C (2:23)

Bob Sutton as much as we love Bob Sutton. Thrilled to be chatting with you.

A (2:29)

Oh, it's great to. It's great to be talking to you, Kim and Amy. Fabulous.

C (2:33)

So Bob, why don't we start out talking about sort of take a giant step back. You have been doing research since you wrote a dissertation on sort of organizations, how to, how to, how to survive as well to create a no asshole rule and what kind of friction is good and what kind of friction is bad. So how does, how does all this get reflected in today's business?

A (3:05)

Oh, gosh. Well, so I've basically been some flavor of organizational psychologist for 40 years. And if you go back, and then I'll go forward. So my dissertation in what in academia they call the tenure run. So this is the set of papers you put together. So they give you more job security than you ever deserve in life. But so, so my research was on organizational death and organizational decline, slash downsizing. That was my original work and my perspective. And so my dissertation was on how you disband an organization that you have declared is we're going to kill it. Basically everything from an auto plant to the geography department at the University of Michigan.

C (3:53)

Wow.

A (3:54)

So I was looking for similar patterns. But the hallmark of my work as an organizational psychologist is I'm always interested in two kinds of outcomes. One is, and Amy said this beautifully, actually, one is essentially the set of organizational performance outcomes. I believe that organizations need to be efficient, productive, innovative, otherwise nobody eats. That's just, that's just the way it is. But as, as one of my favorite sayings is, there's a difference between what you do and how you do it.

C (4:27)

Yes.

A (4:28)

And, and in the process of running an organization, you can treat people well or terribly. So to bring us back to the modern organization. And I'll try not to talk about politics too much, but this is happening in all sorts of organizations, not just in Washington with Doge, if I'm calling that correctly. It's happening at Meta, it's happening at Google, and I don't know, some other places you probably worked at too, Kim. And so there's this challenge that when you make business decisions, you can treat people like dirt or you can treat them well. So just, just for example, and this would apply to Meta, Doge, and it would apply to the plant closings that I looked at like, like the shutting of the geography department and a Chrysler plant in Michigan.

C (5:18)

Right.

A (5:19)

That, that, that if you do it in such a way that you treat people where you give them predictability, you give them some logic about why you're maybe shutting the plant or laying them off or laying their colleagues off, you give them some control over how it unfolds and you treat them with as much compassion as possible. I would argue that two things happen. One is that you save as much money and are as efficient as possible and innovative as possible. And this would be layoffs in particular, especially the remaining organization. And then the other thing that happens is that you don't damage human well being. You don't make it so they get physically sick and die and get sick and, and have a terrible situation. So, so, so, so. And yes, sometimes there are trade offs. I'm not. Sometimes people will argue that, that treating people well is always the best outcome for business. I'm not sure that's 100% true. Sometimes there are trade offs and, and there's limits of each. So, so one of my perspectives is people will always have an argument whether are more effective or not. I even have a slide here. I could show you that, that if you treat people like dirt, they're less productive. They get sick, they quit, they're less. I can show you all that. I don't care. Even though I can show you the evidence. If you're an asshole. I think you're a piece of shit as a human being. I don't want you go away F you.

C (6:49)

I love that. I love that.

A (6:51)

So I don't care. Even though I could get an argument like my friend Jeff Pfeffer says, sometimes that assholes finish first and we certain they're seeing some evidence. I don't care. You're a piece of junk as a human being. You're doing damage everywhere you go. I don't care how much money you make.

C (7:05)

I love that. I love that. Because I think that people often try to, to use the, the data to bully you as opposed to prove something. You know, there's a lot of people who bully with data and very often when people say prove it to me that, you know, that it's okay to be nice, like it's okay to be a decent human being. I don't have to prove it to you. That's a waste of my time.

A (7:31)

Well, just some of the academic seminars I've been to are unbelievably. They're so rude. Especially economists are so rude. I actually pissed off a future Nobel prize winner so much at a talk at the University of Chicago. He walked out of my talk because I wouldn't let him take over my talk. Seven minutes in, I said, no, you're being rude. You're interrupting me. My mother would say you're a rude guest and I'm the guy. Are you like the rude to company?

C (8:00)

Yeah. Well, maybe your mom could have. Well, anyway, I'm not going to go down there. Who might have used that advice over the. In the past few days?

A (8:10)

Yes.

C (8:11)

So, Bob, one of the many things I love about every conversation you and I ever have is that you have research. And it so validates my own anecdotes. Which is. Which is kind of. I don't have research, I have my own anecdotes. That's it. But making sense of one's own experiences is hard enough. And I think the moment when I decided that management was interesting was when I was at a startup, a tech startup that nobody's ever heard of, and they had to do layoffs. And I agreed that there was a good business case for layoffs. The layoffs were necessary in this case. And, and, but they did it in the worst possible way. Oh yes, they hired this guy who I can only describe as a paid. Like the, the CEO did not have the courage to come and have these conversations himself with, with everyone. And this paid, of course, didn't know who anyone was. And so he, he.

A (9:19)

This sounds familiar.

C (9:21)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We've, we've, we've all seen the show. And so everybody who got fired was, was fired in this. You know, basically it was a layoff. And, and the, the reason there was a layoff was management mistake. But the paid said, well, you're, we're choosing to lay you off because you're no good, you know, so, but like that, that was not accurate, nor was it helpful.

A (9:44)

Well, even if that's true, it's not a useful thing to say because other people say, for grace of God go I. And the other thing, since it's a startup, it's a long life, you may see them again and not hire them and maybe fuck them over behind their back because they fucked you over.

C (9:59)

Exactly. So that's number one. The second mistake he made was that he thought everyone who he had just laid off had left, but they hadn't left yet. And because he didn't know anybody, he didn't know. And so then he summons everybody together, not realizing that half the people in the audience he's just fired and tells everybody, why are, why are you all looking so depressed? Telling people how to feel, which really, telling people what to do doesn't work. And telling people how to feel is just obnoxious. And I remember at that moment thinking, you know, this could have been done so much better. And how one does this makes all the difference. And that was really the moment when I decided that I, that I, that management was interesting. It was, it was, it actually really.

