Ep. 311: The Corporate Hamster Wheel - Why Organizations Keep Running and Going Nowhere

Host: It's happening again. Welcome to Work Cookie, a, uh, CBOT podcast as we broadcast around the world. Get bite sized morsels and tidbits from our industrial organizational psychologists, other experts, and the latest research on the workplace to boost your organization's effectiveness. Sign up now@cbok.com that's s e b o c.com to engage with our community, gain a sense of belonging, access our other media and get rapid advice. Our experts@cbok.com welcome.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: I'm Dr. Jeremy Lookabal, Industrial organizational psychology consultant and workplace communication and negotiation coach.

Linda Ann: Also, we have Tom Bradshaw with us,

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: a voice and speech coach and a damn good actor too. He is the official voice and speech coach for the industrial organizational psychology community.

Host: Well, hello and welcome to Work Cookie, our weekly gathering of iOSh recruiters and an actor as we try to make the world of work just a little bit better. And, and Megan, thank you for joining us once again. And we're going to move on today and talk about the corporate hamster wheel. Why organizations keep running and going nowhere. Um, I don't think we need much explanation. We've probably all seen that. Um, but do you want to sort of give us an example or two of in your experience, some of those hamsters running, they might be losing weight, but they're not going anywhere?

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: I do. And the way I like to talk about this hamster wheel and it great descriptor but to me it's really putting in energy towards something without gaining any momentum. Uh, so the feeling of motion without momentum. And I think that all of us have seen this and experienced this, whether we work in an organization or as many of us, we're entrepreneurs, we're consultants, we have our own firms. Uh, so we go into companies and we see this. And again, it's that feeling of motion without momentum, um, of effort that is real commitment, that is genuine, um, and capability that is usually not in question. Yet somehow the same conversation keeps happening over and over. The same obstacles come up and nothing is advancing. So an example may be those initiatives that we seek to, we seek to kind of solve a problem in an organization and we label the initiative, we have a sexy PowerPoint deck. Uh, we bring people together, we start the problem solving process, maybe we even throw in a change management team to help with that transition. And after a few months that, uh, initiative starts to kind of fade and no one really knows what has happened to it, but it kind of disappears into the ether. And that's what we're really talking about with this hamster wheel. This idea of, uh, doing work but not really getting anywhere. It's also what we've all seen and experienced before with the, you know, the proverbial red tape. Anytime that we're trying to move something across the finish line, things get in the way. Or, or the time that you kind of get the courage to speak up in a meeting and say the thing that other people aren't saying, um, instead of being rewarded for that or considered for that, it's actually something that you get in trouble for. So here is one of kind of the versions that most of us have really witnessed. It's a leadership team or a founder or a department head, um, that wants to move in a certain direction again to solve a problem. And with that genuine commitment, um, and that genuine intention, the team or the leader or the individual contributor simply cannot move forward. Um, and this goes back to. I like to reference Martin Seligman. Um, research on learned helplessness describes this mechanism precisely. When people are repeatedly exposed to situations where their effort does not produce a predictable outcome, they will stop trying. This isn't lack of ambition or capability, but because our environment has taught us through repeated experience that our actions aren't actually going to matter or change what will happen next. Then the belief generalizes, and what starts as this particular initiative isn't going anywhere becomes nothing I do around here goes anywhere. Nothing I do really matters unless I'm doing exactly as I'm told. So the wheel is not just spinning organizationally, but it is spinning psychologically inside of, uh, people within the organization who have rationally learned that their best efforts might not be enough to move things forward here. Um, and before I go into the question and open up for group discussion, one other thing I wanted to comment on, because I think this is also a part of the proverbial hamster wheel, which is this idea of fixed mindset. So I'm going to reference Carol Dweck's research on fixed mindset. Uh, and what Carol tells us is when the people around you, whether it's a manager, a leadership team, a board, a colleague culture, when they operate from a fixed mindset, ideas are not evaluated on merit. They are evaluated on whether they're a threat to somebody else's sense of competence, control, status. So what I like to call this is the insecure gatekeeper anomaly. And this really keeps us on that proverbial hamster wheel, because the insecure gatekeeper is what a fixed mindset culture produces and then protects. And if we look at what some behavioral economists call the status quo bias Then there is this tendency of systems to accumulate the current way of doing things not through active choice, but through inertia. So nobody per se, not one single individual, designed this dysfunction. It accumulated over time, decision after decision, meeting after meeting. And once established, it has all of the advantages of the incumbent. It is familiar, it is expected, and it is simply how we do things around here. Change, on the other hand, requires action. It requires actual energy. And the wheel is very good at ensuring that that energy from change never actually materializes. So this is our corporate hamster wheel, not failure in the dramatic sense, not a collapse, and certainly not even a scandal. But it is motion without momentum. So capable, committed people running hard yet arriving nowhere. And, and individuals who have learned that it is safer through repeated experience, that the system around them may, uh, be stronger than their best effort to change that. So with that, I want to open up the room to talk about this piece.

Host: You've just described pretty much every organization I've ever worked for. And like, especially as a creative, you know, I come with ideas and I end up in organizations where there's all these silos. And I've actually, you know, been able to do a little bit of digging and find out that it's not that my supervisor, for example, thinks my idea is, is crazy. Uh, it's that my supervisor has to convince the other supervisors in the other silos. And they look at that argument and it's like, I'm not going that way. So once again, nothing gets done. Um, but we've got lots of hands up, so. Linda Ann, let's go to you first.

