<\/p>\n
ALISON BEARD: I\u2019m Alison Beard.<\/p>\n
ADI IGNATIUS: I\u2019m Adi Ignatius, and this is the HBR IdeaCast<\/em>.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Adi, I\u2019m not going to lie, I am getting pretty exhausted by all the changes we\u2019ve seen in the media industry over the course of our careers, especially now with the advent of AI and a new strategy at HBR that\u2019s built around connection as much as content. I feel like I\u2019m having to learn an entirely new business, and that\u2019s exciting, don\u2019t get me wrong, but it\u2019s also extremely hard.<\/p>\n ADI IGNATIUS: I feel the same thing. I think everybody in every industry is pretty much feeling the same thing right now. And this is before AI even completely lands and transforms our business even more. So this is what we\u2019re doing. We are constantly reinventing our businesses.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: And for anyone struggling like we are with this period of transformation and uncertainty, our guest today has good advice on how to break out of old patterns holding us back and really embrace the idea of continuous change for ourselves and our organizations.<\/p>\n ADI IGNATIUS: So I love that because I think it\u2019s easy to say, and leaders say it all the time, we have to continually experiment, continually change. Everybody has to adapt. Easy to say; very hard to pull off. So if she\u2019s got a framework, I\u2019m all ears.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: So the guest is Nilofer Merchant, a former Apple executive, corporate consultant and author of the book, Our Best Work: Breaking Free from the Invisible Norms That Limit Us. And I talked to her about some practical ways for both individuals and teams to thrive in ever-changing environments. That includes things like normalizing discomfort, rewarding people for building new competencies rather than just showing confidence and modeling constant curiosity. Here\u2019s our conversation.<\/p>\n I\u2019d love to talk today about this idea of adapting to continuous change, which requires curiosity, rethinking the status quo, trying new things. That sounds great and logical in theory, but in practice, it\u2019s extremely hard for individuals, for teams, for organizations. So what is the biggest hurdle preventing many of us from just understanding that this is the new normal?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Yeah. So here\u2019s the thing, change management in the management discipline is you decide where it is you\u2019re going, you tell other people very clearly, you communicate it extremely well, and then you reward and acknowledge the work that\u2019s actually happening. It assumes that one group or party ends up directing the others. And my observation is that that\u2019s actually not change. That\u2019s actually control because when you have true change comes choice.<\/p>\n What we\u2019re describing in the change management literature is actually a subjugation. It\u2019s us telling other people and directing other people to do things. And what we want instead is the ability to actually decide together. And when I say that, most people think, \u201cOh, you\u2019re describing chaos.\u201d And I\u2019m actually not describing chaos. What I\u2019m describing is a difference between accountability and ownership.<\/p>\n So accountability says, Alison needs to know where we\u2019re going to go and she\u2019s going to tell Nilofer and Nilofer gets to participate in that or not. That\u2019s to some degree her choice. But if she needs employment, she\u2019s going to participate. But as soon as Alison takes her foot off the gas, Nilofer\u2019s going to go ahead and do whatever it is she wants to do, which is why no change management stuff actually sticks. It\u2019s because we only do it as long as someone\u2019s forcing us to do it the way it\u2019s been done. But if we have an ownership model, a collaborative model, then we\u2019ve actually decided the horizon together and then you\u2019ve got my commitment, I\u2019m on board. And so as long as you\u2019ve got me engaged, then we\u2019re going to go do it. And even if you move on, I\u2019m still committed to it because I decided it with you.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: So what\u2019s the first step for a leader in trying to move from that old way of doing things into the new way?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Collaboration is co-laboring. You have to actually decide together what it is you want to do. But before we can even do that, we have to be okay with not knowing. We have to be okay with, I don\u2019t know the answer, you don\u2019t know the answer, but we can actually build the answer. And for any of us, I don\u2019t know about you, but I was trained in MBA programs and at work that my job was to know and be confident in that.