that the conversation may
be threatening and orembarrassing for myself and or
other people, gets activated andblocks it.
And this is why the leadershipdevelopment industry at least I
(38:15):
would assert it's a $60 billionindustry worldwide.
Research has been done onwhether it changes leadership
behavior.
Research has been done onwhether it changes leadership
behavior.
Not so much.
It's because it's not becausewe're teaching people the wrong
things or we're trying todevelop them the wrong things.
There may be problems there too,and I think there are, but
let's assume everything wetaught them was perfect and if
(38:37):
only they could apply it theywould be better leaders.
The problem is the application,because the overprotective
program is what we've coined.
It blocks people from doingthis.
Sure, you have to help peoplebecome aware of.
So why is it?
They violate their ownprinciples and in your guy's
case, so let's assume he has therule not to do that.
(38:57):
Why does he do it Nevertheless.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (39:01):
I think it's comfort.
I'm moving, moving back into aspace of comfort.
If someone distracts or movesyou off of your point, uh,
you're going to have a tendencyto go back to your natural uh
programming that's his comfort.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
But he but he.
What he's doing is a much more.
I gotta know right now you inor out?
No, no, effing about right.
So that's his comfort zone.
But it sounds to me like he'strying to exert a lot of control
over the conversation becausehis theory is I'm worried about
(39:37):
this person blowing up.
So if I can kind of establishsome dominance, and exert some
fear out then.
Then I can contain the upset.
Speaker 2 (39:49):
You might be right, todd, absolutely.
I don't want to rule that outeither.
To your point, by the way,these things often team up.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
It's like a hybrid of comfort and control.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
You used the term emotional.
I mean, that's one of thethings that I really get with
them as well.
It's like, how do you conveyemotion without being emotional?
Uh, it's very important.
How do you show them you'repassionate, that you care so
much, without flying off thehandle?
And I, you know, I oftenencourage them to uh role play
those, those conversations withothers as well, before you go in
(40:20):
, just and then to have them flyoff the handle in the
role-playing and see how youhandle it, so you can be ready
for it, just in case it happens.
I'll never forget there's atraining.
Probably 20 years ago, when Iwas actually on the other side
in manufacturing, we weretraining some of our leaders, uh
, utilizing this uh uh frameworkthat I've talked about, and one
of the role players absolutelycame unhinged in the
(40:43):
role-playing conversationagainst one of the top leaders
that we had in the organizationand I mean the whole class was,
like you know, totally takenaback just in terms of how he
went after that and he was a bigguy anyway, like Brutus from
from Popeye it was so funny.
And it was to me.
I didn't know he was going todo it, so I even I was a little
(41:05):
bit uncomfortable, uh, when hewent there.
But then I started to laugh andrealizing that we were just
role playing.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
But I gotta tell you when you can, when you can
predict, uh and overcome some ofthose things beforehand, that
can be pretty powerful and Iwill say, I will say you like,
thank goodness, this guy we'retalking about has you, you know,
because I mean you guided himin the right direction and now
(41:30):
he's going to be in a muchbetter position to have the kind
of conversations that he needsto have.
That will be, you know, ofservice to this person and the
company that he works for.
So keep going.
I'm sorry.
Speaker 2 (41:43):
I look forward to hearing about it.
It was actually a conversationthat was supposed to happen
today as we record this.
Okay, I'm going to be followingup with him just with a phone
call or a text message to sayhow to go.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
Say a little prayer yeah exactly.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
Well, that was the other side of it, as I told him.
By the way, regardless of whereyou sit on, I'm going to put it
on my calendar to the timeyou're going to meet with them
and I am going to say a littleprayer, and I would encourage
you to do the same thing beforeyou go in, to give you the
courage and the humility youneed.
Um, you know, holy spirit, fillyou up with the courage and
humility you need to have.
(42:13):
This conversation needs to behad, absolutely, todd.
You got your book coming up.
The power of candor, and I knowpublishers well enough they may
try and change the name on you.
That's fine.
Give me a sneak peek.
Who are you writing this bookfor?
Speaker 1 (42:31):
And what do you want folks to take away from it?
So thank you for asking.
I guess this is time for ashameless plug.
You know the alternative titlecould be, you know, since we're
getting a little biblical here,the truth shall set you free,
and that conviction is embedded,certainly, into our work and my
(42:54):
firm.
We have people who are all overthe map in terms of their
religious affiliations or thelack thereof, but this
underlying principle issomething that we all believe,
and the reason I'm writing thebook is two reasons.
(43:18):
Well, let me say, the largerobjective of the book is to
provide people with knowledgethey can use in real life to
improve their importantconversations in and outside of
work, so that they, so that wecan reduce human suffering and
(43:39):
increase human joy and meaning.
So so that's, that's what'sdriving it.
Um, then the question is Iwould, I would ask, and I've
asked myself this question whyanother book on conversations?
Haven't we had enough?
I mean, there's so many of them,um, and I think the reason is
(43:59):
twofold.
Um, reason is twofold.
Um, there's not.
I don't know how to expressthis exactly.
I let me say it this way Ithink there is a knowledge gap
as to what good looks like whenit comes to having these
important conversations in ourlives, and so I mean to close
that through the book by sharingthe results of our work and
(44:22):
research over 30 years, witheasily 50,000 people at this
point, um, because the field, um, there's some good ideas in
these books.
There are some gaps in theresearch and there are some
downright bad ideas that arepassed off as good practice, and
(44:43):
so, to the degree that I can inthe context of this book, I
want to provide people withquality information about how to
have good conversations.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Secondly, love that premise no doubt about in terms
of providing good data on how itworks Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (45:02):
Nobody's geeked out more about on subject than we
have in terms of the research.
There are other people who havedone great research on other
topics, but we have, and I havebeen obsessed with only one
thing, and this has been the onething for now 30 years, so I
better have something good tosay, otherwise I've been wasting
three decades.
The second thing is, I don'twant people to be naive about
(45:28):
the challenge, let me say.
The other thing is I'm tryingto encourage people, inspire
people to get to candor as well,to amplify that in their lives
through a rigorous investigationof how they're doing now, what
(45:53):
the unintended consequences areof that and the untapped
opportunities and what could bepossible for them at work and
their lives, for their people,their teams, their families, all
of it, if they could turn thevolume up on candor in the way
we defined it, rightCollaborative search in order to
make things better.
But I also want to do somethingwithin the confines of the book
(46:15):
that actually can make peoplebetter at this, so they don't
have to spend, you know, orspend less money on expensive
training, you know.
But what I want to do with that, though, is parlay it into, or
I'd rather connect it to the app, because we are in the
development of an app, becausethe problem is, is that what?
(46:36):
People who get access to myfirm or Kim Scott's firm,
whoever, it is right.
