B (2:24)

I have watched it all, but I didn't watch it in a linear order, actually. I think, yeah, squiggly. Because I did look at the chapter titles and I just thought, oh, that's interesting. That feels like it might be relevant. Or I was maybe intrigued by the title. And actually, I think it also works fine to do it in that way. You could just pick and choose and be like, I mean, there is one, everybody, that is called Arousal. I think it's fair to say made both. I didn't make it through. I think, Helen, you did actually make it through. No, I didn't.

A (2:52)

I did. I made it through because I thought, I want to watch the whole video book. So I made it through.

B (2:55)

I was so squeamish by that point.

A (2:57)

It basically just a shortcut to everybody in case you're like, do I watch it? Don't I watch it? The shortcut on the Arousal chapter of the video book is it basically says that we have a hot self and a cold self. You can be hot for all kinds of reasons because you're stressed or because you're aroused, for example. But we are. We don't make as good decisions when we are in a hot state. And that's basically the gist of it. But to illustrate that point, there is some quite uncomfortable. Well, I mean, they did an experiment on it. It's based on actual research, but there's knowing the research and then there's watching an act to play out the research. And that is a slightly different experience.

B (3:37)

I'm out. At this point. I'm out. So what was the statement or sort of area that stuck out for you, Helen? Was it that or was it something different?

A (3:45)

No, it wasn't about that experiment.

B (3:48)

No. We did both talk about it before this and go, did you watch that bit?

A (3:51)

Did you watch that bit? What are we watching? I've written down and I put a circle around it. Money destroys social relationships. Very dramatic. So there's a bit in the video book where Dan talks about market versus social norms. And to bring this to life, he basically has these, like, people all sat around. It's supposed to be a family having a Thanksgiving dinner, I think. Oh, yeah, yeah. And they're all having a Thanksgiving dinner. And then one person at the table goes to his Mum, oh, how much do I owe you for the dinner? And starts getting money out, like $300, $400. And everyone at the table's like, whoa, that's really weird. This is a Thanksgiving dinner with our family. Like, you don't pay Mum for the food. Now, the point of it is there are social norms where people will do favours for each other and do kind things for each other. You know, you have a lot of kind of goodwill in those relationships, but as soon as you bring money into the equation, it can really affect how that relationship is. Like, for example, I might say to Sarah, oh, Sarah, I'll go and grab this thing from the shop for you, and that's a favor. Or Sarah said, oh, Helen, I'll pay you £2 to go and get this thing from the shop for me. It feels weird and it affects the quality of their relationships. The reason it stuck out to me was I was just thinking about. Sarah and I are thinking about creating some communities for various different things, could be for kind of research. And we're thinking like a kind of a squiggly listening board. So we've got people in different places that can give us insights on, you know, what people are experiencing in different areas that could help us make sure that we can make careers better for everybody. And we could ask people that we know, do you want to be part of this, a favor, because they know us and we respect their word. Or we could say, we will pay you for this. But his point is, you don't do the paying. As soon as you add a finance to what could be a favor, you change the dynamics of that relationship. And it just made me think. I never thought about that before. It was just a money destroys social relationships statement that stuck.

B (5:46)