Linda Ann: So I, I've seen this, you know, a number of times in, in people that I, that I work with and even friends in the. So forth. And you know, especially with the, with technology the way it is, when you talk about the, um, the, the busy but not, I call it busy but not productive. Right? It's everybody and, and what people are doing is they're just reactionary. They're responding instead of actually moving something forward, right? They're getting their emails done, they're responding to their slack or their team's messages, and then they're going to a meeting and whatever. And at the end of the day, day, they got nothing done. And that's extremely frustrating. And it becomes a way of being. Because people feel busy, they feel important, and it's all about being value, feeling valued, right? And I think when you talk about the, the change, um, and so forth, it's. If we can get to people, and this is, I'M going to put a plug in for.

Nick: For.

Linda Ann: I think it's August. I'm doing. I'm focusing on the values, on how companies do or don't use values and what they're actually for, for and how to use them. But when you look at, um, people don't like change, but if you can give them focus and say, and I've been through that with, um, some, some entrepreneurs where they had the experience, they were starting to grow, they were starting to get new business and in the AEC industry and one of the things that happens to slip as you grow and whatever can be quality, right? We're getting stuff out on time, but they're not really the level that they need to be. And so when he started to communicate that to me, I put a hard stop. I'm like, oh, no, no, no, no. You said that quality was one of your focuses that you were going to provide. That was going to be how you change the industry. That was going to be your mark on the industry. And so everything flowed for there at, uh, the, the bottom line was I said, so what are you going to do about it? How are you going to change things? And so when people can look at that as a focus and not something that, oh, we just need to go through another change, um, it can be helpful, right? Uh, but when people are also working on initiatives that are not connected to anything, they have no real value to them. It's just one of those things we're doing now. And, yeah, that'll fall by the wayside soon. So I'm just going to keep doing what I've always been doing. And that's a forever thing. So that's my start in the conversation.

Host: Sometimes it's better if you can hear me, sometimes not. Um, if I'm trying to convince one of those people and they haven't bought into the dream, do I need to convince them of the dream? Can I have some success if I can get that person on board? Will the hamster wheel actually go somewhere?

Linda Ann: Two things. Yes, you can, but you have the message. And I can't say this enough to an entrepreneur. And as you grow, it does not become something you don't have to pay attention to anymore. You have to be banging that drum every day, every meeting, reminding people of it. When you hire new people, you have to indoctrinate them into that mindset that we are focused on this. And everything flows to and from this idea, this concept of whatever it is. Right. And so, um, Did I answer your question?

Host: I think you did.

Nick: So.

Host: Thank you. And, you know, Nick's waiting, so we should go to Nick.

Nick: Um, yeah. I think the hamster wheel is an apt sort of metaphor because, you know, it's connected to the wall, but it's not connected to anything else. Um, and so no matter how efficient, how driven, how whatever, it's going to keep going and going, and it's. It's in isolation. He's already kind of mentioned the silos that are out there. Um, and, you know, as much as it's a hamster wheel, sometimes change is also kind of that flywheel. Those first couple passes are really hard to get anything going. When we talk about momentum and it's. It's easy to be like, well, this is too hard. It's not working. Get just that one more sort of push of inertia, the cascade will happen. Um, it's one of those things where change is not efficient. It's just not. You have to take time. You have to consider the feelings, the attitudes, the aptitudes of people who are there. And you do have to take time to rally the troops and say, okay, this is really where we're going. This is the vision. And that sort of total integration is. It takes a lot of time, and oftentimes it's the big rah rah rally to start the change initiative. And then nobody does it, continues the system maintenance, as it were, uh, to, you know, say, this is what we're doing, this is why we're doing, hey, let's draw back to that sort of that rally, that rah rah moment. Uh, hey, you could slow down a little bit because we're building the road out that will make this go fast, to push harder. You know, again, I've said it several times, there are points in organizations where that inefficiency, because it's going to slow you down for a week or five. But once you get those relationships, those. Those marching orders, those standard operating practices, then you're off to the races, and you're on the freeway all the time. And so in the now, now, now instant gratification business tempest that we have right now, it's hard to do that. But I mean, AI is the prime example. We're just pushing and we're running and running this wheel. We don't know what we're doing with. We don't know how it's going to. We don't know what needs to be automated, what doesn't. Um, without connecting dots, you are just kind of running in circle.

Host: And sometimes those hamster wheels can run you over, especially when we're talking about AI. Thank you very much for that, Nick. Stacy, good to see you again. Let's go to you.

Stacy: Hey everybody. Uh, this is a really great topic and I'm glad I'm able to join today. Um, when it comes to the actual, you know, the hamster wheel. Oh yeah, that's um, I've, that's part of the reason why I went into my own business is because you know, ah, as an employee of an organization you for me I've had, I've found it tremendously difficult to come in and say this is why this is important when I'm an employee versus I'm a sold. And I come in and I come in with a, with a higher sense of optimism. And Megan, you bring up a really great point about the learned helplessness with Martin Selleck, my favorite person. But I really love how he spent so much more of his time studying learned optimism. And um, he talked about how you know, learned helplessness was what became so popular because it is so prevalent. But learned optimism, such a, is such a um, revolutionary thing that a lot of people don't even put uh, in. And it's, it goes back to uh, Linda, Ann and Rich, what you said in the comments goes back to value and quality. I'm uh, learning more formal methods of Agile project management and um, so that I can speak the same language as Deepalong and being able to come in and say, you know, the whole purpose of Agile is change and the whole purpose of Agile is what is best for the value and the quality of the customer, the stakeholder and to have the team members actually involved in that process so they have that intrinsic motivation. If they have skin in the game then they're going to be able to feel more loyal to the project and feel more sense of fulfillment from them. And I think that it also helps to temper the manager who just comes in and says we need to do this. You know, I read this, I read this article in Forbes on my private jet, you know, whatever. So um, being able to have that conversation because also you know the, the um, textbook things. I'm reading the textbook response to well, what if people start, you know, they say that they don't understand or they're not on the same page as you when it comes to these changes. What do you do? And the answer is always to train them. And I'm a, I'm, I was a corporate trainer. I have my whole, my own thoughts about you know, blaming training for everything that's A whole nother conversation. But when it comes to education, you know, making sure that everybody has an educated, uh, understanding of what the, what the purpose is of this project, what the purpose is when it comes to the corporate goals or the value or the quality. And, um, looking at the different qualifications for that. Thank you for the additional, uh, context, Rich in, in the comments. But yeah, so I think that, like getting that partnership with people, but coming in with that sense of authority, you know, there's the difference between responsibility and authority, which a lot of, a lot of managers don't. But, um, having that buy in from the very beginning is help. It's not always perfect.