What is it?
Top 1% of the world, maybe?
Right, it is right.
What is it?
Top 1% of the world?
Right?
I mean what?
Those are the only people whoneed to have, who struggle with
conversations and need to bebetter at it.
So, but the thing is, it's likeit's way too expensive and it's
not doable.
So, because I've been studyingthis phenomenon enough, we have
(47:05):
a pretty good sense of what thealgorithms are that underpin
effective practice and also whatthe current algorithms are that
are making people lesseffective these conversations,
and we figured out how todisrupt, short circuit the
current algorithm and replace itwith a more effective algorithm
.
This is the benefit of nothaving written anything yet and
just being in the lab anddeveloping people for about 30
years.
So the idea is bring anyconversation you want to have
(47:26):
with anyone about anythingimportant, anytime.
She's here for you and she willnot only help you strategize
for what to talk about and howto talk about it, but this is
the kicker the quality of thepractice that you will get.
She will simulate theconversation you're going to
have with the person.
(47:46):
She will both play the personyou're going to be and then she
will give you, in the moment,feedback about how you're
conducting it.
If you're falling into a trap,she'll be like John, you're
jumping to action.
You're like what do you mean?
I'm like you're actuallyoffering solutions to a problem
that you haven't even discussedyet and that haven't been
actually been agreed.
Do you see that?
You're like, yeah, okay, soname the problem, okay, and then
(48:15):
she'll guide you through thatso that you can start disrupting
the old pattern and startetching and rewiring a new
pattern.
And then the more you do it, itdoesn't matter what.
It could be feedback to yourteam.
It could be trying to influenceup.
It could be leading acrossboundaries with people who don't
have authority.
It could be a conversation witha customer.
It could be conversations athome, whatever outside of work,
which are vast.
You know, practice, practice,practice and you just become
(48:38):
tons better.
But it also is very practical.
Application of it's going tohelp you solve a problem that
you have right now.
Speaker 2 (48:44):
I think it's such a great application for what we
need in leadership todayutilizing AI, utilizing the app
to help us have thoseconversations.
I know I've benefited from itmyself in terms of having those
conversations prior to that andlooking like.
Speaker 1 (48:58):
More people need access to John right, yes,
absolutely.
But you can't do it.
You're limited because you'reone human being, but if you can
take You're spot on.
Speaker 2 (49:06):
I love the scale activity.
I believe the word that I readthe democratization of the tool,
if you will.
So the book will come a longway, but the actual app itself
and making that available isgoing to be something powerful.
I have loved our conversation.
I think we should get backonline once you get your book
coming out as well, on the appgets tightened up and talk even
(49:29):
more about this topic, because Iknow I could talk about it for
hours, but I also want to honoryour time and my time as well.
And, todd, how can folks get intouch with you to learn more
about candor, to learn moreabout you and be ready for when
your book's coming out?
Speaker 1 (49:45):
Sure, and also if they want some free resources as
well.
So people can contact medirectly, todd T-O-double-D at
holzmancom, so H-O-L-Z-M-A-Ncom.
I have a PA.
Her name is Lace L-A-C-E sameemail address.
They should also hook up withus on LinkedIn, because my
(50:06):
faculty and I are posting on adaily basis, so we're trying to
provide valuable content, andthen we're also I mean there's
like I don't know hundreds ofstuff on our blog video and
written.
So just go toholzmanleadershipcom or
holzmancom and it takes you tothe same place and right-hand
side of the screen.
Click and you'll see all kindsof stuff that you can learn from
(50:28):
right now.
Speaker 2 (50:29):
Excellent, I'll be sure to put the links in the
show notes as well, so folks canget to those easily.
They can hear them.
They'll show up in the YouTubecomments as well.
Todd, I'll finish you up withthe same question.
I'll give you a billboard andyou can put it anywhere you want
to right behind you, somewherethere in New York city, behind
(50:50):
your shoulder or wherever youwant to put it.
You can put any message youwant to on that billboard.
What's the message that you puton there and why do you put
that message on there?
Tell the truth, do good.
I think that's a pretty goodmessage.
Tells a lot about what we'retalking about with candor, you
know again.
You mentioned, too, the abilityto do this outside of work.
(51:10):
Like I can't wait to go and usesome of this stuff as I walk
out the door to my office havingconversations with my son and
others to help me go forward.
So I have really enjoyed ourconversation.
I appreciate you investing thetime with the leaders of the
Uncommon Leader Podcast.
Wish you the best in your workin your book and all the things
you're doing to try and make animpact in this area.
(51:31):
Thanks, tom, my pleasure.
You're welcome, thank you, andthat wraps up another episode of
the Uncommon Leader Podcast.
Thanks for tuning in today.
If you found value in thisepisode, I encourage you to
share it with your friends,colleagues or anyone else who
could benefit from the insightsand inspiration we've shared.
Also, if you have a moment, I'dgreatly appreciate if you could
(51:52):
leave a rating and review onyour favorite podcast platform.
Your feedback not only helps usto improve, but it also helps
others discover the podcast andjoin our growing community of
uncommon leaders.
Until next time, go and growchampions.
I'm trying to encourage people, inspire people
to get to Cangar as well andhelping them make a choice about
whether they want to amplifythat in their lives through a
rigorous investigation of howthey're doing now, what the
unintended consequences are ofthat and the untapped
opportunities and what could bepossible for them at work and
(00:23):
lives for their people, theirteams, their families, all of it
.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
This is the Uncommon Leader Podcast.
I'm your host, john Gallagher,and I am excited about our guest
today.
Once we get into thisconversation and you leave today
, you're going to have many tipsthat are going to help you
communicate better with yourteam, with your family, with
your friends, and make a lot ofthose things happen.
So I'm excited about that.
I have Todd Holtzman with me,who has dedicated his career to
(00:54):
helping individuals andorganizations improve their
communication and relationships.
He's the CEO and founder ofHoltzman Leadership, and his
upcoming book, the Power ofCandor, is set to revolutionize
how we approach difficultconversations.
So, todd, I hope that wasgetting you teed up as well as I
could and getting ourconversation started.
How are you doing today?
Speaker 1 (01:15):
I am great.
I'm great, Sean.
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Absolutely Well, I won't give you any break.
Getting started, I'll give youthe same question I always ask
my first-time guests on theUncommon Leader podcast.
That's really to ask you totell me a story from your
childhood that still impacts whoyou are today, as a person or
as a leader.
Now we talked a little bitbefore the show about our age.
You've got to go back a littleways here.
I'm going to test your memory,but we won't reveal that
(01:38):
completely what we are.
Let's just say we're mature.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Yeah, what we are, but let's just say we're, we're
mature, yeah.