A (10:56)

Did better so that, I mean, I love that because that's almost a perfect story of how not to do it. Well, first of all, you don't, you, you don't even know who you're laying off.

C (11:03)

Yeah.

A (11:04)

But the idea, just this idea of prediction Understanding, control and compassion.

C (11:09)

I mean, none of that was.

A (11:11)

And you know, the famous Bill Campbell of the Trillion Dollar Coach was famous for your present. You hug people, you help them carry out their boxes. And there's. And you're doing that for like three reasons. One, because of the impact on the person who, who you're laying off.

C (11:32)

Yeah. Like, Bill Campbell never would have had someone else do it. He would have done it.

A (11:37)

Absolutely. He would do it himself. And then the other thing is the impact on the people who are left. And also maybe living with yourself too might be part of it too.

C (11:48)

Well, I do think that people. One of the things, one of the distinctions you draw is between the bona fide jerk and the temporary jerk. I think, I think one of the advantages that the bonafide jerks have in the, in the world is that they don't waste any time with, you know, waste.

A (12:06)

At least it's not feeling bad about hurting people.

C (12:09)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yes, exactly. Well, mass murderers.

A (12:13)

Yes, you know.

C (12:14)

Yeah, yes, exactly, exactly. So let's talk a little bit about Friction and the Friction Project because I think that you talk about efficiency and you write a lot about scaling, but not everything that matters can scale. And efficiency is sometimes ruinously inefficient in.

A (12:46)

The long run and cruel. So. So. Well, so let me just to back up the way that Huggy and I got interested in this and we spent way too much time on this book.

C (12:57)

Huggy Rao is your co author.

A (12:58)

Huggy Rao? Yes, my co author.

C (13:00)

You don't know that.

B (13:01)

And, and this is the Friction Project.

A (13:03)

Yeah, here's the book bug. Okay. So there's the COVID for people.

C (13:07)

Hold it a little longer. You know, it's a beautiful book.

B (13:10)

Don't give us any friction between us and the Friction Project.

A (13:12)

Radical candor. I got.

C (13:14)

Yes, so.

A (13:16)

And radical respect too. Anyhow, so Huggy and I started this project because, well, in 2014 we wrote a book on scaling, which, which we talked to you quite a bit about. And all these organizations, not just companies. And as I said, I have to laugh because some of you've worked at like, Google, Meta, Mayim.

C (13:34)

I never worked at Meta.

A (13:35)

I apologize.

C (13:36)

Or Facebook.

A (13:37)

Or Facebook.

C (13:38)

I very consciously decided I would not because the first time I met Mark Zuckerberg, he handed me a business card that said, I'm the CEO. Oh, no, you got you. I got one of those. And I was like, no way am I working at that company.

A (13:54)

So I'm going to tell a story that's going to get me in trouble. But the first Time, I didn't even know who Mark Zuckerberg was. But I had a class visitor about 2005, 2004, and this woman just walked up to me in 2005 or so because the no asshole rule was already being written. And she said, hi, my name is blank. I work for a 21 year old asshole. That asshole was Mark Zuckerberg. That was the first time I ever had any reference to him. I didn't know he existed.

C (14:20)

Okay, that was a good introduction.

A (14:22)

That was a good introduction. Anyway, so what happened was there was all these organizations met at Google and my employer, Stanford, which we say a lot of critical things about Stanford in the book, that as they got larger, older, and more complex, so they got to scale, baby, scale. And then when their dreams came true, came a bunch of nightmares as well, which is things got harder to do, they were slower. All the infight, you know, all the problems that come with complexity in organizations. So we spent years studying this. In fact, we had a Friction podcast, which you were a guest on, for example, for a couple of years. But we learned two things along the way, which is one's a good news, the other one's a twist. The good news is that actually there's a whole bunch of things that certain organizations are doing to get rid of bad Friction. It isn't just hopeless. Everything from the DMV to Google, if you want the range, there are good things that happen. And the other thing that we learned was that there's all sorts of things that should be slow, difficult, or impossible. Yes. And so let's start out with impossible. So while she's in jail now, you know, so Elizabeth of Therno's fame.

C (15:40)

Yes.

A (15:40)

Like, you know, there were certain things that turned out, like putting her device on US army helicopters was impossible for her. Elizabeth Holmes. It was good. That was impossible.

C (15:50)

Yes, yes.

A (15:51)

And then there's other things. Like it turns out that maybe ChatGPT and other large language models will save us, but any effort to make innovation too efficient, it turns out if you look at 50 years of academic research I know of, turns out to not work. So just for example, and maybe you can help me with this, Kim. I have no evidence during the 60 years, 70 years of the history of venture capital I know of in Silicon Valley, that they have improved their success rate for the companies that they fund.

C (16:23)

They still now, and now they're saying, oh, we're going to use AI to improve our success.

A (16:28)

Yeah, maybe it'll help them fail faster. And that's true with comedians jokes like the number of jokes they have to try for pharmaceutical firms, the number of compounds, whatever they have to try to get. So certain things, you just have to be patient. And then, oh, my favorite one, to quote the Supremes, is, you can't hurry love. There's all this. This evidence. And so Amy said, you've been working together for seven years. So this idea that it turns out the longer people work together, that the better they do at their job, especially when it's creative and sort of uncertain. So Ulif Packard would be an example.

C (17:10)

And the Undoing Project.

A (17:12)

Oh, yes, the Undoing Project is a condiment. Kahneman and Traversky, they spend all that time hanging out.

C (17:18)

That's the book. Michael Lewis book, Bob, is that, like.

B (17:22)

When we focus so much in radical candor on relationships, and there's ways that you can, you know, Kim's origin story of radical candor was, you know, the guy in the street. And I see you really love that dog and that there are these, you know, sort of quick ways to kind of build relationship. But I'm curious, what is underneath that from the research? Is it about trust? Is it about kind of giving people the benefit of the doubt? What's going on there?