Host: Thank you very much for that. Um, Megan, I want to come back to you a second and then Nick will go to you because something is popping into my head. Um, and you all, I mean, you're all working with people. You focus on the person, not the machine. You might have to look at the machine. But back in the days when I was teaching, especially those first year acting students, having them to get, you know, to play sorrow or anger, what we would call the left hand emotions, really easy. Having them play joy, laughter, they were lost. They had no sort of home base for those things. So when we're working with employees, and especially in situations like this where we're trying to implement change, we have a tendency to go to the negative because change is hard. It's going to be difficult. This is all going to go wrong is part of what we need to do. Look at that psychological element and, and realize that people are generally negative and we may have more success if we can move them over to the positive side.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: This is a great question, Tom. Sidebar. This is why I think all senior leaders should take improv classes. Um, but coming back to the, you know, it goes back to what we talked to in our session last week, which was, I don't really look at resistance as negative. I look at it as a data point. It is telling us something. And what often seems like resistance is merely lack of understanding. So where I think that executives should start or anyone should start with change, whether it's organizational or in your personal life is, and it's a simple one, but it is one of the hardest things to do because it's not really taking action, it's simply paying attention, awareness. What is the objective current state of where we're sitting right now? How are things going as they are right now? And with that, we're going to get those data points of areas of resistance. Uh, we're going to see what's working and we're going to be able to really take stock and take inventory of all of the things that are making up our current situation. And I think that when we're able to put an objective lens to it and then we're able to look at these negative things as data points, uh, rather than attaching emotion to it, the answers become a lot more clear. And that's, uh, where I would, I would start in terms of getting off of that hamster wheel to make real change.

Host: Well, I'm going to try that the next time I'm directing a show. That's not an emotion, it's a data point. I'm going to see if that works.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: There you go.

Host: Thank you for that exciting news. For all aspiring industrial organizational psychology professionals looking to break into the field or find that dream job, we've created the ultimate IO career accelerator course designed to take you from job search to job offer. It can be tough to break into the field or find the right opportunity. That's why this course is expertly crafted by IO psychology role selection and course development experts to guide you every step of the way. Each module contains concise and chunked information packed with unique insights, actionable tips and proven methods to help you stand out and succeed. And it gets even better. Dive into interactive learning with infographics, experiential stories, short podcast chats and even audio thoughts from experts. Experts to keep you engaged. Build your skills with hand on practice through career acceleration activities tailored to give you a competitive edge. Access our exclusive tool, the CBOK Custom AIGPT. Your personal IO career coach available 247 to help you network effectively refine resumes, find your niche, negotiate salary and so much more. This cutting edge course will prepare you to overcome every job hunt challenge and position yourself for success. Stay ahead of the game and stand out in the field. Visit cbot.comjob to learn more. That's s c b o c.com job. Nick, over to you.

Nick: Yeah, I think again, you know, somebody talked about it with Stacey who meant ego or the Hey, I read this really cool thing in a, uh, publication. We gotta go this way. You know, I think there are a lot of high level leaders who have a really great idea and then they put it out there and they expect everybody else to do it for them. Um, and that, you know, that gets to be a little exhausting. I can be a little manic and go from idea to idea to idea and they all sound good, they all start well, but anybody actually finishing research I o that I was programmed. Start with the end in mind. What are you looking for? What are you trying to define? Where are you going? If you don't know where you're going, then of course you're going to, because you don't have any sort of direction. You don't have a beacon, you don't have a North Star. That doesn't say that you can't pivot with new information like that. But you really do, especially with larger, have an idea of what it's going to look like when you get there, why that's important, because that is kind of that thing that you can throw out there to help people be a little bit more optimistic to say, okay, well, we do have a vision that we're going to supportive of our industry and our community or whatever the initiative is within the organization. But if leadership doesn't have that casting that look to the horizon, look forward, and then we'll look back and see how far we've come. But it's that tug and push and pull sort of, uh, idea that you've got to look back and look forward and where are you focused? But if whomever is championing change initiative isn't sure where they want it to go, or they don't have some sort of idea, manic, realistic, whatever it is, it's not going to get off. It's just, it's a really good idea that doesn't have any internal support, let alone organizational.

Host: Do you think a lot of organizations are? Because you're right, I could be thinking I'm moving forward. I could be running as fast as I can. But once again, if I'm on that hamster wheel, I'm not actually going forward. So do you think organizations who get stuck in this, they may feel they're moving forward, but they can't spot? I mean, how, how do. I mean, I'm not an iopsychologist. How do I spot when I'm just moving on the hamster wheel and not moving forward and my organization is falling around, you know, all around me?

