WEBVTT - Productivity Hacks Are Dumb. Try This Instead

0:00:00.240 --> 0:00:02.760
<v Speaker 1>I think it's safe to say that most of us

0:00:02.800 --> 0:00:06.720
<v Speaker 1>wish we were more productive at work. We're always seeking

0:00:06.840 --> 0:00:11.600
<v Speaker 1>that one quick fix to increase our output and reduce distractions.

0:00:12.039 --> 0:00:16.040
<v Speaker 1>But does that really exist? This weekend game plan, we're

0:00:16.040 --> 0:00:34.160
<v Speaker 1>talking about productivity. Hi, I'm Rebecca Greenfield and I'm Sam Grobart. Sam,

0:00:34.479 --> 0:00:37.879
<v Speaker 1>do you feel productive? Never know? But we must be

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:41.160
<v Speaker 1>because we get things done. Oh, totally get things done.

0:00:41.240 --> 0:00:45.320
<v Speaker 1>But the efficiency rate is just terrible. Right. It feels

0:00:45.360 --> 0:00:48.760
<v Speaker 1>like a struggle because it is. You know, you and

0:00:48.800 --> 0:00:51.280
<v Speaker 1>I both do a fair bit of writing, and honestly,

0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:53.599
<v Speaker 1>it can come down to like I will write a

0:00:53.600 --> 0:00:58.080
<v Speaker 1>sentence and then I will not write sentences for ten minutes, yeah,

0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:01.720
<v Speaker 1>twenty yeah, which we talked about in the new Yeart

0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:05.640
<v Speaker 1>resolution episode. How both of my resolutions were productivity focused

0:01:05.640 --> 0:01:08.520
<v Speaker 1>because it's become such an issue for me. That's right.

0:01:08.600 --> 0:01:11.120
<v Speaker 1>One of my two were productivity focused. The other was

0:01:11.480 --> 0:01:15.040
<v Speaker 1>fat focus, but that's for another episode, different issue. So yeah,

0:01:15.080 --> 0:01:20.839
<v Speaker 1>if you google productivity hacks, there are lots of bad suggestions,

0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:24.440
<v Speaker 1>a lot of what we might call horse hockey. Yes,

0:01:24.480 --> 0:01:27.760
<v Speaker 1>Sam's favorite term, A little malarkey maybe, Yeah, it's like

0:01:27.959 --> 0:01:33.520
<v Speaker 1>drink water. I swear. One of them was drink. Yeah,

0:01:33.720 --> 0:01:37.040
<v Speaker 1>it's nothing good concentrate, you know, it's just honestly, And

0:01:37.080 --> 0:01:39.920
<v Speaker 1>there are thousands of these articles, and by the way,

0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:42.960
<v Speaker 1>there will be thousands more. This is a continual cottage

0:01:43.000 --> 0:01:47.039
<v Speaker 1>industry of crap. Yeah. There's also a genre of these

0:01:47.160 --> 0:01:50.080
<v Speaker 1>about how often you're supposed to take breaks. And there

0:01:50.160 --> 0:01:52.120
<v Speaker 1>was some research that came out a couple of years

0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:54.520
<v Speaker 1>ago that got a lot of press because it's said

0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:57.040
<v Speaker 1>the exact amount of time that you're supposed to work

0:01:57.560 --> 0:01:59.560
<v Speaker 1>in the ratio that you're supposed to take a break

0:01:59.680 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 1>is fifty two minutes of working in a seventeen minute break. See.

0:02:04.040 --> 0:02:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Now that lies contrary to what I've found online, which

0:02:07.800 --> 0:02:12.399
<v Speaker 1>is the Palmidoro method. The Tomato method apparently sounds real,

0:02:12.639 --> 0:02:16.960
<v Speaker 1>it's delicious, and it is five minutes of work five

0:02:17.040 --> 0:02:21.079
<v Speaker 1>minute breaks. Okay, so the ratio is similar ish, I

0:02:21.120 --> 0:02:23.640
<v Speaker 1>don't know, Matt, No, Actually you wind up with a

0:02:23.680 --> 0:02:29.240
<v Speaker 1>better break ratio with So the general thinking is that

0:02:29.320 --> 0:02:33.000
<v Speaker 1>brakes are good. Sure, but then also the problem is

0:02:33.000 --> 0:02:36.240
<v Speaker 1>that I take too many breaks, right, so we need

0:02:36.280 --> 0:02:41.120
<v Speaker 1>a timer forto. That just sounds hard. Yeah, it seems

