097: The 5Cs of a High Performing Culture

Speaker A: I'm Dan Hasler, and I would love you to join me and some of the world's best athletes on the Play Fearless podcast. We'll make funning. Welcome to Play Fearless. Out of all the years and all the days that I've surfed, uh, that's the only time I felt like I

Speaker B: was ever in danger.

Speaker A: Well, Adam is. Welcome to Play Fearless. It's one thing to try being number one. It's another thing when you become number one. The Play Fearless podcast is for anyone who takes their sport seriously and is available wherever you listen to podcasts. Welcome to the Habits of Leadership podcast,

Speaker B: brought to you by Cut Through Coaching, helping leaders and their teams to thrive professionally and personally.

Speaker A: Hello and welcome to episode 97 of the Habits of Leadership Podcast. My name's Dan Hasler from Cut Through Coaching. And joining me today is my friend and colleague, Mr. Tim Perkins. Percolate. How on earth are you today, sir?

Speaker B: Uh, Daniel. I'm outstanding. Absolutely outstanding. Ready to play.

Speaker A: What do you put that down to?

Speaker B: Uh, I put it down to deliberate lifestyle choices.

Speaker A: Nice. Uh, for example, for example, that shirt you're wearing,

Speaker B: I said to you beforehand, are we going to video this? You said, no, probably best if we don't. In fact, I've just realized why. Um, yes, this shirt I'm wearing, it is certainly. It lifts my mood a little. Uh, Balinese number. Um, yeah, lifestyle choices. Just, you know, a lot of the work that we do with people, essentially, if. If we look at, you know, some sort of an umbrella, maybe it's about empowering people, empowering people to do the best work they can do in whatever their context is. And so, um, you know, taking some of those same learnings and teachings and thinkings and applying them to my own life, um, you know, one of the things that comes up for me a lot is the idea of really trying to be in the present moment. We do a lot of running around, you and I, um, there's a lot of driving, there's a lot of planes, there's a lot of different environments. And to really be where my feet are and to be deliberate about that is something that I'm. I'm. I'm really focused on these days. And so doing some of the things that I know for me will bring out the best in me. Lots, um, of time in the ocean, which, over the winter, I mean, winters are pretty mild here in Sydney, but getting into the sea in the morning and spending some time, um, yeah, in. In mindful contemplation.

Speaker A: Very nice.

Speaker B: Really, uh, helpful.

Speaker A: Very Good, mate, Very nice, very nice.

Speaker B: How about you? And in fact, I. I put it into practice the other day. As you know, I. I, uh, missed a plane the other morning, which causes a fair degree of stress in our work. I think I've been with you for nearly eight years now, and from memory, it's the first one I've missed.

Speaker A: Well, maybe, I don't know.

Speaker B: Well, you can backward map it.

Speaker A: First what I've heard of.

Speaker B: That's the first one you've heard of. It's a, uh, It's a small, small number, whatever it is. Um, but it's a, ah, you know, it's a stress. And you know, as you well know, in the work you're doing in the sports world at the moment in particular, it's very easy to be as cool as a cucumber when there's zero pressure. So if I'm sitting there in my little half lotus on the beach, you know, at dawn in the morning, it's very easy for me to be as cool and calm and collected as there's no pressure. However, when you're at an Airport at 20 past 5am and the lovely people at one Australian airline say to me, oh, no, you needed to be here one minute ago because we can't let you onto that 6am flight, which I had to sit there and watch on the tarmac for the next half hour, which nearly killed me. And that's when I get to practice being Zen.

Speaker A: Breathe, breathe. Be where your feet are.

Speaker B: Up, be where your feet are. And, you know, look, look for opportunities that come from. Um. How about yourself, Mr. M. Hasla?

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: What's happening in your world? I know for a fact, because you sent me a text message yesterday, that you've been hanging out with a couple of Olympians recently.

Speaker A: So we roll. That's how we roll.

Speaker B: Amongst other things. Tell us about the Olympians.

Speaker A: Yeah. So yesterday as we were recording this, um, we had Jess Fox and Noemi Fox, um, come and join us at, um, the footy team. I work out of the Panthers, and it was brilliant. They came in and they, um, shared lessons, um, not dissimilar to yours, actually, around how to handle those pressure moments and how to actually be completely present and be where your feet are at. Or in their case, be where their boats are at. And, um, yeah, just really, um, articulate, um, the way they were able to, um, talk about the techniques they use and the training that they've done around the mental side of their sport, which, um, the players and the coaches and myself obviously in particular were just. Yeah, we were lapping it up. Um, not only because it kind of. I mean there's always a bias, I guess, when it kind of affirms the kind of work you're doing, but when you get a new insight or a slightly different turn of phrase or a slightly different perspective. Yeah, it was. It was a really cool, um, opportunity to hear from them. Um, and. Yeah, and um, hopefully um, we'll be able to apply some of that thinking in the work that we're doing there in the lead up to the finals. So. Yeah, other than that, yeah, it's same as you really, uh, buzzing around the place, doing work in different environments, a, uh, few more corporate environments of late, couple, um, of new sporting, um, endeavors. Um, and of course, um, every now and then popping into schools and working with um, exec leadership teams there and whatnot. So, yeah, plenty going on. Um, one Eye already, obviously on 2025, um, planning. And that's probably, I'd say, the. The genesis of today's um, conversation really sort of reviewing, for want of a better word, the work we've been doing. The kind of common themes that, although we're working often in, in quite different environments, from a footy, you know, footy, uh, academy through to a school or into a big, um, Funnily enough, one of those airlines you were talking about. Um, you know, what's interesting, and we often say this is, you know, of course those environments look and sound different, but the things we're talking about are inevitably the same. You know, everyone in those environments is interested in creating the conditions where people can thrive, where we can get, um, you know, where we can get good people doing good work and um, you know, high performance, whatever label you want to put on that. And so, um, that against the backdrop of perhaps some of the challenges that we come, uh, up with or come up against, you know, like, how do we. How do we motivate that person or how do we deal with the tricky person? Um. Yeah, I thought, um, it was a good time to kind of review that and perhaps with one eye on. On next year, come up with a bit of a. I don't want to go as far to say a framework, but some. Some touch. Touchstones if you like, of what we think about when we're talking about high performance and more than that, what. What our experience is showing us to be true about when we're in a high performing environment, what things tend to be present. In fact, a phrase that, um, you know, um, Michael Gervais used on one of our recent episodes is this idea of being uncommonly so, you know, whatever it might be. And we'll probably talk about. Well, we will talk about what we've come up with here. But actually, it just struck me then, this idea of, for, for example, you know, like the idea of having consistency. Right. There's nobody that under, you know, that underestimates the importance of consistency. But in high performance environments, they are uncommonly consistent. That's why they're high performance. You know, everyone has a level of consistency, perhaps, or not, but high performance is. It's uncommonly consistent. They're going. And they're doing things just one degree more, you know, or one. One iteration more or one more rep or whatever that might be, you know, to actually, um, to. To sort of walk that talk.