<\/p>\n I\u2019m noticing actually that the role of work is really changing with AI because it\u2019s not about knowing. And in fact, it started changing when we had really good access to search because it wasn\u2019t then about, did I know more than you? It was about, could I find it out? Could I gather up that data? Could I form an insight? And now the knowing and the data part is almost irrelevant. It\u2019s the, can I formulate a new question? Can I have a new take? And those things are so inherently about discomfort because we get to sit in the unknowing for enough time to go, \u201cWhat is it I don\u2019t know?\u201d<\/p>\n I tell the story in the book about Orangetheory. Right before they make you do something really hard, like an all out, they\u2019ll say to you, \u201cIt\u2019s 90 seconds. It\u2019s supposed to be hard and you\u2019re supposed to get uncomfortable in order to grow.\u201d And I feel like that\u2019s the sentence we all need to say to ourselves at work of, if we\u2019re coming up with a new insight or we\u2019re doing innovation or we\u2019re doing growth strategy, it\u2019s supposed to be hard, but we have to be willing to go into that discomfort and trust that at some point we will figure it out. Sitting with that is the maturity that we need every leader to have.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: This requires patience though, right? So in the Orangetheory, they can say, yes, it\u2019s going to take 90 seconds, but a leader might not know how long it\u2019s going to take and the team members might think to themselves, \u201cBut I have all these deliverables that I need to get going on and still perform.\u201d So how do organizations, how do teams find that right balance?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I\u2019ve done this kind of change management work inside companies. So let\u2019s just describe an ordinary scenario. It\u2019s when teams normally try to solve things themselves first, then they often hire a big firm, one of the big three, to come in and help them and get that PowerPoint slide. And then they\u2019re still stuck because they still haven\u2019t figured it out.<\/p>\n And at that point, they are more desperate than ever. And typically that was when I was hired, my team and I were hired. And we come in and we\u2019d say, \u201cActually, can we invite people throughout the organization to come and participate with us? Because I\u2019m sure that if you haven\u2019t solved it yet, it\u2019s not because you\u2019re not trying hard enough. It\u2019s because somewhere in this, we don\u2019t understand the situation and if we don\u2019t understand it, we can\u2019t solve for it. So somewhere in this organization, someone can actually help us.\u201d<\/p>\n And I think every CEO looked over at me like, \u201cCan I fire you now?\u201d Because they thought I was not taking it seriously enough that I wanted to talk to more people. And I was actually saying, \u201cNo, no, no. The reason you\u2019re broken is because I am taking it seriously enough. I believe that there\u2019s some missing piece.\u201d So we have to actually get people in a room together and I\u2019d call that process an invitation to play where I\u2019d actually have them write an email to people and say, \u201cAnyone who wants to come help us solve this problem.\u201d<\/p>\n And in that first couple weeks of process, people would share stories of why customers were calling a lot or why sales metrics weren\u2019t being met or whatever else. And then about two weeks in, three weeks in, four weeks in, some period of time, but not indefinite there was always this epiphany that would happen where someone was describing something and it was the equivalent of looking at an elephant in the room and somebody was saying, \u201cThis is shiny and smooth.\u201d And the other person\u2019s saying, \u201cIt\u2019s hairy.\u201d It\u2019s just like they were describing different things, but as soon as you put the pieces together, you\u2019re like, \u201cClick.\u201d<\/p>\n And there\u2019s this moment that would go around the room and the CEO would always look over at me like, \u201cOh, we didn\u2019t know the answer.\u201d And I go, \u201cYeah, and what does that take?\u201d I go, \u201cYou\u2019ve been working on this for a couple of years.\u201d And I look at my watch and I go, \u201cThat took three weeks. That took four weeks.\u201d So it\u2019s never an indefinite thing. The thing is, are we willing to go slow in order to go fast and are we willing to understand that the comfort of believing we already know the problem is actually the reason why we\u2019re not moving forward.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: And that goes to the point of rethinking the status quo. It\u2019s really difficult to break people from the structures that they\u2019re used to, the business models that they\u2019re used to, the ways of working that they\u2019re used to. So in your experience, how do you get people to abandon their resistance to changing what feels normal and right to them?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: So the difference to me is the difference between competence and confidence. So most often our organizations are rewarding the fake it until you make it behavior. We\u2019re reinforcing the person who shows up with the most amount of confidence at the table, but that\u2019s not allowing for us to have the actual competence. So if we don\u2019t know the answer, why aren\u2019t we willing to say we don\u2019t know? And if we essentially lie and create a form of fraud with each other, that\u2019s not going to allow us to hook up and actually create the ideas that matter.