0:02:41.360 --> 0:02:43.840
<v Speaker 1>also if you're in the middle of something at fifty two,

0:02:44.000 --> 0:02:47.000
<v Speaker 1>you're not going to stop exactly. We don't work in isolation,

0:02:47.040 --> 0:02:50.120
<v Speaker 1>at least not usually. And then also on top of that,

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:52.680
<v Speaker 1>like bigger picture, there's a lot of research about how

0:02:52.800 --> 0:02:54.760
<v Speaker 1>vacation kind of brakes are good to which I can

0:02:54.840 --> 0:02:57.040
<v Speaker 1>definitely get behind. But who's going to argue with that?

0:02:57.200 --> 0:03:00.840
<v Speaker 1>Your boss, fair point fair wanted back up. So yeah,

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:02.760
<v Speaker 1>it just seems like there's obviously no quick fix to

0:03:02.760 --> 0:03:05.280
<v Speaker 1>being more productive. It's the human condition and we always

0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:08.519
<v Speaker 1>are reaching for a slightly better version of ourselves and

0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:11.720
<v Speaker 1>we probably never get there. But today is it going

0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:16.880
<v Speaker 1>to happen today? Today we're talking to somebody who has

0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:21.960
<v Speaker 1>studied in an academic lee rigorous way, various ways that

0:03:22.040 --> 0:03:24.959
<v Speaker 1>you can really achieve your goals. That's right, and he's

0:03:24.960 --> 0:03:28.800
<v Speaker 1>looked at it not only in the conscious mind, but

0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:40.040
<v Speaker 1>also in the subconscious mind. We have here with us,

0:03:40.080 --> 0:03:43.480
<v Speaker 1>Gary Latham. He's a professor of organizational effectiveness at the

0:03:43.560 --> 0:03:46.160
<v Speaker 1>Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. Thanks

0:03:46.160 --> 0:03:48.480
<v Speaker 1>so much for coming on and talking to us. Pleasure.

0:03:48.800 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 1>So we're talking about getting things done, and you've done

0:03:53.080 --> 0:03:57.360
<v Speaker 1>some research on how to achieve goals consciously. Can you

0:03:57.400 --> 0:04:01.800
<v Speaker 1>talk about that all. I started working in this area

0:04:02.040 --> 0:04:06.119
<v Speaker 1>way back in the late nineties, sixties, early nineteen seventies,

0:04:06.840 --> 0:04:10.960
<v Speaker 1>working with logging crews, and in many ways they were

0:04:11.040 --> 0:04:15.440
<v Speaker 1>similar to the people you saw in the movie Deliverance

0:04:15.480 --> 0:04:21.159
<v Speaker 1>with Burt Reynolds, highly uneducated people who might come to

0:04:21.240 --> 0:04:25.320
<v Speaker 1>work two days one week, zero days the next week.

0:04:25.760 --> 0:04:31.039
<v Speaker 1>And I found early on that if you gave these

0:04:31.080 --> 0:04:37.719
<v Speaker 1>people pacific high but attainable goals to pursue in terms

0:04:37.800 --> 0:04:41.239
<v Speaker 1>of number of trees to cut down from day one

0:04:41.560 --> 0:04:46.000
<v Speaker 1>right through the remainder of the work weeks, their productivity swords,

0:04:46.279 --> 0:04:51.200
<v Speaker 1>their job attendant swords, and what was perceived by them

0:04:51.279 --> 0:04:58.320
<v Speaker 1>as backbreaking, meaningless work suddenly became highly meaningful and almost

0:04:58.440 --> 0:05:02.280
<v Speaker 1>like a game, whether it's bowling or golf, keeping score

0:05:02.320 --> 0:05:04.480
<v Speaker 1>as to how many trees they were cutting down, and

0:05:04.880 --> 0:05:08.760
<v Speaker 1>induced competitiveness and a sense of pride in what they

0:05:08.800 --> 0:05:11.240
<v Speaker 1>were doing. And so I'm sorry to interrupt your guard

0:05:11.240 --> 0:05:13.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm just curious. So are you suggesting that it is

0:05:13.560 --> 0:05:17.359
<v Speaker 1>in the specificity of the goal that promotes that kind

0:05:17.440 --> 0:05:22.120
<v Speaker 1>of effort. You can't overstate the importance of that word

0:05:22.240 --> 0:05:27.599
<v Speaker 1>specificity as opposed to general so a general goal might

0:05:27.640 --> 0:05:29.760
<v Speaker 1>be look me in the eye and tell me you're

0:05:29.760 --> 0:05:33.320
<v Speaker 1>going to do your best, or a general goal might

0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:38.360
<v Speaker 1>be before summer, I'm going to lose weight. All of

0:05:38.400 --> 0:05:43.280
<v Speaker 1>those types of goals we found have all but a

0:05:43.360 --> 0:05:48.120
<v Speaker 1>meaningless effect on your performance. The goal has to be specific.