A (17:44)

Well, so. So the, the research. So the way academics. You can ask me about some study topics I know nothing about. I know a little bit about this is there's research on what they call cognitive trust or quick trust. So it turns out. So I never met Nick before in my life, but, you know, I've sort of met somebody in his audio role before and. Or somebody like you, Amy, who's like the host. So we sort of know what the rules and the roles are so we can sort of move forward. But it turns out. So that's cognitive trust. We know the roles, we know the rules, like two pilots in an airplane, for example. But when it comes to really deep understanding of who is good at what and how to balance our needs and to think long term, it turns out that this idea of developing emotional trust, they call it, is something that can take quite a long time. And one of my favorite examples, which is contrary in some ways to the Elizabeth Holmes story, is that the only Stanford startup I've ever invested in, so this is bias. There's this company called Sequel. It started by two women, Greta Meyer and Amanda Calabrese. They met when they were sophomores and they started talking because they were athletes and their tampons were leaking. So they started working on the science of developing a better tampon, which they claim hasn't been improved in 80 years, I'm sure.

B (19:11)

I think we can believe that.

A (19:12)

Yeah. Well, I think some people in this call would know that better than I would. So anyway, so first a couple of years they did the science and then they took every entrepreneurship class together they could imagine. And if you hear them talk about it, they had to battle their way to the relationship. Either they were going to stay together or they were never going to talk to each other again. And now to fast forward, there is a company called SQL. They have $5 million in venture capital, they have a product and they have FDA approval, which Elizabeth Holmes never got product. So, so I'm rooting for them.

C (19:44)

So that's Me too.

B (19:45)

That's amazing.

C (19:46)

And.

B (19:46)

Well, it's interesting as you're talking about that and even I'm just thinking about Kim and I getting to know each other and the ways in which we have different strengths that can cause friction sometimes. So like, where's the, what's the role of like interpersonal friction in that creativity?

A (20:01)

Well, so, so if you. Again, I'm being more academic than I sometimes am, but if you look at research on creativity and for example, if you compare two things, do teams brainstorm a lot or do they fight a lot? Well, the teams that fight, and this is the Andy Grove playbook that teams that fight in an atmosphere of mutual respect and know when to start fighting and how to stop. Oh, and then back to the emotional and cognitive that, you know, they don't insult each other personally too much. There's also cultural differences. Like I'd imagine that an insult in Israel is different than in Japan. I bet you Kim could tell us about that. But, but, but, but this, this idea that in teams that fight and mostly have emotional trust, those are the most effective teams.

C (20:46)

I think that fighting is a little bit like, remember when Amy Edmondson found she expected that the hospitals that reported the most errors would be the least safe, but they were the most safe. I think that fighting is something similar. Like the more you get to know someone, the more you need to fight. Because if you don't fight, you're going to get feedback that you need to fight fair, you need to fight well. But otherwise these like unresolved conflicts, they, they fester and fester.

A (21:19)

So that's the, that's the emotional, you know, and being sort of like an, to be ethnic, an out of control Jew who's married to a pretty emotionally controlled wasp. Nonetheless, we do need, we fight in different ways. Yes, she mostly fights on facts and she's a Lawyer too. So she almost always wins. And I mostly want to fight about the emotional part, but nonetheless, first of all, it forms a relationship. But the other part is that cognitive thing is that if you have a good argument with someone over the facts and do things like, well, imagine we tried, what would be the first couple of steps? Or what does success look like? And argue over that that you're less likely to do it badly. Right.

C (22:01)

And you gotta have a fight over the emotional things too. Because being a WASP myself, I'm very. I don't even know when I'm upset. After all, like, I rely on the people around me.

B (22:15)

I think I told Kim over the weekend we had an off site where I was like, how are you feeling about, you know, the upcoming kid's birthday? You know, what emotions she like? I don't know. I'm like, I'll feel them for you, Kim. So you know that feeling when you're doom scrolling and suddenly it is an hour later and you feel even worse. I have been there, but lately I've been swapping that time for something way more energizing. Masterclass. These are not your average online classes. This is Robin Roberts teaching effective and authentic communication. Chris Voss teaching you how to win any negotiation. And our very own Kim Scott teaching you how to use radical candor to have those toug tough conversations you've been putting off. Whether I am in between meetings or just swinging a string toy for my cat, I pop into the app, I soak up real insights that I can apply immediately. And I'm not alone. 83% of members have used what they learned to improve their lives. With plans starting at just $10 a month, billed annually and over 200 classes to choose from, Masterclass is a no brainer. So get an additional 15% off any annual membership today@masterclass.com radical. That's masterclass.com radical for an additional 15% off. Go learn something that'll change your day and maybe your life.

A (23:41)

So yeah, I really didn't.

C (23:43)

I really did not. I would like until you asked me the question, Amy, I hadn't, I hadn't asked myself that question.

A (23:50)

Yeah, well, as opposed to I was, I was raised. A good example is I figured out late in life that my Jewish mother never actually felt guilt. She would just display it because it was convenient for manipulating people.

C (24:04)

Yeah.

A (24:04)

So we were supposed to display emotions for strategic purposes, not. And that's one of the topics I've also studied is the expression of emotion in organizational life. And sometimes it's strategic. It's not.

C (24:16)

That is really true.

A (24:19)

It's not just, you know, it's not real emotion.

C (24:23)

It's manipulative insincerity.