<\/p>\n I should back up and share this. So innovation, there\u2019s three things that have fueled innovation that all the management theorists for like the last hundred years, Drucker, Mary Follett, to Amy Edmondson and Bob Sutton. Every person agrees there\u2019s three things that drive innovation. One, that we have access to new and novel ideas. Two, that those ideas are joined together in a way that allows them to become real and robust solutions. Three, that we\u2019re solving the problems of tomorrow, that we\u2019re solving meaningful problems. And confidence is to say, we already know the idea. Confidence is to fake it and not actually show where those ideas need further development. Confident is to say, we actually believe where the market\u2019s going. When actually all those three things are about curiosity and uncertainty and change. And so we need to lean into those three Cs and let go of the knowing and the data driven and the confidence models that we\u2019ve been taught. And the shift will allow us to collaborate and create innovation. But more importantly, in this world, if you notice that knowing and speed and confidence and data driven are all the things that AI does really well.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Sometimes wrongly.<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: In fact, the data, Alison, is really interesting. I just read a piece of research that Karim Lakhani did out of Harvard and a group of other people. So I\u2019m locating it to one person, but it was actually six or seven researchers. And they said, AI allowed people, especially junior people, to do things 12% faster, 25% more, but it got the answer wrong 19% of the time.<\/p>\n And I\u2019m like, \u201cOkay, so are we valuing speed and the appearance of progress or are we valuing insight, ingenuity, collaboration, creativity, all the things that actually lead to growth and innovation?\u201d<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Right. So when you\u2019re thinking about how you need to change as a team, as an organization, obviously there are some things that you\u2019re going to want to keep and preserve because they have been working well, and then there are going to be things that you need to get rid of. So how do you work with leaders on determining which changes will make meaningful progress while retaining some of the status quo that has been helpful?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I think it\u2019s more about thinking about, where are the different things that we do every day that we could go, \u201cOh, this is a place for us to improve.\u201d So that\u2019s one. And then the second one is really being practical about we need to figure out how to do more innovation and the places where we\u2019re not seeing the growth we would like is to actually go, \u201cHow do we come together around that? How do we invite people to play?\u201d And start doing strategy and execution in a different way than we\u2019ve ever done, which is to say, \u201cWhat is it we want to do? \u201d<\/p>\n And that creative process. I did a bake off with a team once where they had $2 million to spend and they were having this conversation about, \u201cOh, we should spread peanut butter style across the organization or we should invest it in one place that\u2019s already working.\u201d And I said, \u201cWell, actually, rather than assuming we know the answer, why don\u2019t we invite everyone into an idea-athon like a hackathon, but with an idea thing and just see what\u2019s worth investing in.\u201d<\/p>\n And we set up some rules for the teams and we said, \u201cYou don\u2019t have to work in your discipline. So if you\u2019re a finance person, you can go over to the cafeteria and work with them, whatever you want to go do, but you have to form teams.\u201d And so we set up a way for people to do that. And you have to come with the sizing. So we assign finance people to help with that, and then you just have to show us the possibility. So pilot it in some way so we\u2019re not just talking theory.<\/p>\n One team came together with this idea about if they could make people go use the stairs instead of the elevators at lunch, they would improve the 10,000 steps thing. And they were just excited about that because they personally were trying to improve their health. Interestingly enough, the way they sized it was they actually called the insurance company and said they could get a 5% benefit if they did this set of protocols inside the company. And so saved the company money. And it turns out, by the way, that 90% of the ideas that were submitted in that idea-athon were things that did not require \u2026 Did not require incremental dollars or self-funded. And there was all this latency in the system that was innovation at different levels.