Speaker B: So when you work with the Panthers, for example, you know, grand finalists for the last four years, winners for the last three years, um, heading. Marching inexorably towards, um, being in. In the.

Speaker A: In the final series.

Speaker B: Final series, the possibility of. Of who knows what. It's easy to talk about high performance like that's a phrase. If we're thinking about the Penrith Panthers, for example, we say, okay, high performance is a phrase that we apply to a team that is playing at an elite level and winning. When we think about schools, I spend a lot of my time in schools, and let's say a primary school, for example. Uh, it would be my contention that in schools we often don't consider ourselves to be in the high performance realm. And I think I disagree with that. Like, I, uh, think they are high performance environments to the extent that we allow them to be. To the extent that we are uncommonly consistent about the things that really matter to us. And we're going to look at.

Speaker A: And let's be quite clear. And, um, you know, a school is a far more consequential place than a football team. Let's be quite clear about that. And, And I've got no bones, you know, I've got no problem saying that what happens in school is important. Is important. It's far more important than what happens on a footy field. From a, uh, from an individual point of view, from a societal point of view. Um, you know, it's. It's funny I actually spoke. Um.

Speaker B: He'll explain this to you in more detail, Ivan.

Speaker A: No, no. Well, it's funny because. It's funny because I was speaking to the Penrith Network of schools at the start of this term. There was about 300 in there. Uh, seven. Seven or eight schools, about 300 staff across them. And Ivan came to listen.

Speaker B: Ivan Cleary is the coach of the pin.

Speaker A: He sat at the back, sort of out the way. Um, and I said that, you know, I actually said that out loud with him in the room. And we, you know, and I mean, it's. Because I think it's. It's objectively, it's true. You know, there are. There are certain things. And I think the point is. Right, the point is whatever environment you find yourself in, it's consequential. Right?

Speaker B: If it matters to you.

Speaker A: If it. Exactly. If it matters to you and if it matters to the people you're working with. And if it matters. So when I'm saying far more consequential, I think objectively we can say that, like, the nation's education is more consequential than who's winning, uh, a sporting competition. But that's not to diminish the level of consequence, the level of pressure, the level of application that people apply themselves with in those environments. So I guess that was a way to try and, um, be a clarion call, so to speak, for this idea. We've got to be thinking about high performance. And just on, uh, the. Before we dig into this in more depth, I think sometimes. I think sometimes people hear that and they get a bit twitchy. They get a bit. Oh, you know, you're trying to bring stuff from the corporate world or the. Or the sporting world into this. Or, you know, I spoke at a big corporate just last week, and I'm saying. I'm not here to say that your business is like sport. It's not. Right. It clearly isn't. Like in sport, for example, you know, the rules are explicitly clear. There's somebody walking around, mate, or running around with a whistle. With a whistle. So you can't do that. You can do that. You know, things aren't changing, the field isn't moving, you know, when you're playing footy, it's. It's not this. This marketplace that a, uh, business is in. So. But all of that is to say if we're interested in serving the people, you know, who. Who we're serving, and we're interested in bringing our best for those people so they can be their best. There are absolutely fundamental truths which are applicable across every domain because people are like people. And my final thought on this end of this rant is, you know, too often. Too often we. I think this idea of continual improvement, or you can improve or could do better is seen as quite a pejorative. Statement or it lands badly, as in,

Speaker B: you're not doing well enough.

Speaker A: Yeah. Whereas in. And this is the, uh, one lesson I'd urge us to take from sport is that's all we're interested in. All we're interested in is how do we improve.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: The very best players in the world, the very best teams in the world aren't interested in that as much as they're interested in, okay, what's our next. What's our next edge? What's the next evolution? How do we improve? And if I could urge anyone, and, and I would say that one of the reasons, somewhat ironically, that, um, we, we. We struggle with that in schools is because. Or the workplace is because sometimes literally a report is. Yeah, could do better. You know, rather than it being a statement of fact, it's kind of seen as a judgment or a punishment, which

Speaker B: can be really demoralizing.

Speaker A: Absolutely.

Speaker B: It is. As. As opposed to motivating. I mean, there's a reason. And, you know, we've. We've used this example a lot, and it, it still fascinates me every time I even think about it, that Roger Federer had a tennis coach his entire career. Absolute top of the tree. Obviously. He had a couple of people nipping at his heels all the way along, which he loved having Djokovic and Nadal and Andy Murray and those guys really pushing him. But he woke up each day thinking, how do I get better?

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: And that's a mindset that any teacher, any leader, uh, any footy player, any corporate, any. Any of us, you know, us as dads, how do I get slightly better at the thing that I do? And it's. If we're choosing that narrative, it's rather than, you know, Dan saying to Tim, hey, mate, I think you could get better at this. What are you going to do to improve? Which then feels like judgment and criticism. Um, although it doesn't need to be that, of course, and that depends on the safety within the relationship. But when it comes from me individually, how do I get better at this? What are some of the things that I can do that, uh, you know, even going back to the beginning of our conversation here, what are some of the things that I can do for myself that make me better in general? I'm a more relaxed person. If I have this particular morning routine, I show up better. If I have this morning routine, if I'm considering the way I'm eating, sleeping, all of those things, um, that we know make a difference. And they are performance amplifiers and footy teams just to round this off, you know, footy teams are very deliberate. The number of. I'm going to be wrong when I say this. I was going to say the number of variables are more limited and it's a zero sum game. They win or they lose. But I think the teams, and I'm sure you'll have a view on this, Dan. The teams that focus on winning or losing and that dictating where they're at in their own processes are kind of missing a point. What they're saying is, what can I learn from this win? What can I learn from this loss? And I know you've talked about almost an equanimity in the best change rooms you've been in where the mood in the room is to some extent unimpacted by whether it was a, uh, win or a loss.