So let's see, it's probablycirca 1975, 76, and my dad had
brought home sony trinitroncolor 19 I mean, that was the
(02:04):
big time for TVs back then andyou know, it was kind of like
this prized possession of thefamily my father was at work and
my mom was in the kitchen doingwhatever, and I saw this nail
file and I looked at the screenand I looked at the nail file.
For some reason I thought nailfile and screen, why not?
(02:26):
So I scraped it.
And then I was just curious,you know, and apparently very
stupid, and I saw it scraped thescreen.
I was like, oh, I threw thenail file like a smoking gun
away, ran to my room and juststarted playing, know uh, to
soothe myself.
And then, you know, father comeshome later, I mean many hours
(02:50):
later, and comes to my room andwould ask me so you know how's?
How's your day been?
Oh, pretty good, uh, anythinginteresting happen?
No, not nothing, nothing Icould think of.
He goes, are you sure?
And I start thinking I do thatlike something's up, I don't
(03:13):
know what it is.
And then he goes and it's not,it's close to christmas and he
says santa doesn't like littleboys that lie.
And then I'm like like I havethe flashback.
Oh, my God, I'm so sorry.
I saw the nail file, I saw thescreen, I hit it, I didn't mean
to do it and I'm just crying,crying, crying, crying.
(03:36):
And you know, and he consoledme and he said it's not what you
did.
And he said it's not what youdid.
It's that the important thingis for you to be honest about
what you did.
And that was kind of a veryearly childhood memory about the
(03:58):
importance of honesty and hereally drilled that into me.
You know, say what you think,stand up for yourself.
Uh, don't lie, tell the truth.
The problem is is that it wasyou know he was fine when I was
doing that with other people,but when I was doing it with him
, you know we didn't see thingsthe same way, didn't go so well,
(04:20):
and my mom would often she was,was more kind of emotionally
reactive, would kind of react ina bad way.
So I often felt, you know, if Iwasn't honest I'd feel bad
right, because my dad had kindof inculcated this into me.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
But then if?
Speaker 1 (04:40):
I wasn't, things would go badly.
And I hadn't put like a term toit until probably 20 years
later, which I called thehonesty dilemma, and that has
informed my life and my workever since, because I think a
lot of people feel that wayevery day.
We all know, I mean, no parentwould ever tell their kid,
(05:03):
listen, the way to get ahead istry to like screw up the world
and lie as much as you possiblycan.
Most parents, either explicitlyor or implicitly, are trying to
teach their kids like try to dosome good in the world, and and
and and and tell the truth.
Um, but we all feel binds aboutthat leaders, managers,
(05:24):
salespeople because if we makethe truth the thing that we
prioritize, it's going to damagerelationships.
But then if we're too concernedabout damaging relationships,
then often the truthconversations are where candor
goes to die, and so, yeah,that's the early childhood story
(05:44):
.
And so so, yeah, that's theearly childhood story.
And since then, um, since I was, since 1994, I've dedicated my
life to helping people uh, solvethis dilemma and god, I love
the connection, love theconnection.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
That story, yeah, I remember again, I told you
before we got an episode.
I got you know like like fourlisteners total.
Three of them them are mymother, mother-in-law and wife
that listen to the show all thetime.
But I think about that and Ilisten back or have these videos
back as a kid, as I'm growingup as well, and I remember mom
just saying you know of all thethings, just don't lie to me,
(06:17):
tell me the truth and keep itout there.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
So I can understand, but then again you'll probably
hear if you have nothing nice tosay, don't say it.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
So and you'll probably hear if you have
nothing nice to say what Philcompletely said Don't say
anything and choose to saynothing.
So notice the next message.
There's the dilemma.
Right, that's the dilemma.
Tell me more about that honestydilemma, because it is a
barrier, right, for us inimproved communication.
The other side is, what I heardas well is that sometimes the
truth hurts and maybe there'soverlap with those two things.
But you mentioned the honestydilemma overlap with those two
(06:47):
things.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
But you mentioned the honesty dilemma.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I wason a it's on a podcast yesterday
actually, where someone askedme uh, kind of a similar
question, but not not sofine-tuned as that one, and I
mean, so I think I explained it.
It's like if you're not honest,bad things happen.
If you are honest you're nothonest, bad things happen.
And if you are honest, you'reafraid bad things are going to
happen, right?
And the question the guy askedme yesterday was do you think
(07:12):
that people avoid having, say,honest conversations because of
the risks, right, that theythink are embedded in having
those conversations and the badthings that could result from
them?
And I said yes in part.
But what people aren't reallyaware of of all the bad things
(07:34):
that are already happeningbecause they're avoiding the
truth of things in theseconversations?
Their relationships are alreadysuboptimized, their results are
already suboptimized, they'realready holding on to something
which is bothering them and sothey're feeling frustrated and
disappointed and demotivated andall of these kinds of things.
(07:55):
And that's a big reason whypeople avoid having honest
conversations, because if theywere aware of all the problems
the avoidance of honesty wascreating or that we're creating.
English is my first language,but sometimes grammar escapes me
(08:15):
.
They would be less likely to,much less likely to avoid them.
And then of course there's, youknow, the competence to ensure
those conversations go well.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
We got a mentor that has said this to me before and
it's one I've read from.
I've not met him before inperson, but it's from reading
his stuff.
He said the most expensive timeis the time between when you
know you need to have thatconversation and when you
actually carry that conversationout in an effective way.
Conversation and when youactually carry that conversation
out in an effective way andthen all that time in between.
There there is such anemotional barrier that exists
(08:50):
inside of that.
But also if it's a piece offeedback that you need somebody
to improve and you're justafraid to tell them, you're
losing all that productivity,you're losing all that
profitability, whatever.
It is in effectiveness thatyou're losing as well.
But that becomes the mostexpensive time.
I remember I had one of themost profound-.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Who said that?
By the way, that's brilliant.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Oh, that's a John Maxwell quote that I read inside
of his book, and I can'tremember which one it was,
because, unfortunately, thatentire road is out there, but it
is.
I mean, it's so true, right, Ihad a conversation, and I say
this I had an employee when Ifirst got into leadership back
in 1998 that I wanted to have atough conversation with and I
just didn't know how to have it.
I finally learned a framework tohave that conversation after
(09:31):
going to a week-long leadershipevent.
If this is all that I got outof that event, it was powerful.
I was ready to terminate thisindividual because he couldn't
get along with other people.
His behaviors were bad and Icouldn't figure out a way to
tell him.
I just wanted to be nicebecause I didn't want the guy to
be mad at me.
He was the same age as me, wecame from the same class and all
those things.
But I ended up being able, witha framework, to have that tough
conversation with him and heliterally said he said that has
(09:54):
got to be the best feedback I'veever gotten.
That's 1998.