Nick: I mean, there's, there's intention that has to be there in leadership. And that's a whole different quality that I don't think it's touched on a lot. You have to be intentional with where you're going and what you're doing. Um, but there's kind of that, that hedonic treadmill. You know, it feels good to do something. So we're going to do something and well, okay, what we're doing doesn't feel exciting anymore. So I'm going to abandon that. I'm going to go to this new thing that's, that's exciting. It feels good to do that and that again. It's kind of the same hamster wheel idea where we're trying to, trying to get that feeling back. I am guilty of an individual life. It's really fun to start a project in that middle lull. I fall apart, I walk away. I will go find something new. Um, and so I think leaders would be well advised to find somebody who's willing to push through that boring middle to get something across that almost has the greater sort of hit of excitement than the start does. But you've got, you've got to get through that minutiae that, uh, okay, it's forming, it's not quite where we want it to be. Um, it's really boring to look at because it's just every day we're going to come in and check on it. It's like watering the plants, almost watering the garden. And it will bloom eventually and it'll be really exciting what it does. But somebody's gotta.

Host: But I don't need to do the boring work. I can hire an Iowa psychologist to do the boring work. Right. Thank you very much for that. Linda Ann, over to you.

Linda Ann: So I think it's really important to have people understand the why of anything. And if they can't understand the why or the purpose of what we're doing and how it's going to benefit them at some point or the organization, it doesn't always need to benefit them. If they can understand the value of whatever it is that they're doing and understand that it was made through good decision making processes like it makes sense on some level, do I have to agree with it? No. But if I know, because if I know that there has been a good purposeful decision making process in creating the decision for why we're doing this, then I can, I can get behind it. I don't have to agree with it, but I can understand the reason for it.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: Right.

Linda Ann: So I can move forward that way. I think that because people really do want to belong and have something beyond themselves that they contribute to. So. But if you don't give them that, then they're, they're lost in ambiguous ambiguity. And I think it was, was it Stacy that was saying, talking about responsibility and authority. The, the, the major key to failure is responsibility without authority. M. Right. If you don't, if you have responsibility for the success of something but don't have the authority to make the changes or implement what it takes to make that successful, that then that's a recipe for failure every time.

Host: That's a great warning.

Linda Ann: Well, and even as an individual, if someone's giving you responsibility without the authority, you go, no, thank you.

Host: That's a lesson I gotta learn. Thank you very much for that. Stacy, over to you.

Stacy: Well, um, I'm living proof about, uh, what happens when you give somebody, uh, responsibility without authority. And that's why, you know, the performance management program that I was, that I was planning on implementing, um, in my last corporate job failed miserably. And it actually cost me a promotion because I didn't get results from not having author. And so, you know, there's plenty. Another reason why I'm not there anymore. But there's plenty of things that, um. And I alluded to this in, in the chat. Um, my, uh, one thing that, that I really found helpful was reading about Burnout. And, um, there's a really great book, uh, written by two. It's called Burnout. And I would recommend that to anybody. Um, and one of the things that isn't directly mentioned book but is mentioned in the, um, a lot of different articles change. And you know, how many times have we all heard about, well, we're going to change our leadership. We're doing a reorg, we're doing a rif. We're doing all this. You know, we have these, these different phases of change that we're, that we're trying. We know that change management should be like every five to 10 years, but let's see if we can do it in two words. And the employees just get disillusioned and re. And rightly so, because it's like, oh, great. It's just another, another change. And I experienced this, um, not myself, but I saw this in a previous role that I had. And um, the response pretty much from every change, uh, proposal by two employees who were friends at the time as well, uh, two co workers was, well, that's great, but I'm just a worker. And so going back to what you were saying, Megan, like that, that helplessness, like they said, well, that's great that you all are doing, but I don't have, I don't have any say in this. And even when I do, nobody's listening. So I'm just going to sit back here and stay busy, stay on this hamster wheel and do all this paperwork, which, you know, HR and iOS we love. So, um, being able to have those administrative tasks, they just kind of default as opposed to seeing well, what is a more efficient way? What is a way that we don't have to have so much paperwork? Um, and what are some uh, some inspirations. So a recent example that I saw was there was a um, there was an organization uh, in the area that uh, helps to train folks who are living with disability mental or the only way to fulfill, the only way that to fil an application for one of their jobs is print it out and send it in. And it's like, is everybody too busy to consider how to make this more value? Is everybody too busy staying on that wheel to even step back and see? Oh, that's a very ableist thing. And this is very much against what we're trying to hire. So I do think that a lot of it is that combination of change. Pig. And you know Nick, you said this as well. Like that hedonic treadmill like well we're going this way so we're just going to keep going this way. And so many people are so busy that they, they don't have the opportunity to stop and to look around them and to see what could be.

Host: Did you find that a lot, Megan? That we're, we're just so busy trying to survive and, and in many cases just keep our job. That the idea of change, I mean we uh, don't like change at those times especially. But it sort of gets back to that. If you see someone on there and they're on that hamster wheel, sometimes you can't convince them they're on the darn hamster wheel. So how, how do we break through? Any advice?