Speaker A: Yeah. Certainly the intentionality around why we're in the room while we're in the review, the focus of the training. Like, uh, what I'll say is that in, in high, in the best performing teams I've, I've seen there's very, very little difference between, you know, the mood, the, the focus on a Monday after a win, uh, or after a loss. Like if you didn't know the result, you'd have a hard time knowing what's, what's gone on. In the lesser performing teams I've seen, it's stark. You know, they're riding the highs or they're in the lowest of lows. And you know there is. And, and you can't, you know, we're, we're literally talking about consistency before. Right. So uncommon consistency is this idea of I'll take good news and bad news with that level of equanimity, which is cool and I'll savor the good news, but I won't, um, I won't get carried away. I won't start reading over privilege. Yeah. Believe in my own hype or getting too beaten up when things are going badly. You know, it's all temporal, you know, and, and just being able to see it for what it is. Um, and look for the learning. It's that, that is like a mindset which is uncommon. Just look for the learning. People m. Say it a lot, but. Yeah. Do they do it? And the answer is no. You know, that one of the biggest. I've been riffing on this idea, you know, the biggest lies we tell, you know, one of them is all we learn from our mistakes. No, no, we don't. The vast majority of people do not learn from their mistakes. They hope no one ever finds out about the mistakes. They don't want to talk about the mistakes because, and you sort of brought this up before because of the environment. It's. And we're going to actually talk a bit about this as it happens. But, you know, there's, there's a lot of stuff we say, but the difference is who's uncommonly consistent in actually doing it. Um, you know, taking those Instagram memes and actually living it day in, day out. It's an operating system because those memes

Speaker B: are often incredibly nice little truisms to live our life by. But we, we treat them like candy, uh, in a way where we just. It's fairy floss.

Speaker A: It's just, you know, we don't understand, we don't understand the work it takes to create an environment where people learn from their mistakes. That's the reality. We don't understand how much work goes into it for someone to be able to put their hand up and, uh, go, you know what? I've stuffed up there and let me talk to you about what I did and what I thought was going to happen and how it went and what I've learned from it. And they're able to do that knowing that their value to the group hasn't diminished because they made an error. You know, their sense of belonging hasn't been compromised. And just to be clear, there's a caveat on this. We're not talking about gross negligence or illegalities or anything like that. We're just talking about someone had a crack at something, took a, you know, an educated risk or took a whatever, you know, and, and they're held in a way where actually, yeah, let's, we can learn from this. Actually. Um, you know, it's not like trying to prize it out of a group of 15 year old kids who don't want to look silly in front of their mates.

Speaker B: Yeah, and the idea of this is actually, I haven't talked to you about this yet. This is something that, um, I've been exploring recently because it came my way, this concept, um, known as negative capability. And it was actually coined by, um, one of your brothers, an English romantic poet, John Keats, who we probably all studied a bit of Keats at school. He's the guy that wrote Ode to a Grecian Urn and Ode to a Nightingale and had this incredible career. Died at 25. Tuberculosis. Um, but he wrote a letter to two of his brothers and he was actually talking about Shakespeare and saying, we don't need to understand Shakespeare Immediately. We don't need to make sense of it immediately. Sitting. That unknowing, which I think is a parallel with what you were just saying there. And I love this. I really like this idea. Um, and yeah, he's saying that we have the capability. My understanding of what he said, we have this capability. Um, but at this stage, we're seeing it as a negative course. We don't know how long you prepared to sit in it. It. To make sense of something without feeling this. This restlessness to understand and to make sense. Um, and I think there's. There's a real confidence that comes with negative capability. You have to be okay. And it's kind of. It's kind of an antidote to anxiety, which is, you know, everywhere these days, just sitting with something.

Speaker A: Yeah, I love, I love that. I mean, a couple of things are popping off in my head. Like the first one I came. I forget who said it, um, but it was probably an Instagram meme. But the idea. The idea of the, you know, the person who can master patience, can master anything, you know, and then I can. I sort of hold, um, that up against, you know, I often sort of reflect on education. Being a former teacher, but also having two teenagers now going through it. You know, it's like I feel it's a shame that, for example, you know, my daughter's, um, maths endeavors are kind of put up there. It's kind of like a race, you know, You've got to get it, got to move on. Come on, let's move. And I know for a fact, uh, she feels she doesn't have that ability at the moment to sit with that discomfort.

Speaker B: Because competition.

Speaker A: Yeah, exactly.

Speaker B: Is the enemy of that.

Speaker A: Yeah. And she's being left behind. And it's this and it's that. And so, yeah, it's just an interesting observation. And again, whether that's, uh, whether it's a school thing, a work thing, a sports thing, being able to sit with that discomfort. In athletes, we talk about the idea of being, you know, comfortable when it's uncomfortable, um, which is usually more around the physical side of it. But there's definitely a mental part to that as well. So I think it sort of correlates a little bit. Um, well, we've, uh, I had down here introduction two minutes, I think. Um, the fact that, you know, we have just been riffing a lot on. On the work we've been doing and sort of. Yeah. Trying to pull it together. So our. Our hope for today's episode, Perko, is that we're gonna draw together what we see as being sort of like five. I'm not gonna go as far to say as key things because we're still playing with this as it happens, but certainly five things that.

Speaker B: Pillars.

Speaker A: Pillars or. Yeah, but I don't want to set them in stone yet. Perko. Okay, well just five ideas or five things. Themes, themes, concepts, Thought bubbles. Thought bubbles that we're sort of seeing over and over and over again when we're working with teams who are performing well. Um, and because we uh, you know we do like sort of uh, catchy, catchy instagrammable ideas, we've, we've sort of pieced them together in terms of like if we've got a high performing team in front of us in any domain, our bet is that these five Cs are going to be present and we're going to talk a little bit about each of these um, C's um, and we're going to sort of introduce ideas uh, from previous podcasts for different guests that we've had on, um, to help illustrate that and then we'll just riff on, on different um, different elements of it as we've been observing them. So those five C's M. And we're not just right from the get go, we're not suggesting this is a framework as such or they, they need to be sequential. But what we are saying.