That individual is still withthat same company now as an
executive director for theorganization and I was getting
ready to push him out the door.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
So I remember, um, I've got a few things I want to
say.
Sometimes you just got to pickone, john, you know well, I mean
good for you, um, you know,allowing the truth to be your
ally and having some faith thatthe best that could possibly
happen will be as a result ofprioritizing the truth, and good
(10:29):
for you for having faith inthis person as well, that they
could hear it.
We often give each other waytoo little credit and we
attribute too much weakness toeach other than is actually
warranted as a general rule.
But what it reminds me of andwhen I can mention clients rule.
But what it reminds me of, andwhen I can mention clients I can
.
When I can't, I can't.
We're working at my team and Iwere working at Red Bull years
(10:53):
ago consulting them.
We're in this beautiful skilodge in Park City, utah, called
Stein Erickson's and we ranthese things called bull shops.
We had to brand it properly forwhat they were doing, we'd have
like three and a half days inthe mountains.
It was ridiculously luxuriousand privileged to be able to
even do that.
And we had a bunch of the Iguess it was the GMs or
something around the table,running different geographies,
(11:14):
and one of the GMs is ready,just like you, ready to get rid
of this guy, and they're allagreeing with him.
I was like okay, so, if Iunderstand it, this is what you
think his gap is.
X, is that right?
Uh-huh, and this is what yourdata for this is.
Here's your examples.
Y, that's right, and this isall the problems that his
(11:35):
behavior is creating.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Z.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Yes, so have you told him all this?
No, so you're ready to fire aguy?
Speaker 2 (11:49):
because he's not behaving these ways.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
He's behaving in this way, which I can understand
right, because it is creatingproblems for sure, but you never
actually told him the truthabout these things and you're
blaming him for beingunchangeable and resistant to
change.
(12:11):
I mean, you actually can't makethat claim unless you've
actually given him the feedback.
So what you're doing is listen.
It may be the case that thehorse has already left the barn
and it's too late to recover thesituation, but I think you do
have to question the morality ofyour decision in light of this.
And it's interesting, it'sfunny.
(12:32):
I was angry about it.
I remember it.
I was a good bit younger thenand this is like 15 years ago so
.
But they agreed and he had theconversation and the person was
(12:53):
open to it and he turned his.
He turned his behavior around,his performance improved.
They didn't fire him and it'slike, yeah, uh, look at how much
chaos could have been avoidedhad they had the conversation
earlier.
And had they not look howcoincidental at all.
This guy's whole life was inthe balance.
(13:15):
And had these guys not come toutah and had that conversation
not occurred, all these badthings would have happened and,
of course, these guys wouldnever have learned anything
either?
The leaders themselves, andthis is why will I screw up your
next question or can I just saya little more about this candor
(13:37):
thing?
Todd, go ahead, come on.
So, okay, because I know wetalked a little bit before and
you spent a lot of time inhealthcare and consulting to
kind of healthcare entities, andwe have too.
We spend a lot of time withseveral global faculty 13 people
, more than half of whom areoverseas and the rest are here
stateside, lucky enough to notonly train leaders at very high
(14:08):
levels, like senior levels, likeCEOs of pharmas and things like
this, but also customer-facingteams, salespeople, msls,
patient access people all thelike, and we have had a kind of
privileged access to the waythey actually conduct these
conversations with customers.
(14:29):
And when we develop people, weask them bring to us a customer
conversation.
That didn't produce the resultthat you wanted and based upon
the work of one of my, my idols,uh, chris argers from harvard.
So chris taught at the businessschool, the law school, the
(14:52):
graduate school of education,where I studied, the kennedy
school of government, where Itaught.
For those of you who areinterested in him, imagine, uh,
imagine, I was going to say theEinstein of the social sciences,
a-r-g-y-r-i-s.
Chris wrote a bunch of stuff inthe Harvard Business Review.
I don't know.
(15:13):
He wrote I don't know a fewhundred articles, 30 books,
received 14 honorary doctoratesfor his massive contributions to
management, leadership,organizational behavior,
research, education,anthropology.
I mean amazing human being andhe developed a foolproof tool
(15:36):
that we use that helps you.
It's the best.
Next thing to like micingpeople up or filming them when
they're actually having realconversation.
So the point of me telling youthis is we get very accurate
data on how they're reallybehaving during these critical
conversations with customers.
Fine, the reason I'm explainingall this is that in every single
(15:57):
instance the culprit was acandor gap that they were either
not expressing important thingsthey were thinking and feeling
to the customer and or askingthe kind of questions that were
necessary so that the customerwould open up and share the
(16:19):
truth of what they were thinkingwith them.
That's number one, and numbertwo, by the way, largely unaware
that that was the reason whythe conversations weren't having
the impact that they wanted.
I'm not saying completelyunaware, just for the most part
unaware.
They would mostly say theexplanation was largely external
(16:40):
they're not giving me the timeI need, they're very busy.
They prefer the other therapy,insert explanation.
I wouldn't call them excuses.
I think those things are alsotrue.
But here's what the consequencesare, and this is why I have I
was just writing a post on thistoday have made Canada the cause
(17:03):
of my life is because the humantoll is huge and the level of
human suffering is incrediblyunderappreciated.
So we'll talk about threelevels of suffering For the
(17:23):
customer, for the salespeople,in this case, themselves, and
for the patient.
So the customer maybe this is ahealthcare, you know, hcp or
somebody like this feels likethe conversation has been a
waste of their time and they'renot getting any value out of it.
Because if you're not sayinganything valuable, you know.
If it's provocative, why wouldit be interesting and useful to
(17:44):
them?
Fine, and so, of course, thenif you're a sales rep, your
access to them goes down,because they don't spend time on
things they don't considervaluable.
As a sales rep, you're miserable, right, at least with some set
of customers.
You're feeling very frustrated,you're disappointed, you're
demotivated, you're deflated,all of it.
(18:04):
And getting up out of bed dayin, day out, man, talking to
these customers when they wantto give you a few minutes, I
mean I couldn't do it.
But then you start to thinkabout the patients.
Well, the consequences of thisis that in these instances, the
patient ain't getting themedicine they need.
(18:25):
Oh, that's right, all right,and some of these patients you
know.
The best case scenario isthere's an opportunity to
improve a patient's life, a lifeand it's being squandered or
delayed.
The middle case is they'resuffering from some horrible
(18:46):
disease.
They eventually get themedicine, but they suffer longer
than necessary.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
The worst case scenario is they actually die
and when we've had back to thattime gap, by the way, too back
to that time, how long it takesto get the information they need
yep it's you're saying thatpartially triggered for me to
say this.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
And so and by the way , this is not my analysis, it is
our analysis, but it's theiranalysis so we take them through
a process of taking a hard lookat their case studies.
We ask them so what is it thatyou did or didn't do that's
preventing you from makingprogress?