Hmm. It's quite dramatic. Mine was different, so I picked out a concept that I'd not heard the words before, which was this idea of motivated reasoning. And motivated reasoning is essentially, we paint the world in the color that we want to see it. So we sort of see the world in a way that works for us and then that affects our decisions. It kind of influences how we think about things. I guess it's knowing that we all bring natural biases to everything and remembering that I was thinking, well at work. Some of the ideas that we've talked about before I think can be really helpful and we might want to use a bit more kind of knowing this, like, knowing there's kind of a name for this is what do I think about this? So still kind of talking about that, because I think it's important that you've kind of got your own perspective, but knowing that that perspective is likely to kind of be motivated by your own, just your own experiences. And then thinking about things like, okay, well, what would an opposite opinion be? Because an opposite opinion is painting the world in a different way to the way that we see it. You know, almost like that forcing function of what is an opposite opinion. Or I was thinking you could imagine yourself in the shoes of someone very different to you, and you'd go, well, they will see the world in a different way to me. Okay, so what might they think? I think, particularly when you're thinking about judgments, it can be really helpful at work. So, you know, if you're kind of judging a challenge or an issue, or if you're trying to understand why somebody might be upset or emotional about something, that you kind of go, well, I can't understand that. And the reason you can't understand it is because you're painting the world in your way. And so if you can sort of try to go, okay, well, my way is not the only way, what is it about this situation that this person is going to be caring about and kind of just recognizing it will be different. I suppose the whole point, we are all different. That was one of the things I found with all the kind of behavioral, economic concepts. I felt like I was kind of moving from, well, now I've got the awareness, what is the action that I take so that I'm not irrational? Because most of the time being irrational doesn't help us, doesn't mean we want to be, like, flaky and, like, never make decisions. But I think it can help you probably, like, improve your decision making once you kind of understand, okay, well, my decision here is definitely going to be influenced by what I would normally do. It's kind of a sense check. I was like, what are the small sense checks I could put in place just to slightly kind of slow me down to go, oh, okay, just going to check. Opposite opinion would be this. Has that made me change my mind? What would Helen do? Has that made me change my mind? Maybe even asking, asking someone in our team who maybe doesn't know the issue quite as well. What do you think? So, yeah, that stuck with me, and I sort of kept on applying that kind of logic as I was going through all the different ideas.

A (8:41)

So let's talk about something that surprised us. Mine. I don't know if this did surprise me. I just. It's like another thing that has just sort of stuck with me, which was about. He talks about the temptation and the temptation leads us to make sort of short term decisions, which I guess is a bit like that food thing. I guess it surprised me and again it sort of stuck with me a bit is like make decisions with your future self in mind. That's what we should do. Because when we're irrational, when we make decisions based on short term temptations and actually we should think about what, what's better for our future self. Like that's the kind of balancer to that temptation. And I thought, oh, do you know what? I don't think I do that. I don't think. I think I am quite in a moment person.

B (9:26)

Yeah, you're very human now, which is a good thing. You know, I think, I'm not sure it's identical, but I think the graph that Dan shows is very similar to the research that Katie references. I was like, oh, we're starting to see similar things.

A (9:41)

Yeah.

B (9:42)

Where he talks about, I mean, this is a bit bleak because we give into temptation the amount of preventable deaths that it leads to. It's a US based research. I think it's kind of fact. But it's about 40%. It's high. You know, it is just things like, I don't know, always choosing to eat bad stuff or like not doing exercise or could be also things like isolation and kind of loneliness, but various different things where they sort of go well actually if you have your future self in mind, you will live longer and be better kind of physically and mentally. And it's interesting how they kind of both refer to that. I think you can see with this is like behavioral economics, isn't it? And change. What they were both really motivated by I thought was like, how can you help people with those things that actually they've got a really high level of control over, but we might feel like we've got a lower level of control over. I mean I say this having literally eaten three white chocolate Christmas coins prior to this conversation. So if I was thinking about my future self, I probably should have been like, no, eat the banana. But they were delicious. Maybe I'll have a banana next. And next I will invest in my future self.

A (10:49)

Banana for the future chocolate coins for now. What surprised you?

B (10:57)

Something different actually. And I hope I've understood it right because it did surprise me. So he did some research where he's talking about procrastination. He basically says whenever there is something that takes effort, even if it's in our best interests to kind of not delay It. So we get it's better to do this now. We still procrastinate because of the effort. It's like almost like, oh, this feels hard. And the hardness wins over the helpfulness of do it now. Start making progress. And so he did this, and he was basically talking about his students procrastinating over and giving in, like, essays and stuff. He had three different approaches to try and help people get stuff in. Like deadlines, basically meet their deadlines. One was like the dictator approach, which was like, I'm going to be really strict. I'm going to tell you essentially exactly what you need to do. One was the coach, which was sort of more supportive, spaced out, encouraging people to sort of give some of it earlier. So quite kind of pragmatic, I thought, quite sensible as a way to do it. And then the third was free will. You know, this is a deadline. How you get to that deadline, completely up to you. Now I was like, oh, that's interesting. I am somebody who. The free will works for me. So if I think about, like, when we were both at university quite a few years ago now together, I would set myself a deadline that was often like a week before when it was actually due, because I liked the payoff of being like, I'm gonna give it in early and then I'm gonna sort of reward myself with like, oh, but I'll be done. And then I'm gonna, I don't know, go on holiday or, like, have a break or I will have done it. So, like, for me, the free will works. And I don't like someone telling me like, you must do it in this way. I like the freedom to sort of figure it out for myself. I thought the coach one was going to be the most effective because I was like, oh, you know, you're spacing it. And I think he even talked about maybe like, rewarding people for kind of do some of it earlier. But the one that is most effective is the dictator one. It's like being, you know, I suppose we would always, like, discourage people from being too directive. Also, it feels too much. And maybe in this context it's okay. But I'm like, you've got to treat everybody like adults. You know, we talk about give people lots of freedom on the how, just be really clear on the what. And I was like, oh, that's. I don't know. It felt quite uncomfortable because I was like, that feels more command and control. That doesn't feel like a way that I want kind of people to work.