Speaker B: Definitely not saying they're going to be

Speaker A: sequential, we're definitely not saying that. And I think the way we've actually pieced together the podcasts will probably um, reinforce that at the end. Definitely not sequential. So not saying you need this before this, before this, but you probably need a fair degree of each of these based on your own um, environment. So what we're saying is in high performing environments we see a lot of connection, both interpersonal connection, uh, connection to vision, connection to purpose, uh, connection to their clients or their customers or their kids, whoever it might be. So connection and real authentic connection. Um, and again, people being uncommon, uncommonly consistent, which we'll come to in a minute about putting that, you know, front at the forefront of their work. Um, the second C is this idea of clarity. So absolute clarity on uh, what's acceptable, what's not, how we're going to do the work, why we're doing the work. So again already you can see there's overlap here. We've got clarity in our connection. So the connection to the vision, the purpose, we're super clear on that. Everyone knows what it means. There's not a uh, version, you know, 1 and A. Version 2 and the version 34. We know what we're doing and why. And then once we've got that, then we've got this level of commitment to that commitment, not only to the cause, but to each other. I've got your back, you know, um, you know, if you fall down, no dramas, I'll pick you up. Because I know that when I fall down, you'll pick me up. So we're committed to the cause, we're committed to the work. Um, we're committed to the client, whoever, the children, the sporting endeavor, whatever. We're committed to that, but we're committed to each other as well. And again, the word we've used already numerous times, um, consistency. We do that. It's not just on our good days when we're doing that. It's when we're struggling, it's when there's a bit of indifference, whatever. We are uncommonly consistent in, in the way we go about that. And the final C that we've come up with at the moment is this idea of. And there's an element of challenge. So there's a, ah, it could be the challenge of winning a comp. Could be quite an objective measure, could be a numbers thing. But, you know, as much as there could be an external challenge, we actually, if we're being honest, probably m. Privilege the internal challenge more the challenge to find our own performance gap. The challenge to continually learn, grow and develop. Um, and again, not just on our own, but as a collective. Um. And yeah, the argument being high performance is a result of those things, you know, and whatever metrics we're using. Yeah, you know what, we may see them, um, all the time, but reality is, whether that's sport, whether it's at school, whether it's in the, you know, in the economy, the variables are going to be such that the results may well vary, but the manner of the performance is going to be at that, ah, that. That level. And, and that's actually often sort of like my opening gambit when I go and work with people is I'm interested in results. Of course I am, of course I am. But I'm more interested in the manner of that performance. And so even, even last week I went into a business where they were talking about, oh, we've got to be number one. It's like, really? Why? Like what? It's just a. That seems odd to me that we've got to be number one. Because that's actually probably more of a reflection on everyone else. Like if everyone else is shit, are you happy being number one just by being less shit? Which is obviously a bit flippant, but really, let's just focus on being our best. Let's focus on improving ourselves. And you know what, that metric will probably take care of itself if we do these five. If we get into the weeds around these five things. So connection, clarity, commitment, consistency, and, um, challenge.

Speaker B: So what we've done is look at a bunch of the podcasts that we've done in the past, listen to those and think about these experts, people who are really, you know, top of their field, um, some of the people who've developed the frameworks that we use when we're working with you in the various organizations that we work with, and take another sound bite from five different ones that really fit and exemplify what we're talking about here with this 5C concept that we're playing with. And we're going to draw out from each of those.

Speaker A: Yeah. So the first, um, one we're going to, uh, dip into is episode 79 in which we interviewed Owen Eastwood, who, um, is the author of a book called Belonging, which has had a real significant impact on the work that Tim and I, um, do. And Owen, um, is a performance coach and has worked with some of the, uh, biggest sporting teams, um, in the world essentially, but also does work in, in the corporate space as well. And as I mentioned, this idea of belonging, um, and connection, um, has really, since we came across Owen's work, has really, um, been elevated in the way that we think, um, about the work that we do. And yeah, we just want to start, almost start with the end in mind. But if we start with this idea of connection, just taking this little snippet from our chat with Owen,

Speaker C: you know how you induct people when they come in, do you actually bother to sit them down and explain to them, um, before you start your, you know, induction process, I'm just going to explain to you.

Speaker A: You're onboarding, correct?

Speaker C: This is why we've brought you here. We had some amazing candidates, but I just want you to understand this is why we selected you and this is why you belong here and this is how we believe you can help us. Um, if you have to give feedback to somebody rather than saying, okay, let's have a conversation, I'm not happy about what you just did, this is not good enough, etc. You can be a bit more informed of using as past people at Gareth Southgate who would explain, um, let's have a chat about how you're performing at the moment. First of all, I just want to remind you, this is why you're here. This is why you belong here. This is why we brought you in. This is what we love about you. Love about what you can bring to this team. This is how you make us better. And then reference. Hey, you know, we had a conversation, didn't we, about what the best version of you could, could evolve and become. And, um, you know, there'll be a gap between where we're at right now and that and just talk to me about it. You do that, you can literally hormonally profile someone. The difference between setting up a conversation and giving feedback in that way versus the sort of direct, confrontational, edgy, uh, statement.

Speaker B: So one of the phrases there that really jumps out to me in that quote is, is those three words, you belong here. And Owen, for those of you who've listened to the whole podcast previously, he uses that phrase a couple of times. And he says that, um, in his book, he says that for Pacific Islanders, those three words are the most powerful words that they can hear. And then in the conversation with him, you know, I sort of put it to him that those three words are powerful for everybody, right? And he, he agrees that for, you know, for all of us, you belong here is an incredibly powerful phrase. And, you know, under this first C, um, of connection, you know, and connection, slash, belonging, which is Owen's, you know, premise here, to recognize that we have you, you are one of us, you're part of this organization. So that, that's great when things are great, but what about when things aren't so great? What about when things get a little bit tricky? You know, what about when I have to call you to account perhaps in relation to something. If we begin as he's done in the quote here, you know, um, we're not that happy about something that's just happened. However, what we're. Incredibly, what we've been deliberate about is choosing you. You are part of us. So how do we move forward from here? Dan? What. When. When you hear this quote and when you think about why we've chosen this, one of this is why, you know, you belong here. You're part of us.

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: How does it land with you?

Speaker A: Yeah, for me, it was around the, uh, you know, use of the word, you know, induction process. And I think of so many, um, different environments where the induction process is so practical based. It was like, okay, here's how you put in a leave request. Here's your laptop, here's where the bathrooms are. Here's where the bathrooms are. And you know, obviously, obviously there's a, there's a, there's a, a reason we need to do that and there's a. It's, it's, as I said, it's practical that we need to do that. But I think I'm gonna go as far to say that so many dramas at, uh, In a workplace. So many dramas in a workplace, wherever you might find yourself, or in a classroom or in a staff room, boardroom, change room, whatever. So many dramas, if we tracked it back, fundamentally have originated because at some point or other someone felt like they're on the outer. That's a generalization. But, uh, but at some point or other they felt like, you know what you. And you're not part of what we want here. The way you go about things, um, your professionalism or lack thereof, this and that, that's, that that's not, you know, who we are. And whilst just to be clear, this is not to excuse any unprofessional behavior or anything like that, I think if we actually took the time at the start to really connect with people over and above the, you know, team dinner or over and above the um, welcome drinks or whatever it might be, whatever it might be, you know, to really build authentic connection with maybe not everyone, because I don't know, your team might be enormous, the people might be there. But to get really connected with some key people and really understand who's in front of us, who, who's with it, who've we got around us here, what makes them tick, what are their m. Motivations, what are their values, what's their origin story, you know, what do they hold to be most important, what's their non negotiables, all that kind of stuff.

Speaker B: Um, so over and above the work you're talking about.

Speaker A: I don't give a toss about the work at this point. Yeah, that's. Yeah, I mean that's. I'm gonna make again, massive generalization. But if you've made it through the interview process and you've got the job, I'm guessing you've got some level of competence, right? Yeah. And of course we're gonna, as we've alluded to in our 5C model here, we're going to challenge you to do, do more. But we spend so much time talking about the work and no time talking about the people who do the work or how we're going to do the work. And that for me, again, uncommonly consistent. Right. We've got to have this. And just, uh. Just so we're clear, we're not talking about, you know, it's sharing circles where we're all, you know, gratuitously talking about the biggest challenges we've faced in our lives. We're talking about having five minutes at the start of a meeting. I was, uh, checking in. Deliver. It's on the agenda. Check in. How you going? How was your weekend? How your kids going at school?