<\/p>\n So wherever people caught, whether it was a systems change or a process change or a human behavior change or all the way up to a market change. I think that\u2019s the kind of thing we need to unlock. When we say, let\u2019s access new and novel ideas, the data says that we eliminate between 50 and 70% of them, that they either self silence or we ignore them.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: It sounds like you\u2019re really talking about the democratization of change, which also sounds really difficult to manage. So in practice, do you have an example of a company that you\u2019ve worked with that has managed to corral that kind of change management that you\u2019re talking about, bottom up change?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: You know I want to share this story and I\u2019m going to tell the CEO\u2019s name but he\u2019s no longer in the role so I can do it and he won\u2019t mind. So when I was working with Adobe, one of the things that they were stuck on is they were losing a large portion of their education market to a competitor, Macromedia. And basically every kid that was coming out of design school was coming out loving Macromedia tools and not Adobe\u2019s tools, which is a big risk to their future design market. And we figured out that over 50% of Macromedia\u2019s revenue was coming from education. So we figured if we won education, we actually defeated the vendor in a really interesting way.<\/p>\n So we talked to customers and said, \u201cWhy are they picking the vendor?\u201d We talked to the product team and said, \u201cWhat would you build if you could build?\u201d We talked to the sales team and said, \u201cWhat is it you need in order to win over contracts?\u201d We\u2019re just moving all the levers, trying to figure out what the go to-market strategy would be.<\/p>\n And at that point, Bruce shows up with a book called Execution, which was a book that was saying basically if the reason we\u2019re failing at work is not because we don\u2019t know the strategy, it\u2019s because we\u2019re not executing well. And he handed this book out to everybody. And the book basically said, \u201cListen, if things aren\u2019t executing well, it\u2019s because you\u2019re not telling people clearly enough, you\u2019re not rewarding them enough, et cetera.\u201d<\/p>\n And I said, \u201cIsn\u2019t that interesting that we\u2019re making the assumption that strategy and execution are two different things and that they come from two different parts of the organization and that this side can then tell this side that they\u2019re not working hard enough.\u201d When in reality, strategy and execution are \u2026 Especially nowadays with the world moving so fast, is more one and the same. It used to be a thing you could plan and then you\u2019d hold a 20-year arc.<\/p>\n And Rita McGrath many years ago, I want to say 10 plus years ago, showed the research that said strategy was holding a five-year arc. And of course that data was far less for any industry that was touched by information, which by the way is everyone. So it means that we\u2019re not holding onto any kind of arc so now we have to think much more iteratively, adaptively.<\/p>\n And so him handing out the execution book was really saying, \u201cHey, I\u2019m doing a great job and I\u2019m doing a great job because we and the C-suite know what\u2019s going on and you guys aren\u2019t doing well.\u201d And I just looked at the project we were working on because we had gone to him and said, \u201cHey, we figured out that 50% of the market was coming from education. So if we fix the education solution, we actually win there, we win the whole game.\u201d<\/p>\n He funded it because we brought him the idea. It changed the entire industry because Adobe became the player. And that was a perfect example of what happens when you stop thinking in the siloed model, which is what we do within an organization too, with strategy and execution being two different silos and we start thinking collaboratively and go, \u201cOh, these are one and the same.\u201d<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Yeah. Absolutely. I think today that arc is shrinking so much that strategy just has to be dynamic. Rita actually presented on this at one of our recent virtual events and I have a colleague at HBR who I think put it really succinctly like, \u201cIn this environment, you need to do strategy with us, not to us.\u201d<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Exactly.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Yeah. It was just so succinctly phrased that I said, \u201cYes, that\u2019s exactly right because strategy does need to be changing all the time. And so you need the people on the ground to help you conceive of it.\u201d<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I have a whole chapter around the idea with. Because the world is so complex that we can\u2019t assume that any one party knows enough. We have to assume that we\u2019re missing pieces of information and that gives us the opportunity to go, \u201cWhat is it I need to ask in order for me to fill in pieces of information rather than what is it I already know?