A (13:24)

And obviously that's kind of compliance isn't it?

B (13:25)

It's like decision making by and I'm gonna tell you off I guess you know back to like we don't like to be told off I suppose. But what was interesting. So that one still works the best like being super strict. But then when he does do then the kind of coaching and the kind of spaced approach it still does have a really positive impact versus not doing that. And actually the free will one doesn't work. So maybe I'm the exception there kind of rather than the rules.

A (13:48)

Or maybe you coached yourself.

B (13:50)

So maybe, maybe at an early age I was like I'm. I'm preparing for my career in circa 20 years time. But the coaching approach did work and he said even though some people did leave some of it until later still lots of people made progress earlier than they would have done otherwise. And also there is a bit of a sense of well do I actually really want to dictate to people what they should do and do people actually enjoy that experience or yes, I might have done it but I don't feel good about it because I do feel like I've been sort of dictated to. That's not a good way to be. It might work but it's not any kind of enjoyable process. Whereas the coach one is at least a more enjoyable process. You're kind of getting enough support but without kind of being left with too much space. It's kind of that support space happy medium.

A (14:37)

Just connecting it to work. Makes me think about feedback. So companies want people to get feedback because it's powerful for learning but lots of people don't do it. And so I guess the dictator view is you need to get four pieces of feedback by the I don't know, 28th of February or whatever. Like that's the dictator one. The free will one is go and get some feedback this year. And the coach one in the middle is you need to get feedback by 28 February because there is a date we suggest you do it every fortnight. You get one piece but you determine what's best for you. And it just makes me go Actually a lot of companies probably do the dictator one at the moment with like feedback or filling in forms isn't but they culturally maybe try and get that coach one like we need to have it by this day. Here's a suggested kind of flow for the frequency of your feedback but you know we kind of leave it up to you. Just makes me think about how you could apply that insights to what we're actually doing at work.

B (15:27)

And I suppose that's freedom within a framework, which we always know people do like freedom within a framework.

A (15:32)

What other action are you taking away as a result of watching this video book?

B (15:35)

One of my favorite chapters which I had come across before was on relativity and Choices. And so he gives the. I've actually seen the example before as well about the Economist and how the Economist tried to sell their magazine. They give one price that's for the magazine, one that's for the digital, one that's for the one that's combined. And it's really interesting in terms of anchoring of prices and kind of where people go. And I think the conclusion I came to is choices are good for people, kind of give people choices. So we might want to think about that in terms of learning. Like, one of our big focuses for next year is like, how do we get people learning as they go learning in the flow of work? And so rather than we could dictate that, but that's probably not naturally our style. But we could give people some choices. Oh, you can learn in the flow of work. Here are three choices. So we could say for like meetings, try a decision discussion agenda. Try making one meeting 10 minutes shorter. Or try combining decision discussion agenda and making a meeting 10 minutes shorter. So you could do those three. Then you could go, actually, it's probably helpful for people to have three choices. And what you have probably done, I think, is people go, oh, decision, discussion agenda. And make it 10 minutes short. Probably feels too hard. And that is what he would call a decoy option. So we're not actually really expecting people to do both. Maybe some super keen beans and ambitious people might. But if then that meant that people chose one of the others, some action to learn is better than no action to learn. So then I was like, oh, how do I start influencing the psychology of learning? And that's when I actually got really interested in it then, because I was like, well, you know, we've just written a book on learning, or at least the first draft of it. And then I was like, we could literally go through that book and be like, right, we want all of those ideas to come to life. You could use behavioral economics to increase your chances that that work has a higher impact, gets used more frequently. So yeah, I got to choices and decoys.