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Um, whatever it might be. Right. Um, and you.

Speaker B: You said. Just. Just let me interrupt you for a sec. You mentioned earlier about your daughter and maths at school. So it's one thing to check in about the things that are going really well for you.

Speaker D: Yeah.

Speaker B: Mad experience. I met a couple of Olympians yesterday. But also, there's this thing going on for me. You know, part of the richness of my world is the fact that I'm finding it difficult watching my daughter struggle with this particular thing.

Speaker A: Tell you what makes it harder when I try and help her and I struggle with it. Turns out I'm crap at both.

Speaker B: But you. You share that stuff with me, which then says, okay, this. This is another thin layer of thread of connection that says, okay, well, I'm more than just the work. Um, like, as you just said, quite strong. I don't give a toss about the work. And of course we do.

Speaker A: Yeah. But at that point in time, if it's about connection. So if it's about. No, no, People first, you know, we've Have. We have this in our. In our.

Speaker B: In our stuff, in our manifesto.

Speaker A: Yeah. You know, it's. It's. We're people first. Um, and I think when we miss that Mark, you know, in a previous podcast we spoke about, in our last Q and A, actually in episode 94, I think we use that phrase of, you know, start seeing people as people rather than as problems, you know, particularly if we're dealing with Trick. You know, when. So when you don't have these five Cs in place, typically we start talking about the problem. We start talking about, you know, all the dramas. It's like, no, no, let's see them as people first. Because my guess is that unless they are, uh, Unless they are in the real smallest proportion of society who do just wake up in the morning and want to make your life hell, my guess is the vast majority of people are dealing with stuff, which means we need to be aware of it in some way so we can support them a little bit better. Um, so they can be a little bit better, you know, um, and I know that sounds a little bit woo woo and a little bit out there, but for me that's what leadership requires today.

Speaker B: And we've used the playing with the term more recently about people crave significance. And significance means I matter. What I uh, do matters, how I fit into this organization matters, we crave significance. And when things fall apart, as you were starting to say before, maybe it's that sense of that significance has been eroded.

Speaker C: I.

Speaker B: It feels to me like I don't matter. M. And that's going to have big consequences.

Speaker A: Yeah. And if you don't feel like you belong, if we just keep riffing on Owens piece, if we, we feel like that we don't belong, then we sure as hell can't feel like we matter.

Speaker B: Yeah, absolutely.

Speaker A: Yeah. Which I think then leads us into. So let's, you know. And again, I'm not saying they are sequential because I think they are more symbiotic than sequential. These um, these five Cs, another part I think of that connection piece is not just the belonging, but being able to I guess bring, you know, your authentic self, if we want to use that phrase. But being able to speak your truth, being able to speak up, uh, to power, um, being able to share questions that you've got, ideas, concerns, mistakes, um, and not feel like you're going to um, you know, be punished or humiliated. And what we're talking about here is that, that belief that you can do that is this concept of psychological safety. And Professor Amy Edmondson from Harvard Uni is, is the world's leading expert on psychological safety. And we were lucky enough to have her um, back on episod of the podcast. And in that I asked her for her definition of psychological safety and this is what she shared.

Speaker D: You know, a short way to say it is psychological safety is a sense of permission for candor. So ah, it's an awareness that I can speak up at work, I can ask questions, I can offer half baked ideas, I can request help, I can acknowledge mistakes, all of that. Um, and I've formally defined it as a shared belief that the workplace is safe for interpersonal risk taking.

Speaker A: So when I hear Amy talk about um, that idea of um, being able to offer half baked ideas or requesting help, um, and speaking up in general. And I guess the key bit there, uh, having permission for candor, you know, for me that really speaks to the, the idea of building clarity. I can tell you what I'm thinking here, just so we're clear and you can tell me what you're Thinking so we can get to that sense of alignment around. Okay, uh, this is the thing. Right, I get it. And since the release of her book the Fearless Organization, she's written, um, many other books. But that book in particular really brought, um, the concept of psychological safety to the forefront. And it's certainly work that we've spent a lot of time, um, grounded in when we're working with teams. And one of the things that I've just started to hear a little bit, um, in the, I'm going to say maybe the past six months or so is people just starting to push back against the idea of psychological safety. And, and just to be just so we're clear, dear listener, I think in an incorrect way they've pushed back. They'll say things like, oh, uh, damn. But what happens when there's too much psych. Psychological safety? You can have too much, you know. And so when I asked them, I said, okay, oh, you know, help me understand what you mean by too much psychological safety. They'll say things like, oh, well, people feel free to be able to just say exactly what they want, or they can, you know, stand up in a meeting and completely railroad it, you know, or they can undermine things. They're just overconfident. And so my follow up is then, okay, so when people do that, when they railroad the meetings, when they undermine or the, you know, they just sort of dominate the voice space, whatever it might be, I say, what do you do in response? Or what do other people do in response? And they'll say something like, oh, uh, not much because, you know, they're dominating the space. I go, okay, so you don't have psychological safety. Then it's, uh, this idea of we've got too much. No, no, what you've got there is someone who lacks awareness, uh, doesn't understand group norms, doesn't understand the protocols. Um, perhaps for whatever reason, you know, they're just not able to engage in the group in the way that others might find appropriate. Maybe, maybe they are out to get you. Whatever. Right, but whatever. But if no one is speaking up to voice their concerns, if no one is speaking, if no one's taken interpersonal risk to ask this person to, okay, that's great, thanks for sharing, but we'll pick this up later. Or then let's be quite clear, you do not have, you don't have anywhere near enough psychological safety, let alone too much. And I think this is such an important nuance to understand if no one's speaking up or if the leader, if you Yourself are feeling. Oh, gosh, I don't quite know what to say here or do here or how to manage this here. And this isn't the hill to die on. It's not the time. Then let's not tell ourselves we've got too much. You cannot have too much psychological safety. The more psychological safety you've got, the more permission for candor you've got. Uh, which means I can hear what you're saying, and I fundamentally disagree with it. And here's why. I fundamentally disagree with it. And it's done in a respectful, collegial, collaborative manner. Let's talk more about it so I can understand more. Because at the moment, I fundamentally disagree, but I respect you. So let's talk more about this. You might not change my mind, and I might not change yours, but we can certainly broaden our thinking. I can. I can learn to empathize with you. Doesn't mean I need to agree. Doesn't mean we need to change what we're doing here. But let's be clear. I want to hear these concerns you've got. I want to hear these questions. You've got these ideas You've got. The idea that you can have too much psychological safety is that. Is the same to say, you know, that water is a bit too clear. You can have water that's too clear, you know, and.