After we help them understandwhat good looks like so they
could better analyze themselves,and they end up being pretty
(19:25):
insightful and they say what arethe unintended negative
consequences on customers, youand patients?
What I'm telling you is whatthey said, and so you know how
this work can be, john is, youhave a sense of mission about it
(19:52):
, but you keep gettingre-enrolled in it, because your
clients teach you things thatmake the difficult work of
helping people get better atthis worthwhile.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
Well, Todd, look, I mean, I love the passion that
you have for making that happenIn the world of healthcare it
exists Again in that consultingspace that I've been in as well.
How many times, frankly, aphysician and I'm not taking
shots of physicians they got atough job.
But in a three-minuteconversation they have with a
patient, how much time do theyhave to use candor with a
(20:16):
patient that say, if you don'tchange your behavior, you are
going to die at some point intime, because we're all going to
die?
But they don't want to havethose conversations, they don't
want the patient to be upsetwith them, and I make up that
that's one of the biggestbarriers to candor is the desire
, whether it's a leader, as afamily member, as a physician,
whatever that is to be liked,and we don't want someone to be
(20:39):
upset with us.
And so I have two questions.
The candor piece of it.
Let's even go down to thebasics of that.
How do you define candor incommunication?
And then the second piece ofthat is what attributes are
needed to be effective in thatdelivery, Because I make up.
I could also communicate withcandor, but do it by yelling at
(21:01):
someone or whatever that is.
So how do you define it?
And then, what are theattributes needed to be
effective at it?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Okay, let me address the first question.
If I lose the thread in thesecond question, just please
bring it back so maybe I couldsay what it isn't first.
So it isn't about sayingeverything you think and feel.
My partner, olga, who has areality show sitcom that's on
(21:33):
now on Apple TV Okay, shamelessplug called Olga Knows Best and
unfortunately I'm in it becauseit's about her life, so I have
no choice.
She would love that.
Right.
Let me teach all of our clientsto just be fully self-expressed
, say whatever you think andfeel.
Great for a reality show man,but not great for real life.
(21:56):
And actually a managing directorof talent at one of our FTSE
100 banking clients told us thatwe tried something like that.
We instituted a value years ago, before we ever came along,
called something like straighttalk or whatever it was, or
direct conversations, and shesaid it gave license to every
sociopath to say what theythought and felt, regardless of
how unkind it was.
(22:17):
So what we like to say and Ilike to say what they thought
and felt, regardless of howunkind it was.
So what we like to say and Ilike to say, like candor without
compassion can be cruel, it'sequally okay.
It's equally not about only yousaying what you think and feel,
because none of us asindividuals are omniscient, and
(22:39):
so a piece of truth, hopefully,or some aspect of reality exists
in my head.
But we've all got pieces of thepuzzle and we have to combine
these puzzle pieces to form amore complete picture of what's
actually true.
And I was talking to thedefinition I'm going to give you
(23:01):
.
I have shamelessly stolen it,but it came from one of our
clients.
So Ed Jenkins I Ed British guy.
I think he still lives in theUK.
I think he might be working forAstraZeneca now, I'm not sure,
but he was working for adifferent farmer when we worked
together.
I think he might be working forAstraZeneca now, I'm not sure,
but he was working for adifferent farmer when we worked
(23:21):
together and we had gone throughthis.
He had gone through thisprogram.
He was the franchise head forimportant therapy for the United
Kingdom and I think upreporting into him.
He had kind of commercialleaders and salespeople and he
had medical leaders andsalespeople.
So he and all these differentlevels went through our kind of
candor program and it delivereda great result.
You know, despite the companygoing through a big reorg,
(23:43):
despite them losing their withthe FDA.
They didn't get the approvalfor the earlier line of therapy.
People kept using what theylearned and they grew orders
which was amazing and I didn'tthink would happen because
you're in the middle of reorgand then you don't get approved
(24:06):
for earlier therapy and thenyour competitor does, and all
the HTPs are looking at thecompetitor's drug and say why
are you going to buy anythingfrom you, okay?
So I asked Ed amongst otherscan you help me understand why
the program delivered?
And it seemed like it delivereda result.
Well, first of all, do youthink it did, Okay?
And if so, what actuallyhappened?
I mean, I have some sense ofwhy it happens, but we're not
(24:27):
there watching people whatthey're doing with it.
They're not inside of people'sheads, so I don't know 100% what
they're actually doing.
And this is the definition ofcandor.
That now is kind of our Northstar as a firm.
And he said I always thought ofthese conversations that either
something to win or to avoid.
Because now I understand thatcandor is treating every
(24:51):
conversation as a collaborativesearch for the truth in order to
make things better.
And I have to say, john, thatreally hit me two years ago, I
guess maybe two and a half andit's like wow, somebody finally
explained to me what the heckI've been doing and I was very
(25:13):
grateful for it.
And so that's how we think ofit, and I think this is why this
is a mind shift for people.
Um, because in some ways theconversations seem tougher for
people because of how they'rethinking about the conversation,
like, oh, I've got to convincethem they're wrong and I'm right
(25:35):
.
But if you think a bit, as thisconversation is meant to do
some good in the world, maybeit's also a way I'm trying to
serve this person as well.
So you're trying to servesomething outside of yourself
this person, the team, theimpact this team has on
(25:59):
important things and people thenit kind of shifts your
orientation.
So then, and then if you startto think of.
Okay, I'm trying to do somegood through the conversation,
but I have to treat it as acollaborative search for the
truth and I have to have kind ofcourageous humility.
This is maybe this is avariable, one of the variables
(26:19):
you were talking about oraspects of it.
It's like, okay, I have thecourage to express the truth of
what I think, but I have to havethe humility to be open to and
to even invite people to tell mewhere I'm wrong, because what I
care about is not being right.
I care care about what's true.
So then a lot of you who arelistening and thinking about
(26:41):
having tough conversations itdoesn't mean it makes the
conversation easy, by no means.
You are right to be worriedabout these things.
It's not in your head.
You don't need somepsychotropics to help you deal
with your anxiety.
Most of the time your limbicsystem is telling you something,
probably for most often forsome good reasons.
(27:02):
But if you think of it, if youkind of orient yourself that way
the truth on behalf of servicethen I think it totally affects
the way you approach it.
Then you can say to somebodylisten, I'm worried, some of the
things that you're doing arekind of damaging your
credibility with the team, whichI know is important to you and
(27:26):
may impact your ability to kindof, you know, get the kind of
bonus.
You're looking at the end ofthe year and I've been thinking
about that and I got some thingsto share with you.
That, I think, could be helpful.
You interested in talking aboutit?
I don't see why that.
It's not that that conversationwon't be upsetting, but it
doesn't mean the person will beupset with you.