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: I think that that's a double edged sword because my, and this is my humble opinion, I would love for the room to kind of share theirs as well. But I feel like there's a fear of stepping off of the wheel. I think we know we can, but if we step off of the wheel now, we are separating ourselves from the group. We now become the other. And oftentimes when we step off of that wheel and separate from the group, we are no longer and we're not seen, as Linda Ann said earlier, busy doing things. We then could actually cost ourselves a job or a promotion. You know, back to Stacy's earlier point, uh, because corporate culture, the conditions have been set in most organizations that you are rewarded for being busy and for activity and short term results. We really don't reward people for stepping back and being creative or being thoughtful about something that might take a really, really long time to implement but could give us those long term results that we Actually, see, uh, so we're kind of impatient. And the minute that someone's not demonstrating as busy on that hamster wheel, uh, I think we're quick to turn our backs on them. And at least that's been my experience. And what have I observed? I'm curious what other people have to do, have to say about that.

Host: Well, we can find out. And actually, we'll start with Linda Ann, let's go to you.

Linda Ann: So I think that one of the things is that fosters. What you're talking about is, is where you had said earlier, is that insecure gatekeeper. I think those are the bane of most companies existence. Right. And there's. There's more than I care to see. And, and they exist a lot in human resources. They really do. Um, and. But my thought is, what are. Who is actually responsible for the result? And do they know it? Has that been communicated to them? And have they picked it up so that they understand that they're responsible for the result and how to get the result using their employees? Right. And, um, while you. While things may take a significant amount of time to achieve the end result, that we're looking for the goal. Right. Being aware and acknowledging that incremental progress is extremely important. Right. And I have the mantra when I'm working with an organization is just progress is good. We're not looking for. We're not looking for perfection. We're looking for progress. Right. And, um, just having people and that can go a long way to that optimism you were talking about and saying, okay, I just. We made this one step and we're moving forward because if we didn't take that action, then three months from now, we'd be that much further behind. Right. And so maybe we don't hit that goal in two years, maybe it's three, but at least we're going there, we're getting there. And to acknowledge that progress is. Is extremely important. And the other thing too is to really look at. Are you making sure that the people that are working with you, that are you, that are working on your team, are they actually competent? Or are you tolerating, you know, busy incompetence? Because people really appreciate working with a competent team, and that will go a long way to the engagement part.

Host: Yeah, you're absolutely right.

Linda Ann: Um, so that's. Yeah, those are my couple of points I think that I wanted to make. Who's responsible. Oh, and the other thing too is when you were talking about. I forget who it was, but it's important to. In everything that you do Take that point of view that you're walking a mile in your client's shoes to see what it's like. This was Stacy for that, for that application process. What is it like for you, for your clients to work for you? You know, how. How hard is it? I always. I learned it when I was like 17 years old. It should never be part hard to pay somebody money. It should never be hard to work

Host: for you, but sometimes it is. Thank you very much for that. Nick, over to you.

Nick: I think, you know, we talk hamster wheel, and word that comes to mind for me is inertia. We've already had heard the, you know, the phrase of a dead organization. It's the way that we've always done it. Um, and it's. It's very true. And to Megan's point, you know, we can step off, but if that's going, you know, a thousand miles an hour, it's going to hurt a little bit. Um, the landing might not be so smooth, um, as far as that goes. Um, so I think there is some inertia. Two things that. One are the unintended consequences. Great idea. Words of Mike Tyson. Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the mouth. And so I think that there's these really good change initiatives that get out there. They bump into the real world. Now you're slapping duct tape on the boat, just trying to float, just trying to get across the finish line. It's messy and it's ugly, and that's kind of what changes, uh, for a lot of things. Uh, the other thing is, you know, it's. It's a copycat world out there. Something works for organization A. And they have thought through, and they have gone through all the steps and thought about where they're going, why they're doing who needs evolved. And they've done all that research. But all anybody else sees is just, you know, the tip of the iceberg of, hey, this works. So let's imitate that. I, um, think that's where you get some of this sort of shiny objects. Oh, well, you know, this, you know, this organization was able to revolutionize things through A.I. well, that's true, but they built it from the ground up over the last years. You know, the idea of an overnight success really isn't, uh, isn't overnight by new search just something that moves the needle quickly. So I think that there is some value in designing a little bit of friction in some of these processes just so they don't go off to the races and that, uh, Hiring everybody went to applicant tracking system. Now it takes me three clicks to fill out a job application. But the Recruiter also has 700 applications to go through. So you know, where, where can we create some inefficiencies to self select some people out? Where can we create some inefficiencies? So we stop and think, what are we really doing here? What are we trying to do? Are we trying to keep up with the Joneses? Are we staying in line with our company? Um, you know, vision or model? Are we changing just for change sake? Get. You get into that change fatigue, don't see the change through again. Going back to that, that boring middle which I guilty of wanting to check out at. Ah, um, it's hard to get things across the finish line. Um, and sometimes you have to shut down the noise and say, no, we're going to stay on this path because this is the path we've chosen. We've given a three year timeline, we're going to see it through. Um, I don't care what else come along unless it's painfully obvious that we.

Host: So Megan, let me ask you, is, is there a self help book for this, you know, for, for continually moving forward and change? Um, are there somebody we should be reading or simply, should we just be hiring more IO psychologists and you know, people who actually understand this?