Speaker B: And you can have too much respect in. Too much trust.

Speaker A: Far too much. Yeah. And. And it's just. It. It's. What's the right phrase? It's a straw man. Is that what it is? A straw man argument? When. When you put something on, um, me. You can have too much. No, you can't. Because that's actually a falsehood. It doesn't exist. It's not. There's no substance.

Speaker B: Because Amy. Amy uses terms like everyone and no one, which are really important terms in relation to this. Everyone feels safe to speak up. Uh, no one will be punished for speaking up. And the example you've given with people, and I've come across this as well, where people say, can you have too much? Or we have too much. What they're really talking about is obnoxious, unself aware, egotistical behavior of a few that are actually demeaning, uh, psych safety. Reducing psych safety. It appears that they are so psychologically safe, they can say whatever the leap they want, which is not the case. That's got nothing to do with psych safety.

Speaker A: Yeah. Just because it's like, um, we were talking about. I'm trying to Work in a metaphor about the River Seine in Paris. Just because some athletes felt it was safe to jump in, or more clearly they were told it was safe to jump in, doesn't mean it was safe to jump in. It doesn't mean that there was no pollution. Right. But just because some people do, it has to be objectively. You look around and go, oh no, everyone can, we can all jump in here. Respectfully. You know, and I think that's really, you know, again, when we're talking about clarity, what does respect look, sound and feel like here? You know, when we're debating our ideas, what is acceptable, what is not acceptable?

Speaker B: And that clarity. We have to be so deliberate about the clarity that the clarity impacts you. It impacts me, everybody in the organization. Because you might feel 100% clear that it's safe to speak up, but for me, I might feel the complete opposite. So how do we clarify the parameters that says to everyone. And you know, as we've discussed with lots of organizations before, this is a constant building up of a cultural environment that, yeah, it's constantly developing to say that it's safe here because it can be eroded very, very easily. You've said in micro moments, you know, somebody rolling their eyes, somebody, you know, acquired, ah, aside to somebody else, psychological safety can be diminished. So the clarity here, uh, and perhaps the commitment as well. Dan, I'm not, you know, as we explore this, this sort of creation that we're, we're building as we go here is psychological. It is, this is what psychological safety means for all of us. And this is our shared commitment to that.

Speaker A: Absolutely.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Yeah. Which leads us beautifully into this, um, the next episode we want to draw on, which is, ah, episode 38 with um, Jonathan Raymond, who introduced us to a, I think a really elegant,

Speaker B: um,

Speaker A: model for navigating accountability in um, any environment, to be honest. And it's called the accountability dial. And if you, if your interest is peaked just by this one particular excerpt we're going to play, then I'd urge you to dig out episode 38. And his book Good Authority is also a really useful read. Um, because what we're sort of trying to bridge here is the idea, as you put there, the clarity. This is what we're saying now. Can you commit to this? And I know that you, um, uh, you know, one of your favorite plays over the past few years has been literally to get people to sign off on the rules of play. You know, this is how we're going to debate, this is how we're going to make Decisions. This is how we, this is what professional means in our environment. Best professional self can. Now can we all commit to this? Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. And so that idea of getting clarity on what we mean and then the commitment piece because as um, Jonathan, um, talks about here, um, you know, often we kind of think we're on the same page when it comes to what professional means or what punctual means or what prepared means. But often you know, and uh, you know I use this phrase a lot sometimes, you know we think we're on the same page but in, in many cases we're not even in the same library. So um, yeah, I just love this little excerpt that we're going to play now from uh, episode 38.

Speaker E: Was auditing a class in Buddhist psychology about 20 years ago and the professor had said something that was one of the, one of the favorite things I've ever heard. I can't remember his name but there was a wise ass student who was trying to make a point and uh, raised his hand and he wanted to speak and the teacher called on him and he said, well I think that's similar to this other thing. And the professor responded and looked at him with this very serious, playful look. He was a very kind of provocative guy. And he said, well if you mean similar as in not the same, then I totally agree with you. And that's where most organizations and is that we look, we're similar but we're not the same. And the daylight between those two things is enormous. And I couldn't agree with you more that the reason why accountability lags on most teams and most organizations. It's not because the manager doesn't want to drive accountability and it's not because the people don't want to be accountable and it's not even because they don't want to be pushed. It's because there's a misalignment between what you as the manager actually want. Even though I know you think it's clear it isn't and they think you want something else. You're using the same words, people are nodding heads. But I promise you, having watched this a thousand times, that you're similar but you're not the same.

Speaker A: Yeah, ah, I really like the distinction uh, between same versus similar. And um, you know, the idea that whilst we might feel like we're on course together, just even one or two degrees of separation in the moment might not feel like a thing. But a week to three weeks down the track, there is actually quite a degree of separation, um, at that point. So, which leads us into this idea um, of consistency. So the accountability dial that Jonathan created sort of is I guess one tool that we can use to help stay consistent on the uh, commitments that we've made to each other. But one of our um, I think one of our most popular podcasts actually um, one of the most popular episodes is episode 45 with Kim, um, Scott, the author of Radical Candor. And I know Tim, you do a lot of work with um, the framework of Radical Candor in, in the work that you do with, with exec teams. Just briefly give us a little intro to what Radical Candor is and how to conceptualize that and then we'll jump to the little excerpt we've got of Kim talking.

Speaker B: Yeah, so Radical Candor, um, as you say comes from the book by Kim Scott where she's developed this model, um, which fundamentally is a very straightforward model if you can envision, ah, a two by two grid, um, and she has four quadrants in this grid. And the top right quadrant she refers to as this concept of radical Candor. And it's where a um, really clear understanding of developing relationship is aligned with the idea of a really clear process of challenging people and giving feedback on things. So when, when the, when there's a high emphasis on the relationship, um, and there's a high emphasis on giving honest clear feedback, that's what she refers to as being in the space of radical candor.

Speaker E: And

Speaker B: one of the things that she really um, emphasizes there is this idea that the opposite side of Radical Candor is this idea of ruinous empathy which is where for all sorts of reasons, a lot of them based around self preservation, we don't say the things to the people that we work and live with that we need to say to them in the way that we need to say that to them and in the time frame that we need to say it to them. Because we've got all sorts of valid reasons for not wanting to have what a lot of us refer to as difficult conversations. We don't give the feedback that we need to give to the people, um, that we're surrounded by because of fear of damaging the relationship, because of fear of potential retribution from the other person, for fear of um, not having all the facts, um, and not wanting to step into something that we're not 100% certain about. There's all sorts of valid reasons why we don't say the things that we want to say. But what Kim talks about here. And we'll listen to this little sound bite from the interview in episode 45 with her now, um, is that we need to find a way to step into those challenging conversations.