A (24:26)

So one of the things I did. This is a digression, but not. Is. When was this? I don't know, the early 90s. I worked as a telephone bill collector. Like, people. Like, they'd all be in this big bullpen collecting, you know, Visa and MasterCard on bills for a very large bank. And they taught us. They taught us strategic emotions. And one of the things they taught us, which is pretty interesting, was that if somebody wasn't upset enough about their bill, you would slam them and be nasty to them. Do you ever want to buy a car? So you want to have your phone shut off? You ever want to buy a house? Sure. Don't pay me. But if they were too upset or too anxious, and they were so. Because sometimes they get so anxious, they're afraid to pay the bill. Like, they're just freaked out. Then you get kind of soothing and you say, it'll be okay. There's just. It's not the end of the world. It's really simple. All you've got to do is. And then they'll say, but I can't pay the whole bill. Well, if you could just send US$50, it would be much better for your credit rating. Even if you can't send us the whole 200, we'll note that. And the creditors will know it. I mean, they would teach us this strategic emotion. And so that was basically to be nasty to nice people and nice to nasty people, sort of like. Or upset people, basically.

C (25:48)

Wow. Wow. So anyway, you know, I was thinking about this the other day. I was. I was trying to buy something, and the salesperson started. And I decided I wasn't going to buy the thing. The salesperson really started. Bull. Trying to bully. Started being an. And. And I remember I was. I was taking some. Some cues out of the. No, out of the survival guy. I was like, I finally looked at this person. I said, do you think that I'm gonna say yes because you're being an. But I guess that works sometimes. Well, at least you know, that's why they were doing it.

A (26:30)

But they taught us in bill collector school schools, the difference between a salesperson and a bill collector is a salesperson. You know, it's sort of like. Like my job is to manipulate you. But when I'm a bill collector, you have entered into a contract which you are violating.

C (26:46)

Yes.

A (26:47)

So. So. And I don't know if that's true.

C (26:49)

But.

A (26:50)

But I think the sales situation versus sort of like a compliance situation where you're legally obligated is different.

C (26:55)

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

A (26:56)

But who knows anyway?

C (26:58)

Who knows? Who does.

B (26:59)

Kim, you mentioned the no asshole rule, the asshole survival kit.

C (27:03)

These are two different books.

B (27:04)

Two books.

C (27:05)

And, you know, hold them up, Bob.

B (27:07)

Yeah, hold them up, because I don't.

A (27:08)

Even have those books.

B (27:09)

Well, people are going to want to get these because, Bob, one thing that pops up on our podcast a lot is. But what about when I'm working for an. Even though we try not to put people into boxes either. The behavioral, you know, the momentary thing. So I would love just to get a few tips, especially now that we're in 2025. First of all, is it showing up in different ways or is it the same old that you studied in the early. You know.

A (27:36)

Well, we could argue whether we're at. And I. And I recently. In 2000, in 2017, when the no asshole rule came out, I actually was interviewed in the Trump Tower right after we had a brand new president.

C (27:49)

It was way before 27th.

B (27:51)

Well, that was the newer one, right?

A (27:52)

No, no, no, no, no. Survival guide.

B (27:55)

Yeah.

A (27:55)

And I claimed to the. I don't. The New Yorker New York journalists that we were at peak asshole. And I've now corrected myself, so I was wrong. But, but, but, so, but assholes will always be with us. And there's. There's a certain percentage of people who routinely treat others like dirt. Those are certified assholes. And then there's a certain. All of us under the wrong conditions can be demeaning. I mean, in fact, psychologists are brilliant at turning people into jerks.

C (28:23)

Yes.

A (28:23)

What you do is you put them in a rush, you put them under time, you have them be around assholes, you give them sleep deprivation, you treat them like there's all sorts of ways to turn us all into jerks. But if you're working with somebody who is a. Who I would call a certified asshole. To me, there's sort of three responses, or maybe four. One is just to take it. I mean, this is the whole world of cognitive behavioral therapy. And this is sort of. One of the examples I use is a friend of mine, Becky Margiotta. In the 90s, she went to West Point and she was one of the first female plebes. I just. They call them at West Point. And there it's almost structural that people insult you every day. And Becky would say, I just got to get through this. When I look back on it, it won't be so bad. And she'd say these people are just acting and all that sort of stuff. So that's cognitive behavioral therapy. So not letting it touch your soul.

C (29:23)

So it was like system. That's systemic assholery almost.

A (29:26)

That's systemic. That and probably venture capital too. So. But. But. But nonetheless, if it's this idea where you reframe the situation. So that's one. The other one, which is to just quit. And to me, there's two kinds of quitting or to avoid it. One is you can quit. People do quit. And I always say, be careful. Make sure you have a job when you quit. The other one, which is more subtle, is that. Is that a lot of times you don't necessarily quit, but you find ways to avoid contact with them. So you don't go to the meetings they're at. If. Well, if you're working at, you know, now we have the situation with hybrid work. You can figure out what days they work and just not be in the office. Those days I already had. So, so. And then. And then there's finding ways to bring them down.

B (30:22)

And I think people's ears are really perking up on this one and the.

A (30:27)

Ways to bring them down. The model here, and I've met her a little bit, is Gretchen Carlson at Fox News, which is. Although she did she. Which is, you know, number one, you figure out who your friends are, so you sort of build a posse. Number two, you have. You keep, you know, you record it. Like you keep a record.

C (30:50)

You document that.

A (30:51)

You document it, and then hopefully you can find somebody more powerful to sort of screw them over. Okay. And. Or get them removed. Now, this doesn't always work because there are some situations where they are so powerful that it may not work. But, you know, Gretchen Carlson did seem to get Roger Ailes fired. So. Yes, so. So that. That, that would be. That would be an example. But. But I always warn people that the percentage of time it works is difficult. And. And being impatient and. And trying to fight back on them initially doesn't work. Oh, one more thing. At least for temporary assholes. Or is that sometimes. That if it's sometimes giving people feedback, they're leaving people feeling like dirt is important? Because that's another one of my distinctions. One are strategic assholes. The others are clueless assholes. And there are a lot of people in the world who lack the awareness of how they're making other people feel. So sometimes this is a case where radical candor may actually work. It may work especially if you've got a clueless caring asshole. And some. And there are people like that in the world.