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: Well, we should always hire the people that actually understand it. Number one, look, there are a myriad of books that I could, I could list off. I have, if I open up this closet behind me, books are going to fall out because I've read all of them. Um, and you know, they all have some value and have, you know, a good quote or two. But I think really what it is is there's two parts. I think first of all, we have to act locally. So, you know, if you're listening to this podcast and you're an individual contributor and you're like, this all sounds great, but I'm surrounded by bureaucracy and insecure leaders and red tape and I actually can't do any of these things. I see the value, I want to do the work, but I can't. Um, you know, I would say that the thing that you can do is act locally. You know, do your best with what you have in front of you. And you know, maybe you take the Stacy or the Megan route where you're like, look, I've tried really hard. This isn't for me. I'm doing entrepreneurship now. Or maybe you decide to stay with your organization, but you make it work for you. You create your space in that environment. And you might not change everybody, but maybe you're able to change some of your peers as an internal influencer. Um, so, you know, I'd like this to reach senior leaders. I'd like it to get through to our most senior leaders that this stuff is so important, and it actually impacts your bottom line much more than you realize. Um, but, you know, for the individual that doesn't have that kind of power right now, uh, really, when it comes to books or, you know, what's the, like, formula for this, I don't think that there's one tried and true way or else we'd all be doing it. I think it's really what speaks to you, what makes sense for the environment that you are in, because they're all a little bit different. Um, and how do you make it work for you? And I think that's more of an inward exercise than anything else. And I know I got a little bit cheesy here, but it's. It's very true as well.

Host: How do we continue to move forward? Especially, you know, if. If you're not in leadership but you want to be moving forward, is there some way that, you know, advice you would give on how do I speak with my supervisor or my manager to try to get them on board with the type of, you know, movement forward that I want to make?

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: So I think what that looks like is we go back to awareness. You have to know what you're working with. So is your manager an insecure leader? Does your manager have a fixed mindset? Are they doing the best they can on the hamster wheel, really? Assessing your environment, assessing what you do have control over, assessing that if you're responsible for an initiative where you don't have direct authority, could you, as I said earlier, be an internal influencer to the people that you're working with? Could you know, what relationships could you build in the environment around you to have more of a reach? And maybe it's not you saying, we're going to do this and people do it, but maybe it's you extending your reach through the relationships with the people around you and maybe three or four people out that. That, uh, kind of domino effect. You do reach a top leader that can make real change. So I think it comes back to the idea of energy. How much do you really care to. To fight against the hamster wheel and the inertia, uh, and really show up? But if you're someone that really wants to contribute and do good work and have some form of kind of self within a big organization. You've got to pay attention to what you're working with. And then from there you can come up with your own version of a strategy as to how you are going to activate, uh, locally and change the environment around you. Even if it's a small change, it's still going to be, have a meaningful impact to those around you.

Host: Thank you very much for that. Lindan, back to you.

Linda Ann: I think too, if depending on where you are in the organization, sometimes just asking questions of who you report to so that they understand how you're thinking and maybe it sparks a way of thinking in them so that if you say, and believe me, that's the long road, okay, but it's a road, and it's a road that you can move forward and it's a road you can, can move forward and feel good about moving forward because you've taken some level of responsibility and created some level of purpose. And so if you're saying to the person who has, say, assigned you an initiative and you say to them, okay, help me understand how this contributes to your goals or the organization's goals, or how does this contribute to moving the company forward to whatever they've just been on the top stage doing the 30 slide PowerPoint on, um, and help them understand and then continually ask those kinds of why curiosity questions so that the next time, or maybe five times from now when they're sitting in that meeting, they start to ask of the people that they're with, so how is this going to affect the. That and that my, you know, that I have, my employees are asking me questions about how this serves this. So you spark a different way of thinking in a different level of accountability. That is not threatening, but makes sense.

Host: I had a colleague once, uh, when I was teaching at university, who I would put out a brave new idea and she would like, no, no, no, no. Uh, but then about six weeks later, she'd come into a meeting going, I had a dream last night and I've got this great idea and it was my idea, I don't really care. I just don't want, you know, it to happen. So I was happy that I was able to influence her dreams somehow. But anyways, thank you for that.

Speaker F: Rich.

Host: Let's go to you.

Speaker F: Yeah, I, um, I can't help but to think that, you know, most of the problem that happens with trying to make change has to do with, frankly, it's kind of a marketing problem because we have, you know, um, there has to be a, there has to be A need for the change. And that's where like every change model that's out there, whether it's ACMPT, change management professionals, standard prosci, their ad car model or Cotter or 7S or whatever, all of it revolves around a vision, um, that vision of what that future state's going to be and then expressing the dissatisfaction of where we're at, uh, with the status quo versus that vision. Right? So even Jim Collins had from good to great, where, you know, you have this vision, you have where you're at right now, and then you fill in the gap between, you know, where, where that is. And if people don't, if you know the organization, let's say it's, let's say it's a PE firm, right? That which is very prevalent right now. And they don't see that there's that, that gap that, um, in value for their organization, you know, they may be resistant to make the change because they don't feel that pain. Right? When people, people from a marketing perspective, again, they, they buy into things because they feel that there's a pain that needs to be remedied, right? And that pain can be desire, which is part of the AGHAR model, right? And so that's awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, and then, uh, reinforcement. That's. That. Those are the, that's the acronym there, right? So we need to make people aware of, of the issue and then create that vision and communicate that vision out there. Right? And again, all the models kind of support that. Uh, there's a formula that. It's kind of an old formula, so take it with a grain of salt, but it's out there. It's actually a mathematical formula to some extent. Uh, a, uh, multiplication problem, right? And it says C equals D times V times F times S. If that is greater than R, then change can happen. And so C is the change. D is the dissatisfaction of the current status quo. Um, by the way, this comes from Dana Miller and Katie. Um, and again, it's an older model, but it's. I think there's some value to it still. So D is dissatisfaction. V is the positive vision. Uh, F is the first steps, practical first steps that can be taken. Um, S is the process for sustaining such a change, right. If any of those is zero or little, right? Zero times anything is zero, right? So, so if you don't have that right, your, your resistance is going to be greater than that and you are not going to be successful. And getting off that, you know, that negative flywheel or hamster wheel or you Know, um, we want a fly, like Jim Collins says, the flywheel of change. We want that to continue on. Right. But when the flywheel turns into a hamster wheel, it's certainly a problem. But, um, a lot of this revolves around, again, having, uh, the strong vision and then the dissatisfaction with that status quo. And if the valence of that is great enough, um, you'll get the support. If it's. It's not, then frankly, you just won't. You know, that's kind of where. And I think there's enough evidence out there to support a bunch of that. Oh, you're still on mute.