Speaker F: Now you want to start out and you want to start out in kind of a gentle way and you want to say, you know, there's something that I'd like to talk to you about. Is now a good time? And judge how your boss responds. Usually again, nine times out of ten they'll respond well. And then don't go immediately to the outer edge of challenge directly, but say it in kind of a gentle, uh, neutral way, whatever it is that's bothering you, and then pay attention to the response. And if your boss seems angry, if your boss seems upset, that's okay. It's because your boss is a human being. Try to respond to the human need and move up a little bit on the care personally dimension. Nine times out of ten, however, your boss will sort of not really hear what you're saying because your boss is probably super confident and you're going to have to say it again, maybe more sharply. And so find uh, uh, again find the courage to move out on the challenge directly dimension when it's necessary, but don't go to the outer edge immediately.

Speaker B: I've been playing with an idea. I've been listening to your podcast and I heard in relation to exactly what you've just been talking about, you used the phrase tread gently but tread. Yeah, and I really, the phrase was playing in my mind, um, and I was thinking about it and Dan and I have just been playing with this idea. Tread gently but tread says to me this is sort of confident, front foot, brave, empowered sort of speech. Remember to tread the reverse of tread gently but tread might be tread but tread gently, which sounds to me much more fearful, cautious, apologetic, powerless. And I think the order of that phrase is super important.

Speaker A: I think um, radical candor, bit like what we're talking about with psychological safety previously has again been somewhat misunderstood in, in certain areas. I was listening to a podcast just last week actually um, with uh, Ryan Halliday, um, who is um, the author of Daily Stoic or, and he's you know, quite a well thought of uh, commentator and uh, influencer if you like on, on Instagram and all that kind of stuff, many best selling books. And he I believe gave a misrepresentation of what radical candor was because he was talking about how people can use uh, it just to be um, in his words, a bit of an asshole. And um, and I was listening to going no, you've completely misunderstood the model as I understand it anyway, which radical candor only exists with, with care. So if we don't have that care, if we can go back to the two by two box that, um, Tim was talking about, if you imagine the Y axis, uh, the ones who are mathematically challenged like me, that's the axis going up the page. Um, let's say that's care and then the X axis are going across the page. Um, is the challenge anything below the midpoint? So where the X axis crosses the Y axis, anywhere below that midpoint, you've stopped caring about the person. And, you know, we often use the phrase, if you're below that line, then you, you can't be leading, you're not leading if you're below that line. And so, you know, by caring about the person and then bringing the challenge, um, that's how to be radically candid. And if you care enough about the person, as Tim alluded to in, in his, uh, reflection of Kim's words, you will find a way to tread. You know, you will find a way to tread gently, but tread. Um, because if we don't, if we're just caring about the person, but we're holding back from that, that's when you find yourself in that ruinous empathy part. That's when you find yourself not speaking up because you don't want to damage the relationship. And I'd imagine if you're like any other human I've met on the planet, myself included, we've all got a conversation that's in that quadrant right now. We've all got a, uh, conversation that would be worthy of having, but we're just holding back on it and so is there a script? Absolutely not. You know, but there's a way that if you go looking for it, you know, and it's uncomfortable, you know, and I actually had this conversation with my, my son the other day about, you know, that's where the gold often is, the stuff that feels a bit uncomfortable. You don't really want to do it, but you know, you need to, if you can go, go there. No one needs to be disciplined when they're doing stuff they love. But if you can go there, that's where the growth is, that's where the gold is. So thinking about, you know, how you can tread gently, it's just getting your foot in the water to start with, to start the conversation a bit like what you were talking about before Perko, about. We don't have to have this conversation one and done in 10 minutes. This could be the start of A conversation which takes place now over the next few months, you know, who knows? Um, so, yeah, it's just something to, um, be mindful of. And I think it's something that, um, even workshopping, you know, uh, with, with people around you to say, okay, well how, how can we do this? How can I tread gently here? Because I do know I need to tread.

Speaker B: It's interesting what you were just saying about your son there, Dan. I was just looking up, um, I just heard an interview with, um, Steve Biddulph, the Australian, um, psychologist who has written some very influential books around parenting, um, particularly one called Raising Boys, and then a whole lot of other ones that he's written subsequently. But he's got a new book out at the moment called Wild Creature Mind, A, um, new way of using your mind. And he talks about what you actually feel in your body when you're feeling uncomfortable about something, saying that often that feeling in our body, which is what he's referring to as our wild creature mind. So rather than, you know, um, the part of our brain that you know is often referred to as the left side of the brain, which is the analytical sort of side, um, and the language based side. And often those conversations, we can be put off those conversations because of the idea that we know that there's language we're putting around this that is making this. And we often fall into this trap of saying, this is going to be difficult. This is a hard conversation. So we find every reason in the world to avoid those conversations saying, but actually tapping into your body, the gold that you were talking about there, Dan, with your boy, that of recognizing where the discomfort is and saying, well, that's a part of how I'm feeling. Um, it's not the complete feeling because when we recognize that difficulty in our body, it often puts us off doing the thing that we want to do because it's discomfort. Um, and so about making, turning that into a more not necessarily comfortable situation, but trying to diminish the discomfort by stepping into it. And I think that's the point that I really try and make with that play on words with Kim in the interview. There's the tread gently, which is the care factor that you're talking about, the Y axis. But tread, you know, it's, it's our responsibility. There's a lot of leaders who are listening to this podcast, but in a sense we're all leaders. Whoever, whoever it is that's listening. As leaders, we have responsibility to do the challenging stuff, and that's the tread. But do it uh, you know, always couch that treading in care of the other person and you know, this becomes more nuanced because what does care look like for them? And this is where our self awareness is so important to recognize what the other person needs as well. What does treading gently look like to them? Because for us, treading gently might be one thing, but what is it for them? How are they going to receive what it is that we need to share?

Speaker A: Which ties in beautifully, Perko, with our final uh, little Excerpt from episode 67 in which I chatted with Aaron, um, Walsh, who is a, uh, mental skills coach who works in multiple sports. And the focus, it was actually quite a wide ranging conversation. But the particular focus of this excerpt, uh, is that is the language we use and the understanding, the difference I guess between what it is we say and what they hear. And I think in terms of um, everything we've spoken about, um, in today's podcast with this is, you know, our fifth sea of challenge. But I think you'll notice here how it really speaks to the symbiotic relationship between all of these Cs. So this is what Aaron Walsh had to share with us back in episode 67.