C (32:03)

At one point was behaving like a clueless, caring asshole. I'll tell you the story and you can tell me how this fits into your research. So I had just taken this new job at Google and I was managing a big team and an HR person came to me and said, Kim, you're really, you're intimidating your team, you're making them feel powerless. And I did not believe. You know, I felt like that was.

A (32:33)

I'm so good.

C (32:34)

Yes. Yeah. And I think this is like been thinking about this. One of the biggest problems in the world is if you think, if anytime I think me, but I would never do that. I'm not that kind of person. God damn it. I am that kind of person.

B (32:52)

I like to say what you resist, persists.

C (32:54)

Yes. So anyway, I was like. And also I sort of felt like almost self righteous. You know, I had spent my whole career trying to be taken seriously when like, at what point did I become intimidated? Right? You know, like that was not, was so outside of the way I thought about myself. And luckily she persisted and she said, look, go in, ask your team to do something, you know, to be impossible and notice. Does anyone push back? Nobody pushed back.

A (33:25)

Okay, well that's a, that's a good indication of that. There was not psychological safety. Right?

C (33:29)

So yes, yes, yes, there was, there were so many. But that was, but it was also by, by convincing me to do this, that was what helped me realize that I was doing things wrong.

A (33:41)

Well, in between the no hassle rule in the survival guide, I came to a realization. Since one of the reasons I wrote the survival guide was I basically got, I don't know, seven or eight thousand emails that basically said, I work for an asshole. What do I do? There were variations of it. Or I worked with an asshole. And I realized that a useful sort of rule for almost all of us is to be slow to label other people as certified as assholes and to be quick to label ourself because all the biases. If you look at the survey, the like national survey data by the Workplace Bullying Institute and they'll ask, have you ever worked with or do you work with or for an asshole? It's like 40% or 50% of the public says yes. And then they say, have you ever been, have you ever engaged in persistent bullying? It's like, it's like 1/2 of 1% of the population will admit to it. So yeah, so, so, so the evidence is to just to be careful to be careful of your biases. But, yes, somewhere towards the end of the survival guide, I actually wrote a nasty email to a student who was driving me crazy. And I had my department chair, Peter Glenn, come into my office and say, didn't you write a book about this? So I wrote the guy an apology, and then I also apologized to him in person. I'm not sure he forgave me, but I thought that was good leadership by Peter Glynn, who is excellent, very emotionally.

C (35:18)

Sensitive chair, you know, our mutual editor, Tim Bartlett, the amazing Tim Bartlett, the amazing. And then. And very lovable Tim Bartlett, who is, you know, the editor, is the boss of the book. So we both have the same boss. He would. When I was writing Radical Candor, because, you know, I tend to. Maybe I don't always show I care personally as much as I think I'm doing. And often in the. In the notes, he would. He would. I would have written something in this very harsh way, trying to be clear, and he would write, care personally. Question mark.

A (35:57)

Well, that. But that. That's. But. But one thing I will say, since we've had this conversation, too, that in different sorts of relationships with people from different cultures. And this has to do with assholeness and radicalness.

C (36:08)

Yes.

A (36:09)

And radical candor versus obnoxious aggression.

C (36:11)

Yes.

A (36:12)

I think I'm quoting you, Kim, that it happens at your ear, not your mouth, isn't it?

C (36:16)

Yes, I think I'm quoting someone else. And I tried to find out who it was recently and I googled it. And you know who it said said it?

A (36:23)

You.

C (36:24)

Yeah, but I did not make that up. Somebody else did.

A (36:29)

So one of the things I have in one of my books is Sutton's Law, which is that if you think you came up with an original idea, you probably didn't. Somebody already had it.

C (36:39)

Yes.

A (36:39)

And then this isn't my ID, either. I stole from somebody else. So you just accept that.

C (36:44)

Yes.

A (36:46)

You've just gone. But the point I was going to make is that in certain sorts of relationships in certain cultures. So we do. Didn't you work in both Israel and Japan?

C (36:55)

I did. I did in Russia, too.

A (36:57)

So you understand. And then Silicon Valley, which. Where we pretend to be nice and stab you in the back.

C (37:02)

Yes. Yeah, yeah.

A (37:03)

So. So anyways, the question of what's insulting. So early in my career, I did my research on the expression of emotion with this Israeli women are not Rafaeli. And we would just scream at each other and just insult each other. And, you know, and I could. I kind of have that obnoxiousness and we just got into it and it was so great because.

C (37:28)

And it was fun.

A (37:29)

You already know it was fun. We were just used to it. Now the problem is that, that people thought that we were like having like a terrible dispute and every now and then be yelling so loud when my colleagues would think that we were near blows. We were just having fun. We were like little kids, like the mouse and the computer. We'd fight over who got to put their hand in their mouth. Like we'd slap each other away. We were having so much fun.

C (37:51)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But not everybody has fun in that way, do they?

A (37:54)

No, no, no. Like my co author, Huggy Rao, who you know. Well, like, Huggy's very polite. That would work with him.

C (38:02)

He would not slap. You would, he would not like having his hands on.

A (38:04)

Yelling at Huggy doesn't work. He just, he actually would probably start crying and walk away. I mean, he's just. This is not his style.

C (38:11)

Well, I, I came to love yelling and like when I, when I. But I was not raised that way. You know, I was raised as a female in the South. Never say, you know, never say no, never disagree. Like pretend, you know, isn't that. Nah, that was how I was raised. But I found that exhausting. And I, and I once, I. Especially when I was working a lot in Israel, which I found very liberating. The way I grew, grew. At first it was scary. Like when I first got there and people were yelling at each other, you know, I had this pit in my stomach. Then I realized, oh, they're having fun.

A (38:49)

Oh, they're having. Yeah.

C (38:50)

And I'm going to have fun like that too. That. And then I found when I would go home, I'd get on the airplane after I left Memphis and I would massage my cheeks from the fake smile.