\u201d Our role also as leaders is to be co-creators in that process because if we listen well, other people can hear themselves more clearly. So listening becomes an act of co-creation.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: We have covered curiosity, listening quite a bit on this show, but is there any particular advice that you would give to leaders about how they need to approach team members from their direct reports to the people working in directly customer facing jobs about how they need to show curiosity and how they need to listen?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: It\u2019s actually a practice I\u2019ve done for years. And what I do is before I go into any meeting, I prime myself by asking, what is it I don\u2019t know? And I start to write down questions that I could ask that would get to that. And I make sure I\u2019m not just asking factual questions, but what was the history of this and why are we so \u2026 Whatever it is, the set of questions that we can unfold more. And I do that as a way of teaching myself to be so much more curious when we\u2019re in a room, any meeting, we can go, \u201cWhat is it that I can be asking that will help the room develop more intelligence?\u201d<\/p>\n Which is different than being smarter. Smart is like what we come into the room with, and there are multiple forms of smart, whether it\u2019s kinesthetic or intuitive or data driven or whatever. Oh, lots of different ways of smart. And then what I want to do as a leader is to figure out how to become more of the glue. So how do I build intelligence in the room by having people hear each other and figuring out where are the possible gaps between people.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: In this era of continuous change, when you\u2019re trying to rethink the status quo, when you\u2019re trying to be curious, when you\u2019re trying to ask questions, when you\u2019re trying to find the gaps, the end goal though is to be competent at that new thing that you should be doing. But is it even possible when things are moving so quickly?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I think the goal is to be ever better at solving the problems and needs of today. And so what I want to do is think about growth as a curve for myself. And the way I get good at change is to actually practice changing. So I don\u2019t need to know tomorrow\u2019s problem. If information\u2019s readily available, it\u2019s not our knowing, it\u2019s our ability to shape the question, it\u2019s our ability to shape the team, it\u2019s the ability then to tap into those new ideas. It\u2019s the ability to connect those ideas together. And I can get really good at the process mechanics of leading and I can handle anything if I can get better at the process mechanics.<\/p>\n So if I know how to tap new ideas, I\u2019m going to be one of the best innovators. If I know how to build teams who can actually come together around things. And so what I actually want to do is trust that no matter what situation you helicopter me down into, I can actually go, \u201cOh, I know how to orient. So I think we\u2019ve got to change our perspective of competence from the do I know enough to, can I lead in this adaptive culture?<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Yeah. It does though for people who have become experts in their profession, it does seem daunting. So how do you get people to shift their mindset from, \u201cI am an expert and I know how this business or function works to I\u2019m ready to be learning every day?\u201d<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: It\u2019s such a beautiful question because it\u2019s the question of our time. Organizations have been focused on reinvention for quite a while. And so we think about it as being out there and now we\u2019ve got to figure out how to think about it as being in here. And when I say to leaders \u2026 I had a leader recently who\u2019s been at major tech firms, run a nonprofit, so run one of the top 150 companies in the world, and she said to me, \u201cI\u2019m worried at my age, I\u2019m not relevant anymore.\u201d<\/p>\n And I said, \u201cDefine relevance for me.\u201d And she was thinking about it as, \u201cI\u2019m not young enough, I don\u2019t know the AI world enough, et cetera.\u201d And I said, \u201cWell, if you think about it as those things, you\u2019re still centering outside yourself.\u201d And today, what we can actually do is center in that spot in the world, only we stand, that function of our history and experience and visions and hopes, and that ability to add value wherever we are. So she brought wisdom to the table. She had just people dynamics. She understood change management. And I said, \u201cThose actually turn out to be incredibly relevant.\u201d<\/p>\n And so we end up learning so much of what we\u2019ve been learning is that we need to know something out there and maybe what we need to do is learn how to center correctly on the value that we can create and to believe that we are capable of learning and growing at all times so that we can be elders in wisdom and actually bring forward the leadership that we need. And if we\u2019ve defined leadership, it\u2019s probably the most important attribute right now. So this is a time for leadership, but it\u2019s not coming from a place of knowing. It\u2019s coming from a place of deep curiosity.