Speaker G: I've probably done 30 reviews in the last 10 years for teams. 30 of them have said at the end of the review, we need to be more accountable, need to be more honest and always push back and say, I don't think you need to be more honest. I think you need to be more connected. M. Because if you're more connected and you trust each other, honesty will be a natural, um, it'll be a natural person in your environment to use that term. Right? Yeah, but, but forced honesty, forced accountability. And so sometimes I think at leaders have the idea of that if we just throw a little bit of pressure through a throwaway comment there in their mind, they're thinking we could get a bit of motivation here. This might be the little, you know, insight we need with them. Just think about that. They go home and they sit on it all night. So I always say to, uh, you know, to head coach, as I said, you know, what message do you want your athlete thinking about all night when they walk out of the room?

Speaker A: So even though, um, Aaron was obviously talking there about an athlete and a coach, just as Perko was saying before, I think this regardless of whether you're a, you know, leader in email signature or just leader as a person, you know, you have influence over others, um, or you actually engage with any other human being on the planet, um, Thinking about what is it that I really would like them to hear or uh, what do they need to hear. And again, just to be clear, we're keeping this grounded in the care side of things. Um, but really understanding. Yeah. That the way in which we communicate here, the way in which we talk, if we listen back to, you know, what all she was saying there about. So often we think it's about accountability. So often we think it's about just discipline or turning up and doing the job when in actual fact, maybe, maybe it goes back to how we started this conversation around, um, about being connected and having that clarity of connection and being committed to that and perhaps being uncommonly consistent and keep bringing that back, back to the four. Um, you know, I just thought it was, ah, an interesting opportunity for us to sort of riff on some ideas that we've been having Perco today. And um, yeah, I'll be really interested to hear what kind of feedback we get on this episode. We're going to share it obviously with all the people we work with and in our online workshops. But we didn't really, we didn't plan this as such. So I'm curious, just, you know, what, what do you, what have you got out of talking about this today?

Speaker B: Yeah, well, uh, I might just step back one step for a minute first and just come back to the Aaron Walsh one there because there's something there that really directly affects, uh, a school principal that I'm working with at the moment in relation to. She is finding it challenging to be motivating by saying the things that she needs to say to her people, that she wants to say to her people with the idea of the fifth C here of challenge, which is based around growth. These are some things I'm seeing and I want to support you to be better and I've chosen you. Like, if we go back to the Owen Eastwood idea, we've chosen you, we want you here. How are we going to support you to bridge the gap between what you said you wanted and what we're currently seeing? And, and this particular principle is saying I'm finding it really hard to find the language that is motivating for my people rather than feeling like a heavy stick. Um, and so there's a lot of nuance involved in this. And I think it comes back to, you know, the second C or the first C, you know, connection. How do we really develop the connection so that people can actually hear what it is that we're trying to say to them? Because, I mean, you and I have both Worked with endless people who are banging their head against the wall saying, but I've told them, you know, and, but what they are, uh, hearing and what I'm saying can be two very divergent things. But I think, then again, if we go back to the Kim Scott one, if we increase the care personally on that Y axis, the vertical axis, if I keep focusing on the care, then maybe how I'm heard and we have to work on this. This is a skill. Some people you meet in life are able to say really tough things to people and people walk away going, yeah, I'm learning from this, but I think it's a very rare skill. Um, so for the rest of us, it's something we really have to work on and learn. But back to your original question there, Dan. You know, sort of my general reflection on this idea. One of the things that we've said off air to each other is the idea that it's not linear, it's not sequential. Um, and you described it, we're really struggling with this by the way you described it as sort of gaseous, like a cloud that. And we're talking about all of the elements, connection, clarity, commitment, consistency and challenge. They're all sort of gases that are existing together and they, they all have an interplay on each other. Um, there is, you know, if you take one of them out, you don't have the formula that you want it, so they all need to be in there.

Speaker A: But is it a cocktail now?

Speaker B: Now you're talking our language. We're not scientists, but we are drinking the culture.

Speaker A: The culture cocktail. There you go. Done. T™™.

Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, let's face it, if you get the elements wrong, it could taste like. And if you get the elements right, it could be just what you were

Speaker A: or it could be toxic.

Speaker B: So, yeah, that was my reflection before you enhanced it.

Speaker A: Enhanced. Who knows? Who knows? We're just riffing it. Ah, yeah, send us in your ideas. Um, yeah, well, yeah, no, that was cool. That was, um, yeah, what I hoped it would be actually a bit of a free ranging exploration and also recognizing that, you know, yeah, we're not as prolific as some podcast, um, producers. Um, but the quality, this is the quality not of the hosts. The hosts, but the quality of the guests that we have on. Ah, I don't know. You know, I hear a lot of, I listen to a lot of podcasts and I know that, you know, but the quality of guests we've had on, we've been very fortunate to really have some great conversation. So this was also a bit of an attempt to either invite, uh, people who have previously listened to go back and listen again to certain episodes. We, we listen to episodes countless times in preparation for workshops we run in. We always hear something a little different or it resonates a little differently. And of course, if you're new to the podcast, um, this is an invitation to go back into the back catalog somewhat and, uh, see what you have a dig around and see what's there.

Speaker B: Um, I really like the premise of what we've tried to do here today, Dan, because high performance is for everyone.

Speaker A: M. Absolutely.

Speaker B: And what we're looking at here is the cocktail of high performance or higher performance. How do we. How do we grow? How do we get slightly better? How do we have that mindset that says, yeah, I want to. I want to be as good as I can be at this thing, whatever this thing is, you know, whether you're a footy player or a sports coach or a corporate leader or a school teacher or a school leader, whoever it is that's listening to this high performance, my, my view of this is that high performance does apply to you in, uh, a really positive way. Yeah, how can I. Because, you know, as we both get to see almost daily when people are, uh, increasing their performance, it's a good thing for them. You know, I think you're actually. Here you go. Here's a little throwaway for you. I think you're less likely to be burnt out, overwhelmed, negatively impacted by, you know, you use the word toxic before toxic environments. If you feel personally that you are developing, uh, your performance and that you're improving and growing and that you also have some autonomy and you're having some impact on the environment that you're a part of. And, you know, those five Cs here, I think, uh, nice, you know, elements of that cocktail.

Speaker A: Yeah, cool. Well, if you're into, um, cocktails as much as we are, um, then please feel free to, uh, share this podcast as far and as wide as you can. Because if you found it worthwhile today, there's a fair chance that someone, you know, work with or love, uh, will also find it, um, worthwhile. Whilst you're at it, um, please leave us A rating, 5 stars if you can, uh, maybe a review. And of course, if you haven't already, I can't believe what you do in real life, but please make sure you have subscribed. Um, we are nearing the hundredth episode, but like a nervous cricketer, we're not quite sure when we'll get there. But, um, we do really appreciate, um, everyone who tunes in. And, yes, we look forward to our next episode. Perko. Until then, thank you very much for joining us today.

Speaker B: Thanks, Daniel. Been a pleasure. It's, uh, interesting chat today, and thank

Speaker A: you guys for listening. Take care. Take it easy.