A (39:02)

Well, so, but, but there's also some code switching there. I think that we all bit that in different situations you have to. And so these are called display rules or emotional norms that, that you, you, you, you sort of switch. In the old days, I used to sometimes work a little bit with HP and a little bit for intel at hp, which is sort of. It's like Stanford. It's passive aggressive with backstabbing.

C (39:26)

Yes.

A (39:26)

And, and so you had to be really nice and pretend to be nice. And at intel you just go to the meetings. It's like, Andy, you just kind of like just everybody yell at one another.

C (39:34)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's. Well, it's. It. This goes back to radical candor, gets measured not at the speaker's mouth, but at the listener's ear. And it's different from culture, from culture to culture.

A (39:45)

And it's hard. I do remember going to a joint meeting that was supposed to be between HP and Intel, that was supposed to be cooperative and literally talked to both sides. And it was the hp. No, the hp. I failed. The HP people were those assholes and the intel people were those wimps.

C (40:03)

Oh no.

A (40:07)

So what do you do?

C (40:08)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, it's hard. It's hard to. It's hard to. And it's not exactly code switching. It's like being. Realizing that communication gets measured not at your mouth, but at the listener's ear and realizing you have to adjust for that. It's not. And that's not being inauthentic. Like sometimes people will say, ah, you know, I'm an. But that's just who I am, you know. And that's not.

A (40:32)

No, no, that doesn't work.

C (40:34)

Yeah, yeah, you, you gotta pay attention, communicate well.

A (40:40)

And to your point, that's why the way that I define assholes is people who leave others feeling demeaned, de energized and disrespected.

C (40:51)

Yes.

A (40:52)

So that's the ear, the airplane.

C (40:55)

Yeah, exactly. Can we talk a little more about friction efficiency though? Because it seems very relevant.

B (41:09)

Kim, if I can jump in. Bob, I saw you on your website. There was a great video about the Friction project and there was a moment where you had two questions that friction fixers ask. Question one was, do I know what I'm doing? And question two was, is the decision reversible? And those questions felt very relevant in terms of potentially what the good use of friction for efficiency could look like.

A (41:40)

Well, so do I know what I'm. I don't think that. I think it was. Applies to all sorts of decisions, which is basically, am I competent enough to make this decision? So I don't want, well, somebody who doesn't know anything about air traffic controlling telling somebody how to be an air traffic controller. This is a hypothetical example.

C (42:00)

Suggestions?

A (42:02)

And the other thing, which is, which is this idea about whether or not a decision is reversible or how much harm that it does. So Jeff Bezos calls this a two way door. So whether it's a reversible decision versus a one way door which is irreversible. Or my friend Diego Rodriguez, who was at IDEO for years, he has this idea when he would ask clients, where is your place for failing? So to use the airplane example, the simulator is a place to fail. But flying the airplane is not the place to fail. So to me, those are the kinds of things that I think of in terms of decision and where you want to think about friction. And then the other thing that I would add, which I think is important in something that we see in the research we do, is it turns out that the more complicated a problem is to solve, the longer you need to take to actually figure it out, which is this. And this is a poke doge, because some things in life are really complicated. And possibly my favorite example in our book, and I keep following them, is that there was a form in the state of Michigan that was completed by 2.5 million residents a year to get food stamps, to get. To get financial aid, to get medical care. And it was the longest form in the country. It was a thousand questions long. One question was, when was your child conceived? As an example of a bad question.

C (43:41)

Oh, my God.

A (43:42)

So this guy, Michael Brennan, who led the effort to fix the form.

C (43:47)

So that was bad friction.

A (43:48)

That was bad friction. But what he did was he brought everybody aboard. He brought the people at the department that oversaw it. He worked on the front lines. They did, like, 10 prototypes. They brought in the lawyers. So it was. And now the form is 80% shorter. This is a case where it actually was a complicated thing was fixed. But he took. He and his team at this nonprofit called Sevilla. The reason that they took the time was first of all to bring everybody aboard because they had the expertise, because they were on the front lines. And then the other reason was, was that, was that it was a complicated problem. There were 1700 pages of rules and regulations they had to comply with so they could legally have the new form. So to me, that's an example of sometimes when they have friction fixing because something's complicated, you need to slow down and figure it out. Some things in life are complicated. Some things are simple. But not everything is simple.

C (44:48)

Yeah. And it looks so simple if you know nothing, you know.

A (44:51)

Yes.

C (44:53)

You know, like, I'm sure if you gave me that form, I'm like, oh, I'll just edit it.

A (44:57)

Right, right.

C (44:58)

And then. And then all manner of laws would have been broken. All manner of people would be, you know, like, one of the times I learned this, it seemed like a very simple solution. Simple problem, not a complicated like one like you're describing. But I would. We all. We had debt. It was an open space, and everybody had a desk, and we were going to move the desks, and it was taking the team what I thought too long, you know, to decide who was going to sit where. And I just went in on a Sunday and moved everybody. And it was like I almost got. I almost got removed as CEO. You just don't know. When you don't know, you don't know the problems you're. It's sort of like, oh, you know, I could not fill up my. I could not replace the oil in my car. And I'll save a lot of money, you know, until my car.

A (45:52)

Until your car. So there's this book by this guy named William Shoots. It's called Profound Simplicity. And he makes the argument that human understanding goes through sort of three phases. One is simplistic, the other one is basically convoluted and confused. And at the end the book's called Profound Simplicity. But to get to that profound Simplicity, it's sort of like the writing process at first. Oh, this book's gonna be really easy to write.

C (46:17)

Yeah, yeah.

A (46:17)

And then you're like in the weeds for years. And then hopefully at the end something simple and elegant comes out. When it comes out. Right. And that's true film editing. Anything like that.

C (46:27)

Government.

A (46:28)

Government, yes, yes. You pick your. And some things are relatively simple to fix. And I don't want to say that there aren't things that are simple to fix. But some things in life are complex and do require sort of slowing down and wrestling with the friction.