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: And when it comes to the team dynamics, we\u2019re describing an environment where there\u2019s dynamic strategy making, you\u2019re needing to upskill all the time, you\u2019re needing to be innovating with your processes, with your business models. How do you do all of that and not burn out? It does seem frenetic. You said chaos before, but I get that it\u2019s controlled chaos, but it still probably does feel chaotic when you\u2019re in it. How do you motivate people to embrace this new model where you\u2019re never really going to be competent, you\u2019re constantly going to be learning? How do you keep people going through constant change?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: One thing you can do is signal that our job is to sustain ourselves. So it was Shonda Rhimes, for example, sent out a note to all of her people and said, \u201cEven if I send you notes at 2:00 in the morning, your job is not to respond to the note at 2:00 in the morning.\u201d In the bottom of all of her emails, \u201cYou respond when it works for you.\u201d And what she\u2019s trying signal is-<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: I love that.<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Yeah. Right.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Shonda. She\u2019s great.<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Shonda\u2019s amazing and such a creative soul. And what she\u2019s saying is, \u201cListen, if our job is to be this creative, change management people who are full of curiosity, we have to have the spaciousness to do so.\u201d So don\u2019t look at my email patterns as what you need to do, figure out what works for you. And I think that norm is a beautiful one, which is, okay, then evenings are evenings and you can actually have downtime. Workout time is workout time, go take care of yourself. Make sure you see your friends, make sure you take care of yourself, and that is your responsibility is actually a nice way of a leader actually signaling that that matters.<\/p>\n And we probably shouldn\u2019t reward the people who are constantly on Slack because that frenetic energy of being online all the time when the company\u2019s going through firing and stuff is a behavior I keep seeing and keep getting reported back to me. And it\u2019s the person who\u2019s so terrified of losing their job that they\u2019re constantly on and they think they\u2019re somehow adding value, but what they\u2019re actually doing is creating noise. So a team lead can go, \u201cYou know what? That\u2019s actually not what we\u2019re looking for.\u201d We\u2019re looking for our creative resourcefulness, not always on.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: And in your experience, what are the key motivators for people who embrace this new way of thinking? Who say, \u201cYes, I\u2019m going to be constantly adapting.\u201d<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I think every leader wants to innovate and I have yet to meet one that doesn\u2019t say, \u201cGosh, I\u2019m interested in high growth and high innovation.\u201d And they don\u2019t see what\u2019s actually stopping them from doing it. I think our motivation is 100% aligned around we want growth, we want innovation, we want to do the right next thing. And then what we\u2019re stuck on is old norms of things that we\u2019re just so used to doing, that knowing behavior that we\u2019re so used to rewarding is old. And so it\u2019s not that we want to do it\u2019s just that we\u2019ve inherited it. And what we have to remember is just because we inherited it doesn\u2019t mean it has to be our legacy.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: \u00a0Is it possible for an individual leader to do this with their team if the organization is not moving in that direction, if the organization is still clinging to old norms?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Every time I\u2019ve done change in organizations \u2026 And I helped Nokia exit to Microsoft and Semantic defend against Microsoft and Adobe to expand its work, I\u2019ve done this over and over again. And in every situation, we didn\u2019t get a top down edict. What we had was a team that worked really well and our team succeeded and everyone looked over like we had had a good lunch order and said, \u201cI want some of that.\u201d And so I definitely think this is about team leadership and whoever can do that and then teams of teams leadership because when we create the change that we actually know works, other people will look over and go, \u201cHow\u2019d you just do that? And can you come over here and help us do it? \u201d And I think that\u2019s how we\u2019re going to create the change, is that organic invitation to do our best work.