(27:48):
They'll be upset with thereality of the situation.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Hey listeners, I want to take a quick moment to share
something special with you.
Many of the topics anddiscussions we have on this
podcast are areas where Iprovide coaching and consulting
services for individuals andorganizations.
If you've been inspired by ourconversation and are seeking a
catalyst for change in your ownlife or within your team, I
invite you to visitcoachjohngallaghercom forward
(28:16):
slash free call to sign up for afree coaching call with me.
It's an opportunity for us toconnect, discuss your unique
challenges and explore howcoaching or consulting can
benefit you and your team.
Okay, let's get back to theshow.
That's awesome.
So I love that.
I mean what I'm hearing yousaying.
The attributes that need to bethere courage and humility are
(28:40):
the kind of entry If you getinto the conversation.
You've got to have both thosethings ultimately overcoming.
What Mark Twain would say isthat we can make up a lot of bad
things that are about to happen90% of them which will never
occur in terms of the quote thathe has, but there still may be
a bad response to it, but thepiece that comes after that is
(29:04):
even that specific behavioralobservation that goes along with
it.
So I have courage, I havehumility, but I better have
specifics to be able tocommunicate with the individual.
Back to your point not to beright, not to be right
necessarily, but so that theycan take an action from it and
do something different.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Well, let's use your framework, right?
You were telling me a littlebit about this before.
What was the framework?
You?
Speaker 2 (29:20):
had situation, behavior, impact and action.
What do I need you to do?
Going forward Yep.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
All right.
So let's take the first three,because if you dump the, the A
is certainly important in thatframework If you introduce the A
too soon, then what happens tothe leaders?
This is one of the big trapsthat we see in the data set of
like 50,000 conversations thatwe've studied People jump to
action too quickly before theyhave agreement on the problem.
So you're trying to getagreement on the SIP right for
(29:48):
situation, impact and behavioralexamples.
Is that right?
Did I get that right?
Okay, fine, so I think that's awonderful framework.
You can see in that example thatI was giving, all I did was put
a frame around it.
That's right.
Right, it's like I'm expressingmy intent of sharing all this
stuff with you, and this issometimes when converse without
(30:12):
the frame, if you throw it.
I'm not saying this is alwaystrue, but sometimes it'll be
true If you go.
I got some feedback for you.
Here's the situation, you know,here's the impact, here's the
behavioral examples.
Great, if you don't put theframe around it.
I want to talk to you aboutsomething.
Yes, right.
You know that I think is, andsometimes you can name the
(30:33):
impact that is havingpotentially this impact on you
and things that you and we careabout, then they could easily
attribute to you're just tryingto give them a hard time, right,
you know?
And when you're receiving andoftentimes when we're talking to
(30:53):
each other no-transcriptemotional to some degree,
they're going to be provocative,they might be upsetting,
because if we're talking, if wedisagree with each other, well,
that's what we can do over abeer, right.
But if I'm talking aboutsomething important, that
probably I'm not sure if this isright, but let me say it out
(31:15):
loud and see what you think.
I'm probably talking to youbecause I don't think you're
either taking action onsomething properly or I don't
think you're aware of somethingthat you need to be aware of.
Or I don't think.
Maybe you are aware of it, butyou aren't taking it seriously
enough.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
I think you're spot on.
I often refer to some of thoseconversations.
If you're not getting a littleblood on the carpet, it's
probably not really worth theconversation.
And to your point that happensI mean fights happen at your
point Drinking it.
Right, you throw a beer mug atthe other person, kind of thing
that's proverbial.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
So I'm fine for conversations where we're
shooting the shit, that's fun,right, or we're in the UK, just
recreational.
But if I'm talking to you aboutsomething that matters to me,
it means, by definition, I don'tthink it's mattering enough to
you.
I don't think it's matteringenough to you, I don't think
you're dealing with it properlyor even think you're seeing it.
(32:13):
So embedded in these importantconversations is going to be
conflict, you know, bydefinition.
Now, because of that, becausethe conversation will almost
always generate some discomfortfor people.
When people feel uncomfortable,they're more likely to make
negative attributions about yourmotives and about what your
(32:33):
intent of having theconversation is.
So if you do some good framing,it kind of cleans that up,
provided they believe you.
But also this is what ChrisVoss talks about from the Black
Swan Group it gives people amoment to kind of brace
themselves and get ready for itso they don't get hijacked by
(32:54):
their limbic systems.
So this is why I make it andit's not the only thing we talk
about, certainly not but why Imake a big point around framing
before you dive into the kind ofsedo model, you know it's so
funny it was excellent, by theway, you and I and I love the,
the context you've shared interms of the action coming in
(33:17):
too early.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
So I had a conversation just a couple days
ago with a coaching client uh,who's gonna have a tough
conversation.
I said how you gonna start thisconversation.
Take me through how you'regoing to start it.
So I'm going to ask as soon asI walk in, I'm going to ask him
are they in or not?
I'm like stop, that's theaction portion of this.
Let's get to this to your point.
Let's put a frame around thisconversation before you bring
(33:38):
them to are you in or not, kindof thing, because that's the
action you want.
You want some differentbehavior.
You go in that aggressive andyou are going to have a fight on
your hands because they'regoing to go, you know, into
defense mode.
Uh, all all these things aregoing to happen.
Whatever's coming out is anattack on me that's right in my
wording.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Yeah, that's right.
I mean, you know, uh, you know,you gotta, you gotta earn the
right to say that, yes, exactlyright.
These conversations.
There is a temperature at whichthe ingredients need to be
baked before they cohere, and wewere talking a little bit
before, and if you don't want totalk about this, fine.
(34:17):
Is this the example where this?
Speaker 2 (34:21):
person's worried about them blowing up.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Yeah, absolutely so let's look at that.
For a second right, theperson's concerned that the
person they're going to get thisfeedback to is going to blow up
.
So then they do something whichensures they will blow up.
Yep, so what's reallyinteresting is, you know why is
that?
Because I would bet that atsome level, he knows better.
(34:54):
The reason I say that is I'llmake two bets with you, one
which we will not be able tovalidate, one.
If somebody else were going todo the same thing and came to
him for coaching or her, he'dprobably say don't do that.
so it means he has a rules inhis head that says doing that is
a violation of some rule, right, like, don't jump to action
(35:17):
before we actually discuss theproblem rule, and most people
have that in their head.
But I also my other bet whichwe could validate is I bet you
would have told him that heprobably got it pretty quickly
is that true?
Speaker 2 (35:31):
oh, I think so absolutely.
I mean again, if we go backthrough that conversation, he's
gonna say that makes sense,right, I shouldn't do it so?
Speaker 1 (35:38):
so what?
What is that quick?
It means he a priority.
Before he ever heard from you,had a rule in his head that said
not to do something like that.