Host: Um, there we go. Thank you very much for that. Uh, Nick, let's go to you.

Nick: Yeah, I think Rich bringing up, you know, Collins, uh, good to great. It's always fascinated me. Again, he kept writing beyond that because the organizations from the first book, all of a sudden they stopped doing what made them great and gone. Circuit City is long past. Um, Southwest has gone through several iterations, all that. So it's one of those, you know, kind of what have you done for me lately? Sort of situations where it's not good enough to just change once. You have to continually adapt. I think that's where change fatigue comes in. Because what is the difference between change and adaptation, really? Kind of a lens and, you know, there's, there's some value, you know, if we're going to go back to the hamster wheel, that hamster is fit, they are ready, ready to go. They have the cardiovascular energy to, to go and actually make change when the time comes. Um, you know, so there's, there's something to be about staying ready again. You know, it's, it's always kind of, you gotta wake up and pay the rent every day, uh, as far as, you know, success and change go. Um, so I think there's a lot to be said of. It's, it's not just a one time sort of, okay, set it and forget it. It is a drop in the bucket. And the little decisions add up to the, the culture and how that change and adaptation is, you know, the mark of staying power. And are you trying to be in the game for a quarter, a year, five years, infinitely. Uh, that's kind of the vision that leadership has to cast, uh, with what the, what the goals are, uh, as far as organization.

Host: Maybe I'll just leave it on. Thank you very much for that, Nick. Linda Ann, over to you.

Linda Ann: I think it's important to talk about what the term change means now versus what it meant ten years ago, uh, because change is constant. Change is the state of being now. Right? It's not like we're trying to make initiatives after things have been static for 5, 7, 10 years. Things are so fluid now that it's a constant state of adjustment and adaptation and incorporation into how we're functioning today. And so I don't think, think that the term of, um, change management and so forth means quite the same as it did maybe 10 years ago because it required this boost of inertia. And I think it's more of a, uh, just let's just change direction. So it's. The energy is probably there on some level. We just need to help people understand that now the way we function in the environment is a constant state of investigation, learning and adaptation versus, well, we're going to get there today, and then that's where we're going to be for a while. No, it's not.

Host: Uh, well, let me ask you this, Linda, and, uh, I'm not sure there's an answer for this, and maybe I'm going to come back to you after this, but there's the. What you just described is like, I would love to live in that world. But when I look out, what I see with organizations is if my organization, if we're going through a time of everything is going great, we're smooth sailing, then as the leader I go, I feel like I've got time on my hands and now I can go, I'm going to look around and oh, I spotted a hamster wheel. I'm going to bring someone in to deal with the hamster wheel. But when things are challenging, especially economically as they are right now, those leaders don't even look for the hamster wheels. And it's the idea to time to bring in someone like yourself when the organization is struggling. So what is the mindset? Mindset in leadership where when things are going well, then I start looking to improve my organization. But when things are not going well, the question doesn't even seem to pop into my head. I'm not thinking about change. I'm thinking about survival. Is there sort of a mind shift? I mean, when you talk about we've got to, you know, educate people or get the messaging out, am I missing something that we need to be doing to connect with those leaders in the times of crisis like we're going through

Linda Ann: now, I think that for the most part, leaders, you never actually get there. Okay, there's. Because, you know, when, like when I would talk about, um, uh, employee engagement and things like that, Right. You need to hire your people every day or recruit them every day. Right? You need to recruit your people every day. It's a constant state you are never getting. There is, is, um, you know, just like you say, you know, once you get to the top, the only way to get is. Goes down. Right. What are you doing to stay where you want to be? But as. And do you have the vision of where your next step is, regardless of if you feel like you've made it? Right. What are you paying attention to? So I think that, um, if they're in crisis, they really do need to look at, um. There's a lot of things that they need to look at. But what. What, what is the. What is it that's going to get them to where they, they do want to be where those actions. But like, I, I've worked with some companies where they're like, oh, we got this in place, we got this in place and we got, oh, and this is what's differentiating us from the, the competition and so forth. And I'm, um. And what I say to them is not, oh, awesome. I mean, that's one thing. But now you've created a vulnerability. Right. How do you, how do you make sure that that's not a, ah, situation where if you lose that piece, that's a, you're, you're going down the tubes to some extent. So it's really how you look at things critically. I'm not sure I gave you an answer, but.

Host: Well, I'm starting to, you know, maybe crisis management, maybe we need to change the definition a little bit. Because if, if you're running a business today and you're not in crisis, you're one of the rare few. Uh, so thank you very much for that, Megan. Um, let me try you.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: Yes. This is really interesting. I'm listening to everything that everyone's saying. It's kind of helping me formulate new ideas and thoughts as well. Uh, but I want to go back to a conversation I had earlier this week with a CEO, uh, who's been in seat for 36 years.