C (46:46)

Thinking like really thinking deeply about. Yeah. I mean when I said I don't know about you, but when I down to write Radical Candor, I thought it was going to take me three months. I was like, oh, I know what I want to say. I'm a fast writer and it took me four years. And I'm glad I spent the four. The whole. The four years. I'm glad I didn't just rush.

A (47:05)

Yeah, well. Well, so I think so. I mean the last book, the Friction Project, we worked on the project one way or another for eight years. It was probably actually a year working on the proposal and a year working on the book is the way that that book. But I hate to the shortest book and the easiest book I've ever written was the no asshole rule, I think. Cause I knew the least about it of any other topic. And so the problem is that this sells more than all my other books combined still. And by the way, the other thing is that. And you and I went through this with our lovely editor Tim of having to get the blurbs, the praise on the black cover.

C (47:40)

Yes.

A (47:41)

The no asshole rule. Here it is. It has no blurbs because nobody Would blurb it because it had the word asshole on it. And I like asked like seven or eight, you know, we got all these blurbs for my two books before everybody was happy to. Oh, really? I don't really want to have that name. So.

C (47:58)

So times have changed. I had no problem getting blurbs for the kick ass boss. But that's thanks. That's thanks to you. You. You bled, you paved the way. Bob. Yes, you.

A (48:09)

Well, no, but, but, but it may. But what it makes me wonder is, and in fact there's some, some pushback in the publishing industry is do we. This whole blurb thing just might be a tradition. It is a nice way to have to get in touch with old friends and get them to pretend to read your book. So there are some advantages to it.

B (48:26)

Bob, I'm curious just back to the asshole survival guide, because it sounds to me like you wrote that because people were asking for very practical, tactical stuff, which I know is one reason why people love radical candor. You mentioned at a high level, things people can do. But I'm curious, as you reflect on some of the letters that you got from people or the advice, anything that kind of leaps out is like, oh gosh, I would love for your listener, like there was this one thing this person did, and they were so surprised. It worked really well.

A (48:54)

One thing that I'm gonna put in a good word for and my wife gets implicated in this story is gossip, which is don't go on the Internet, like try to find somebody who has worked in the place and especially in the team and the boss you're working for. Especially somebody who has quit or got fired and to find out the truth before you accept the job.

C (49:22)

Yes. That's not gossip, that's research. That's.

A (49:26)

Well, I think it's gossip too. So my wife, this is in the book, when she was a young associate, before she was a partner in a law firm, she accepted a job with a fairly famous litigator. This wasn't just a litigation attorney, the Silicon Valley litigator. And, and so after she accepted the job, she got called by an associate had worked for the same guy who described to her in massive detail what an asshole this guy was. So my wife calls up HR like she's supposed to, and said, I've changed my mind, I. I've decided. And they asked her why, and she told them the truth. And so anyhow, so, so the guy calls her up and screams at her.

C (50:07)

That's like the sales guy who thought he would yell at me and make Me buy the thing.

A (50:11)

So my wife, who is a very calm, like she's, like, she's used to, you're a litigator. So she just waited for him to go, and she just simply said, so your behavior in this phone call confirms my decision in the information I collected about you and hung up on him. So. But just think about that.

C (50:29)

I love that.

A (50:30)

And Adam Grant has written somewhere on LinkedIn about this argument too, that there are cases where gossip, which is, you know, basically the juicy bits you say about people when they're not around. That's how I would define gossip. That, that, that there, there are like, sometimes it's just vicious, but in that case, it's actually protective of people who have less power. So. Yes, so, so, so I learned to appreciate gossip. So.

C (50:56)

And if you can't get any gossip, by the way, if you're gonna take a job for somebody new, and this is the asshole avoidance guide, try to get in a disagreement with your new boss before you start. And, and you, you'll learn a lot in a disagreement about what it's going to be like, get the offer, don't do it before you get the offer. And then, and then try have a disagreement about it.

A (51:25)

That, that actually, that actually is, Is an excellent test. Yeah. If you can't get the gossip about that. Yeah, of course. Gossip is. You have to be careful. Sometimes it is unreliable. Sometimes it's just somebody who's a disgruntled employee and so forth.

C (51:37)

Yeah, well. And like, I really, I have. For all my, for all my railing against. I do have kind of an affection for assholes too. So. So, so I might be able to tolerate a certain level of assholery that others.

A (51:52)

Well, so, so there is. So maybe there's. You and I were actually talking about this at dinner recently about the difference between people who have good user interfaces and bad operating systems.

C (52:07)

Yes. Much rather have a good operating system and a bad user interface.

A (52:12)

Yeah. So those people with that sort of. And the problem with people who seem really friendly, those are the people who can completely screw you.

C (52:23)

Yes.

A (52:23)

Because they're so nice to you. And then afterwards, then they're also. They cool you out too.

C (52:29)

Yeah.

A (52:29)

So that's sort of like grooming and abusive relationships almost.

B (52:34)

I mean, it goes back, Rob, I think, to what you were saying in your training with the call center of how you are being, you know, sort of trained to work with emotions and understanding what would work for different emotional states.

A (52:47)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So. And just to be clear that all strategic emotions are not Just warm and fuzzy and caring. In fact, if I look at the COVID of Radical Candor, isn't it ruinous empathy that, that, you know, and there's even. Oh, there's some great research by one of my old colleagues, Barry Style, about strategic temper tantrums. These are strategic tantrum tantrums that are, that are by basketball coaches at halftime. And this is so long ago. The way they did it is in college and high school games. They'd have a tape recorder in the locker room at halftime and they'd analyze the data. And essentially to summarize, the coaches who never yelled and the coaches who yelled all the time didn't have much effect, but the coaches who occasionally lost their temper and started yelling at their teams.

C (53:36)

They got their attention.

A (53:37)

They'd get an increase in score. And the argument, the academic argument is it's got to do with attribution. If somebody always yells at you, they're just an asshole. But if they only yell at you every now and then, you think, gee, maybe it is me. So, so that, that's, that's it. That's. I just love.