So then the question becomes soif all that's true, then why
does he violate his own rule?
And because the reason I'mbringing this up is because what
we have found, so this guy,chris Argyris, upon whose
(36:01):
extraordinary research noteverything, but much of what we
do is based.
So what Chris I'll give a verylayman's explanation of it
discovered is that we've got ourprinciples and we've got our
programming, and the two areoften in contradiction to each
other, contradiction to eachother.
(36:24):
So people believe in I shouldhave the courage to express what
I say, what I think.
I should be deeply curiousabout what other people think.
I should also see theseconversations as collaborations,
where we're trying to makesense out of reality together
and, on that basis, trying tofigure out what to do about it
Right.
So we see, believe these things.
(36:47):
What chris discovered when hefirst did this research in the
70s with 15, 15 000 people we'venow, we've now since worked
with all 50 000 um is that whenpeople have any kind of concern
about that, there's going to bea conflict, that the
conversation might be upsetting,that it might be threatening
and or embarrassing anythinglike this, that these principles
(37:13):
get short-circuited and getreplaced with programming that
drives people to keep things toocomfortable, that makes them
want to win and not make thingstoo competitive, win and not
lose the conversation and besuper controlling in the
conversation.
And a clinical psychologist I'mfond of, a guy named Jordan
(37:34):
Peterson, which I'm sure a lotof listeners have heard of says
that our principles are storedin a different part of our brain
than is our programming.
Oh, wow, okay, so we can readthese great books, watch YouTube
videos, even listen to us talk,and that will hopefully improve
(37:55):
the warehouse of information inour brains that stores our
principles.
But the programming, when wefeel that the conversation may
be threatening and orembarrassing for myself and or
other people, gets activated andblocks it.
And this is why the leadershipdevelopment industry at least I
(38:15):
would assert it's a $60 billionindustry worldwide.
Research has been done onwhether it changes leadership
behavior.
Research has been done onwhether it changes leadership
behavior.
Not so much.
It's because it's not becausewe're teaching people the wrong
things or we're trying todevelop them the wrong things.
There may be problems there too,and I think there are, but
let's assume everything wetaught them was perfect and if
(38:37):
only they could apply it theywould be better leaders.
The problem is the application,because the overprotective
program is what we've coined.
It blocks people from doingthis.
Sure, you have to help peoplebecome aware of.
So why is it?
They violate their ownprinciples and in your guy's
case, so let's assume he has therule not to do that.
(38:57):
Why does he do it Nevertheless.
What do you think?
Speaker 2 (39:01):
I think it's comfort.
I'm moving, moving back into aspace of comfort.
If someone distracts or movesyou off of your point, uh,
you're going to have a tendencyto go back to your natural uh
programming that's his comfort.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
But he but he.
What he's doing is a much more.
I gotta know right now you inor out?
No, no, effing about right.
So that's his comfort zone.
But it sounds to me like he'strying to exert a lot of control
over the conversation becausehis theory is I'm worried about
(39:37):
this person blowing up.
So if I can kind of establishsome dominance, and exert some
fear out then.
Then I can contain the upset.
Speaker 2 (39:49):
You might be right, todd, absolutely.
I don't want to rule that outeither.
To your point, by the way,these things often team up.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
It's like a hybrid of comfort and control.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
You used the term emotional.
I mean, that's one of thethings that I really get with
them as well.
It's like, how do you conveyemotion without being emotional?
Uh, it's very important.
How do you show them you'repassionate, that you care so
much, without flying off thehandle?
And I, you know, I oftenencourage them to uh role play
those, those conversations withothers as well, before you go in
(40:20):
, just and then to have them flyoff the handle in the
role-playing and see how youhandle it, so you can be ready
for it, just in case it happens.
I'll never forget there's atraining.
Probably 20 years ago, when Iwas actually on the other side
in manufacturing, we weretraining some of our leaders, uh
, utilizing this uh uh frameworkthat I've talked about, and one
of the role players absolutelycame unhinged in the
(40:43):
role-playing conversationagainst one of the top leaders
that we had in the organizationand I mean the whole class was,
like you know, totally takenaback just in terms of how he
went after that and he was a bigguy anyway, like Brutus from
from Popeye it was so funny.
And it was to me.
I didn't know he was going todo it, so I even I was a little
(41:05):
bit uncomfortable, uh, when hewent there.
But then I started to laugh andrealizing that we were just
role playing.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
But I gotta tell you when you can, when you can
predict, uh and overcome some ofthose things beforehand, that
can be pretty powerful and Iwill say, I will say you like,
thank goodness, this guy we'retalking about has you, you know,
because I mean you guided himin the right direction and now
(41:30):
he's going to be in a muchbetter position to have the kind
of conversations that he needsto have.
That will be, you know, ofservice to this person and the
company that he works for.
So keep going.
I'm sorry.
Speaker 2 (41:43):
I look forward to hearing about it.
It was actually a conversationthat was supposed to happen
today as we record this.
Okay, I'm going to be followingup with him just with a phone
call or a text message to sayhow to go.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
Say a little prayer yeah exactly.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
Well, that was the other side of it, as I told him.
By the way, regardless of whereyou sit on, I'm going to put it
on my calendar to the timeyou're going to meet with them
and I am going to say a littleprayer, and I would encourage
you to do the same thing beforeyou go in, to give you the
courage and the humility youneed.
Um, you know, holy spirit, fillyou up with the courage and
humility you need to have.
(42:13):
This conversation needs to behad, absolutely, todd.
You got your book coming up.
The power of candor, and I knowpublishers well enough they may
try and change the name on you.
That's fine.
Give me a sneak peek.
Who are you writing this bookfor?
Speaker 1 (42:31):
And what do you want folks to take away from it?
So thank you for asking.
I guess this is time for ashameless plug.
You know the alternative titlecould be, you know, since we're
getting a little biblical here,the truth shall set you free,
and that conviction is embedded,certainly, into our work and my
(42:54):
firm.
We have people who are all overthe map in terms of their
religious affiliations or thelack thereof, but this
underlying principle issomething that we all believe,
and the reason I'm writing thebook is two reasons.
(43:18):
Well, let me say, the largerobjective of the book is to
provide people with knowledgethey can use in real life to
improve their importantconversations in and outside of
work, so that they, so that wecan reduce human suffering and
(43:39):
increase human joy and meaning.
So so that's, that's what'sdriving it.
Um, then the question is Iwould, I would ask, and I've
asked myself this question whyanother book on conversations?
Haven't we had enough?
I mean, there's so many of them,um, and I think the reason is
(43:59):
twofold.
Um, reason is twofold.
Um, there's not.
I don't know how to expressthis exactly.