Host: Wow.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: And he has, uh, the most incredible culture I've ever seen in an organization. So our meeting was that I could interview him to understand what he is doing that seemingly nobody else, at least in America, uh, nobody else is. And I've never heard a CEO in my career talk so profoundly about culture and his people. And one of the things that he said over and over again is the data is there, the results are clear. If you create the culture that is right for your people, you will do 10 times better at the minimum than you're doing right now. Um, and he talked about the fact that, you know, yes, companies can be successful. I'm thinking of a few right now. I won't name them by, by, you know, creating burnout and like just drawing blood from their people and extracting. Um, but he said, and he said he had started out that way, but as he grew as a leader, he realized he could be even more exponentially more successful by caring first culture. So all of that to say, I asked him a question similar, Tom, and I said, uh, what do you see that other CEOs don't? Why is it so? How do you get it? Because I haven't talked to anyone that gets it like this. He said, well, Megan, I've had lots of Runway. He said, I've had the honor of 36 years in seat, so I've made all the mistakes that I could make. The problem right now is we have short term CEOs. Our CEOs are in seat maybe three to seven years max. And that creates a short term mindset. Uh, and so we're living in these corporate cultures that are very affixed to the short term, that is layoffs, which are actually, if you look at the numbers, a terrible decision for your finance, for your company. Uh, but we look for these short term fixes so that these leaders can then jump to the next company or merge companies or do something bigger because it's about them and their short term career. Um, and so I think it comes back to the quality. And Linda, and you said this, the quality of the question we're asking, it's helping these leaders to kind of look at where they're at and ask things like instead of what do we need to launch next, what do we need to stop doing? Or instead of what are we going to build, what is the pattern underneath of what we're building that keeps breaking and really help our CEOs to understand the implications, implications of the short term mindset, uh, that can actually affect them still while they are in role. And I'll kind of wrap it up with this idea that when I think about change in culture, culture to me is the infrastructure. If you can build the right infrastructure and the right conditions that make sense for your company and for your people to thrive, then you can dribble in a million changes, as many as you want. It's not about each individual change. If you have that infrastructure intact and in place and everyone knows what direction they're Marching toward the change that's happening doesn't really matter. That's just like the weather. We're talking about the soil and the ground that the company is built on and that's where people really need to focus their attention. And I think the fact that we get so distracted with little AI rollouts and these short term things, these new initiatives, these transformations, um, that continues to, you know, propel that short termist mindset which keeps us on the hamster wheel.

Host: You know, this turns into or works well with a conversation I had a few days ago, uh, talking to someone about planning and we both agreed that you know, everyone is focused on their three to five year plan. No one's doing a 10 or 20 year plan anymore. And I'm old enough that used to be standard, you know, so, so thank you very much for that. Um, we are a little over time Linda, and let's go to you quickly and then Megan, I'm going to come back to you to talk a little bit about next week. Linda Ann, back to you. But you got to turn your mic on. You're, you're doing a me right now.

Linda Ann: The reason there's no 3 to 5, a uh, 10 year plan is because every, you can't identify that yet anymore. Right? Because what the word, everything's so different by that time. But you can have the, the value system, the, the the strategies in place to help you be, give that infrastructure. Right. I'm all about setting up that foundation and getting that system so that no matter what direction you are going to or pivoting on, you've got that, the way to do it without creating chaos. And that's really the solid thing to look at. It's not so much the, the we want to be a 10 million dollar company in 10 years. It's more about this is the kind of company we want to be. And these are the foundations that we want to use in the process of getting there. And then that will take you wherever you want to go.

Host: Sometimes correct me if I'm wrong, because I could be wrong. I sometimes look at goals as not the end result that I want to achieve. Goals are just there to get me moving in the right direction. Direction I could get halfway there and discover that that's not actually the goal. The goal is over here. So am I wrong to do that? Am I crazy?

Linda Ann: I mean I think it's really. People don't understand quite what, what it m, what strategy really is and how the goals fit into your strategy of, of who you want to be. And what you want to accomplish. You know, if you're, if you say, for example, you're focused on serving your clients in the best way possible, right? It. If that changes over time, then your strategy is still solid. You're just. Your goals or operations on how you get there might shift. So I think it's really understanding that the way that system works and not just being focused on how do I get to Friday so I can go home?

Host: That's great advice, not only for CEOs, that's great advice for kindergarteners as well. And I'm back to everything I learned. Uh, thank you very much for that, Linda Ann. Megan, uh, let's come back to you because next week we're going to be talking about the future of AI and is it culture? Is it culture? Is AI really culture? Megan?

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: Yes, Yes. I was in an AI conference a few months ago, top AI leaders in the country, and they were talking about how the future of AI is not technological, it is cultural. And so every organization right now is racing to adopt AI, and almost none of them are asking the way one question that actually determines whether that investment pays off, and that is, are our people ready to work alongside it? So we'll get into that next week

Host: without wanting to date it. Oh, it's so confusing. I've got so much to learn. Um, I look forward to next week. Thank you very much, Megan. Thank you, everyone, for your contribution today. Uh, once again, another fantastic discussion. And Megan, if you want to count us out, we'll see everyone back here in one week. Week's time.

Dr. Jeremy Lookabal: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Bye.

Host: Thanks for listening to this episode of work cookie, a Seebok podcast. Don't forget to sign up@cbok.com that's s e b o c dot com to engage with our community, gain a sense of belonging, access our other media, and get rapid advice from experts. Would it be a bad idea to make your most challenging workplace problems go away@cbok.com.