A (17:39)

My thing I'm taking away is I like the chapter about like keeping the doors open and why that is like bad for decision making. So as human beings, we like to keep doors open, but that sort of creates too Many options. And you're sometimes better to focus. There's a story that gets told about sort of a Chinese military person who burnt some boats so that they only had one boat in the battle and they had to win anyway. The action I've taken from that is like, they're kind of like the burn the boats, you know, like, oh, I'm thinking about us and our work particularly for like the year ahead. And oh, we've got too many doors open. Maybe we should close some doors so that we're more focused on.

B (18:14)

When you say have things we do, we have. We have too many doors open.

A (18:19)

Doors open. So we should maybe burn some boats so that we are more committed to the things that we have decided to do rather than kind of spreading that decision making a little bit. If we had that in our heads, we, what doors would we close if we knew that that was going to a better decision about what we actually do do?

B (18:36)

And just before we finish, the one thing we haven't really talked about over the last three or four episodes is the Squiggly career video. So if you've not had chance to watch that yet, you've still got access to all of the video books. So maybe you could watch a bit of Squiggly and let us know what you think. I did go on because I realized this week that the video books get reviews and star ratings. And I was like, ooh, it's dangerous. I know. Do you know what? It is dangerous? If I've read this, right, we've got 636 reviews, which feels like a lot.

A (19:08)

That's nice.

B (19:08)

Suspiciously a lot. I was like, oh, is that total reviews across all video books or is that our. If that's our video book, that's great. Cause that means lots of people are watching it. And we're scoring 4.4 out of 5. Which I was like, that's good. That's good. Funnily enough. And I was like, I'm sure Dan would have something to say about this. I would feel better if it was 4.5. I was like, why is it 4.4 just feels that one point lower than I want it to be. And I was like, what is it that we need to do to make it that one bit higher? But I think lots of people have watched it. And as well as the video book, some of you might have spotted these. If you've watched some of the others, you can download a sort of one page summary. Those are quite helpful. Those are all kind of PDFs that you can download. And with our video book, maybe, unsurprisingly, there's also a workbook that you can download with loads of the exercises in. You'll see Helen and I on screen. You will see some people sharing their squiggly career stories. So people that we asked to be part of the video. And I think they're brilliant and they are not actors. There were actors in some of the others, but ours are real people.

A (20:05)

Real people.

B (20:05)

Real squiggly queer community people. And you will also see some animated versions of Helen and I, which, you know, I'm slightly less of a fan of, but it mixes it up and it gives you a break from listening to, well, maybe other people.

A (20:18)

Both of us are less of a fan too, and that's why we're 4.4. They were.

B (20:21)

Maybe that's it. Maybe it's animation. I did try to click into it. I was like, I should. You know, you should be open to, like, reading it. And I can't actually. I need to find what people have actually written. But, yeah, I think a lot of people have spent time with it, which is brilliant. And if you have, thank you. And please make the most of all the other video books on there. Lots of people who've been on the podcast before have video books. Ethan Cross on Chatter, one of my favorites. Shelly Archambeau on being unapologetically ambitious. Love Shelley. She's great to listen to as well, Great to watch. Got great presence, great voice, Kim Scott, radical candor. So you know loads of the classics, the career development classics. I know lots of you would enjoy. Like I say, definitely spend a bit of time and kind of make the most of partnership with had with litvideo.

A (21:03)

So thank you very much for being part of the Squiggly Careers video book club. We would love some feedback from you. So if you've enjoyed doing it, if you've got any ideas, if you want to do anything like this again in the future, please just send it our way. It's helenand sarahquigglycareers.com but we are going back to our normal podcast episodes from next week. So hopefully we'll be listening and learning together with you then.

B (21:24)

That's all for this week. Back to you again soon. Bye for now.

A (21:27)

Bye, everyone.