I let me say it this way Ithink there is a knowledge gap
as to what good looks like whenit comes to having these
important conversations in ourlives, and so I mean to close
that through the book by sharingthe results of our work and
(44:22):
research over 30 years, witheasily 50,000 people at this
point, um, because the field, um, there's some good ideas in
these books.
There are some gaps in theresearch and there are some
downright bad ideas that arepassed off as good practice, and
(44:43):
so, to the degree that I can inthe context of this book, I
want to provide people withquality information about how to
have good conversations.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Secondly, love that premise no doubt about in terms
of providing good data on how itworks Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (45:02):
Nobody's geeked out more about on subject than we
have in terms of the research.
There are other people who havedone great research on other
topics, but we have, and I havebeen obsessed with only one
thing, and this has been the onething for now 30 years, so I
better have something good tosay, otherwise I've been wasting
three decades.
The second thing is, I don'twant people to be naive about
(45:28):
the challenge, let me say.
The other thing is I'm tryingto encourage people, inspire
people to get to candor as well,to amplify that in their lives
through a rigorous investigationof how they're doing now, what
(45:53):
the unintended consequences areof that and the untapped
opportunities and what could bepossible for them at work and
their lives, for their people,their teams, their families, all
of it, if they could turn thevolume up on candor in the way
we defined it, rightCollaborative search in order to
make things better.
But I also want to do somethingwithin the confines of the book
(46:15):
that actually can make peoplebetter at this, so they don't
have to spend, you know, orspend less money on expensive
training, you know.
But what I want to do with that, though, is parlay it into, or
I'd rather connect it to the app, because we are in the
development of an app, becausethe problem is, is that what?
(46:36):
People who get access to myfirm or Kim Scott's firm,
whoever, it is right.
What is it?
Top 1% of the world, maybe?
Right, it is right.
What is it?
Top 1% of the world?
Right?
I mean what?
Those are the only people whoneed to have, who struggle with
conversations and need to bebetter at it.
So, but the thing is, it's likeit's way too expensive and it's
not doable.
So, because I've been studyingthis phenomenon enough, we have
(47:05):
a pretty good sense of what thealgorithms are that underpin
effective practice and also whatthe current algorithms are that
are making people lesseffective these conversations,
and we figured out how todisrupt, short circuit the
current algorithm and replace itwith a more effective algorithm
.
This is the benefit of nothaving written anything yet and
just being in the lab anddeveloping people for about 30
years.
So the idea is bring anyconversation you want to have
(47:26):
with anyone about anythingimportant, anytime.
She's here for you and she willnot only help you strategize
for what to talk about and howto talk about it, but this is
the kicker the quality of thepractice that you will get.
She will simulate theconversation you're going to
have with the person.
(47:46):
She will both play the personyou're going to be and then she
will give you, in the moment,feedback about how you're
conducting it.
If you're falling into a trap,she'll be like John, you're
jumping to action.
You're like what do you mean?
I'm like you're actuallyoffering solutions to a problem
that you haven't even discussedyet and that haven't been
actually been agreed.
Do you see that?
You're like, yeah, okay, soname the problem, okay, and then
(48:15):
she'll guide you through thatso that you can start disrupting
the old pattern and startetching and rewiring a new
pattern.
And then the more you do it, itdoesn't matter what.
It could be feedback to yourteam.
It could be trying to influenceup.
It could be leading acrossboundaries with people who don't
have authority.
It could be a conversation witha customer.
It could be conversations athome, whatever outside of work,
which are vast.
You know, practice, practice,practice and you just become
(48:38):
tons better.
But it also is very practical.
Application of it's going tohelp you solve a problem that
you have right now.
Speaker 2 (48:44):
I think it's such a great application for what we
need in leadership todayutilizing AI, utilizing the app
to help us have thoseconversations.
I know I've benefited from itmyself in terms of having those
conversations prior to that andlooking like.
Speaker 1 (48:58):
More people need access to John right, yes,
absolutely.
But you can't do it.
You're limited because you'reone human being, but if you can
take You're spot on.
Speaker 2 (49:06):
I love the scale activity.
I believe the word that I readthe democratization of the tool,
if you will.
So the book will come a longway, but the actual app itself
and making that available isgoing to be something powerful.
I have loved our conversation.
I think we should get backonline once you get your book
coming out as well, on the appgets tightened up and talk even
(49:29):
more about this topic, because Iknow I could talk about it for
hours, but I also want to honoryour time and my time as well.
And, todd, how can folks get intouch with you to learn more
about candor, to learn moreabout you and be ready for when
your book's coming out?
Speaker 1 (49:45):
Sure, and also if they want some free resources as
well.
So people can contact medirectly, todd T-O-double-D at
holzmancom, so H-O-L-Z-M-A-Ncom.
I have a PA.
Her name is Lace L-A-C-E sameemail address.
They should also hook up withus on LinkedIn, because my
(50:06):
faculty and I are posting on adaily basis, so we're trying to
provide valuable content, andthen we're also I mean there's
like I don't know hundreds ofstuff on our blog video and
written.
So just go toholzmanleadershipcom or
holzmancom and it takes you tothe same place and right-hand
side of the screen.
Click and you'll see all kindsof stuff that you can learn from
(50:28):
right now.
Speaker 2 (50:29):
Excellent, I'll be sure to put the links in the
show notes as well, so folks canget to those easily.
They can hear them.
They'll show up in the YouTubecomments as well.
Todd, I'll finish you up withthe same question.
I'll give you a billboard andyou can put it anywhere you want
to right behind you, somewherethere in New York city, behind
(50:50):
your shoulder or wherever youwant to put it.
You can put any message youwant to on that billboard.
What's the message that you puton there and why do you put
that message on there?
Tell the truth, do good.
I think that's a pretty goodmessage.
Tells a lot about what we'retalking about with candor, you
know again.
You mentioned, too, the abilityto do this outside of work.
(51:10):
Like I can't wait to go and usesome of this stuff as I walk
out the door to my office havingconversations with my son and
others to help me go forward.
So I have really enjoyed ourconversation.
I appreciate you investing thetime with the leaders of the
Uncommon Leader Podcast.
Wish you the best in your workin your book and all the things
you're doing to try and make animpact in this area.
(51:31):
Thanks, tom, my pleasure.
You're welcome, thank you, andthat wraps up another episode of
the Uncommon Leader Podcast.
Thanks for tuning in today.
If you found value in thisepisode, I encourage you to
share it with your friends,colleagues or anyone else who
could benefit from the insightsand inspiration we've shared.
Also, if you have a moment, I'dgreatly appreciate if you could
(51:52):
leave a rating and review onyour favorite podcast platform.
Your feedback not only helps usto improve, but it also helps
others discover the podcast andjoin our growing community of
uncommon leaders.
Until next time, go and growchampions.
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
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!