C (53:56)

And maybe.

A (53:57)

This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. When you visit the doctor, you probably hand over your insurance, your ID and contact details. It's just one of the many places that has your personal info. And if any of them accidentally expose it, you could be at risk for identity theft. LifeLock monitors millions of data points a second. If you become a victim, they'll fix it, guaranteed. Or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year@lifelock.com podcast terms apply.

C (54:26)

Maybe it really was. I mean.

A (54:28)

Yeah, maybe it really was. Yeah, yeah. And, and, and so there are strategic uses of anger that are not necessarily cruel. And then there's moral outright outrage, which is sometimes justified. So anger sometimes is good.

C (54:42)

Absolutely, absolutely.

B (54:44)

Well, speaking of moral outrage, and before we close, Bob, are there certain areas of inquiry right now that either you're doing some research on that are especially interesting to you? Like what's kind of. Where's your brain headed right now?

A (54:58)

Well, so the thing I'm having honestly the most fun with. We'll see if I can do any good. I'm trying to. Is. Okay, so if you look at the Friction Project, it actually starts out with a dumb email sent by a Stanford Administrator that was 1266 words long with a 7500 word attachment.

B (55:15)

But who's counting?

C (55:17)

I'm with you.

A (55:18)

Inviting all 2000 faculty members to spend Saturday brainstorming on Zoom about the new sustainability school I'm not joking. So anyhow, our new president John Stanford has all these things that are very difficult to do as in any large complicated bureaucracy. Our new president John Levin, one of his top three priorities and God knows he's busy with, with all sorts of things raining down from the government. But one of his top three priorities is to simplify Stanford and to reduce the administrative burden that we all place on one another. So I'm having. And so I'm going. I think I've done 10 friction talks at Stanford in the last three months including to the cabinet. I've never been to the cabinet. People run the university.

C (56:02)

Wow.

A (56:02)

So I got to talk to them and you know it's, it's early days but there does seem to be some progress. Like, like I, I mean just for example, I talked to a group of business people and one of them had cut the monthly meeting every three months and another one had a 15 person. This isn't because of me. It's just stuff that's happening, it's in the air. One of them that, that he had 15 people in three different teams and they were using three different project management softwares which is very hard to communicate. So he forced them to use one.

C (56:37)

Amazing.

A (56:38)

And there are other examples I could point to at Stanford but, but in its sort. And so there are, there's specific work being done but, but I do think if you start with the assumption that, that my job is to be a trustee of others time which I think is the assumption that is, is being embraced in some parts of Stanford. So that, that's the thing I'm having the most fun about and the most hopeful about. And, and I, I can be very negative about our Stanford administrators as I just was with that 1266 word email. But, but I will say that from what I can tell that the, the management of Stanford is doing a pretty good job despite how brutally the environment is. And then we have a new dean, the first female dean of the Stanford Business School. Her name is Sarah Soule. So, so she's one of the most talking about competent and caring from the most competent and caring people I've met during my years in academia. So I'm having fun with that.

B (57:33)

I love to hear it. First of all, someone who has probably written a few 1265 word emails. I know the pain they can cause. So I love that you're doing that. But also I'm just thinking how can we scale Bob Sutton and get that efficiency work into maybe other sectors beyond just higher education? So that is Maybe planting a seed of maybe learnings can be transferred to other sectors.

A (57:56)

Well, I think that I'm actually not even a particularly good friction fixer, but I think that all of us from where we are can make things easier for other people. I think that it's possible and I see some hope in different. In Google too. There's even some hope in Google. There's all sorts of places.

C (58:13)

There's lots of hope. Lots of hope.

B (58:16)

So is that the invitation for our listeners that we're inviting each of us to be a friction fixer, to be.

A (58:21)

A trustee of others. Time to be. And that doesn't mean that you always make things as efficient as possible. But if you're going to take a lot of their time, think about situations where the struggle is worth it.

C (58:31)

Yeah. Make sure they get a good return on their time.

A (58:34)

Yeah.

B (58:35)

Wonderful. And finally, Bob, before we close, how can people find you and your great books?

A (58:39)

Well, I do have a website, Bob Sutton.net but you know, and I'm on LinkedIn and I tend to be responsive to emails. As long as you're not an idiot or an asshole, I'll probably.

C (58:52)

Of email.

B (58:53)

Let's keep it, keep it short, folks. Be a trustee. Be a trustee of Bob.

A (58:58)

Well, although some, some people write very long, very entertaining emails, so. So I don't, I don't want to stop those people. I mean, I've had 1266 word emails that are awesome. So. So if you can carry it off, I want to see those long ones too.

B (59:16)

Oh, sounds like a challenge.

C (59:19)

Awesome. So fun talking to you, Bob. Thank you so much.

A (59:24)

Well, thank you, Amy. Thank you.

B (59:26)

It was a treat.

A (59:28)

And Brandy and Nick, who are backstage, I guess. So thank you all so much.

B (59:31)

Okay, so head on to radicalcandor.com podcast to see the show. Notes for this episode and praise in public, criticize in private. So if you like what you hear, please rate and review us wherever you're listening. And if you've got criticism for us, you know we welcome it. Email that to podcastadicalcandor.com Go order Bob's books wherever you get your books, wherever books are sold. Bye for now.

A (59:56)

Bye. Bye.

C (59:57)

Take care everyone.

B (59:58)

The Radical Candor podcast is based on the book Radical Be a Kick Ass Boss Without Losing youg Humanity by Ken Scott. Episodes are written and produced by Brandy Neal with script editing by me, Amy Sam. The show features Radical Candor co founders Kim Scott and Jason Rosoff and is hosted by me still, Amy Sandler. Nick Kharisimi is our audio engineer. The Radical Candor podcast theme music was composed by Cliff Goldmacher. Follow us on LinkedIn Radical Candor the company and visit us@radicalcandor.com.