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Are there any daily or weekly or monthly practices that you would encourage teams to engage in to ensure that they are being adaptive and not reactive?<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: I think the big thing is to think about the way they\u2019re approaching meetings. I just think that\u2019s such a practical way of approaching because all of us are in meetings all the time and to go, \u201cAre we using our energy and time together to generate new solutions to old problems?\u201d Because most of the time, most meetings are regurgitation of what we tried to solve three months ago and we just haven\u2019t closed that loop and we don\u2019t move on.<\/p>\n I once went on sabbatical. And I was off for 12 weeks and I was so excited the day I got back, sat at my desk at 6:00 AM, cleared all my emails, and then I was like, \u201cLet\u2019s go.\u201d And I went to the first meeting and they were having the same exact conversation that they\u2019d been having when I left. And I was infuriated because I was like, \u201cOh my God, what has happened here?\u201d<\/p>\n But that actually turns out to be more normal than not. And so I want us just to look at just meetings because we could sit there and go, \u201cWhat is it we\u2019re not doing well here?\u201d We can actually start to see it ripple effect because it\u2019s the microcosm in which I want people to understand that that\u2019s where we\u2019re not getting new and novel ideas, that\u2019s where we\u2019re not generating new solutions. And it\u2019s mostly because we don\u2019t understand how to manage those well. So if we could do that one thing alone, we\u2019d see change.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Yeah. I would add that the next step is to have those idea meetings, make sure the meetings are about new ideas and solving problems, but then actually make sure that you do something after the meetings to move in the direction that you\u2019ve been talking about.<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Exactly. And we know how to do that. The funny part is \u2026 Bob Sutton has that beautiful knowing, doing gap work that he\u2019s talked about. And this is not necessarily about that. This is us saying, \u201cWe\u2019re going to try a new norm. We\u2019re going to actually look at the behavioral ways in which we\u2019re entrenched and change those things.\u201d And if we can just see, \u201cOh gosh, we have this pattern of behavior where we mostly talk at each other\u201d because we think the underlying norm is about confidence and we have to elicit more confidence, more talking than, okay, we\u2019re going to focus instead on competence and measure ourselves by whether or not we\u2019re actually solving real problems.<\/p>\n And these are all intangibles and right now we\u2019re mostly measuring tangibles. We\u2019re measuring efficiency, speed, output, but we\u2019re not measuring creativity, curiosity, ingenuity, collaboration, and all the things that Amy Edmondson\u2019s works points to, which is about how do we create safety and teams so we can do new ideas? Those are all emergent qualities. So as leaders, we need to step into that place of, I can create the structures, which is actually almost like building an architecture of a building. I can create the social structures that will allow us to do the work that we need to do.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: Well, Nilofer, thank you so much. It\u2019s been such a pleasure talking to you. I really appreciate it. And the book is terrific.<\/p>\n NILOFER MERCHANT: Thank you.<\/p>\n ALISON BEARD: That\u2019s Nilofer Merchant, author of the book, Our Best Work: Breaking Free from the Invisible Norms That Limit Us.<\/p>\n If you found this episode helpful, please share it with a colleague and be sure to subscribe and rate IdeaCast in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen. If you want to help leaders move the world forward, consider subscribing to Harvard Business Review. You\u2019ll get access to the HBR mobile app, the weekly exclusive insider newsletter, and unlimited access to HBR online. Just head to hbr.org\/subscribe.<\/p>\n Thanks to our team, senior producer Mary Dooe, audio product manager, Ian Fox, and senior production specialist, Rob Eckhardt. And thanks to you for listening to the HBR IdeaCast<\/em>. We\u2019ll be back with a new episode on Tuesday. I\u2019m Alison Beard.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n #Skills #Navigate #Continuous #Change<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ALISON BEARD: I\u2019m Alison Beard. ADI IGNATIUS: I\u2019m Adi Ignatius, and this is the HBR IdeaCast. ALISON BEARD: Adi, I\u2019m not going to lie, I am getting pretty exhausted by all the changes we\u2019ve seen in the media industry over the course of our careers, especially now with the advent of AI and a new […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3277,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7215","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-management"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n