0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:53.560
<v Speaker 1>Have you been able to replicate this outside of logging

0:05:53.800 --> 0:05:57.560
<v Speaker 1>since most of our listeners I think aren't loggers, but

0:05:57.600 --> 0:05:59.880
<v Speaker 1>we're working to grow that audience. Actually, so it's really

0:06:01.520 --> 0:06:06.279
<v Speaker 1>does that work in an office setting? Yes, that's absolutely so.

0:06:06.680 --> 0:06:11.960
<v Speaker 1>By the mid seventies we were working in office settings

0:06:12.080 --> 0:06:17.719
<v Speaker 1>and perhaps our most impressive finding was with people with

0:06:17.920 --> 0:06:23.440
<v Speaker 1>masters and PhDs and engineering and the sciences, and we found,

0:06:23.560 --> 0:06:29.760
<v Speaker 1>once again, those who were assigned specific high goals did

0:06:29.839 --> 0:06:33.720
<v Speaker 1>better than those who just had general goals, and those

0:06:33.800 --> 0:06:37.280
<v Speaker 1>who participated in the goal setting process with their boss

0:06:37.520 --> 0:06:41.800
<v Speaker 1>sad even higher goals than those that were assigned unilaterally,

0:06:42.320 --> 0:06:45.240
<v Speaker 1>and they had the highest performance of all And that

0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:50.720
<v Speaker 1>was extremely impressive. And as two thousand and seventeen, we

0:06:50.760 --> 0:06:56.760
<v Speaker 1>have found that goal setting is extremely effective on close

0:06:56.839 --> 0:06:59.840
<v Speaker 1>to a hundred different tasks. So it's by no me

0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:03.080
<v Speaker 1>restricted to logging. That sounds like a lot of work

0:07:03.120 --> 0:07:05.280
<v Speaker 1>that you were doing, as as Becca described, sort of

0:07:05.320 --> 0:07:08.600
<v Speaker 1>in the conscious realm. But you've actually moved on, as

0:07:08.680 --> 0:07:11.080
<v Speaker 1>I correct, You've now looked at ways in which the

0:07:11.160 --> 0:07:15.240
<v Speaker 1>subconscious can help us achieve goals. Yeah, yes I have,

0:07:15.360 --> 0:07:18.440
<v Speaker 1>and I should preface by saying that I did so

0:07:18.880 --> 0:07:23.600
<v Speaker 1>very reluctantly. There was a number of studies coming out

0:07:23.600 --> 0:07:30.800
<v Speaker 1>of social psychology showing that if you left books on

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:35.520
<v Speaker 1>a table, and in one group the books had to

0:07:35.600 --> 0:07:40.360
<v Speaker 1>do with dieting, and then the other group the books

0:07:40.400 --> 0:07:44.680
<v Speaker 1>on a table had to do with, um, let's say,

0:07:45.160 --> 0:07:48.680
<v Speaker 1>gardening or what have you. And then someone comes in

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:52.119
<v Speaker 1>later and says, hi, you must be getting hungry. Would

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:55.480
<v Speaker 1>you like an apple or a chocolate? And those who

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:59.440
<v Speaker 1>saw the books on the table that had to do

0:07:59.520 --> 0:08:05.400
<v Speaker 1>with hitting, unbelievable to me, chose the apple with the chocolate.

0:08:05.440 --> 0:08:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Now I've never done that in my entire life. I

0:08:07.760 --> 0:08:11.160
<v Speaker 1>would always choose a chocolate. And when you ask people

0:08:11.840 --> 0:08:16.160
<v Speaker 1>afterwards did you notice the magazines on the table, they

0:08:16.160 --> 0:08:20.080
<v Speaker 1>would say no. And for those the few who said yes,

0:08:20.120 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 1>I did notice the books on the table, and you

0:08:22.640 --> 0:08:26.080
<v Speaker 1>said what were the books about, they didn't have a clue.

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:30.120
<v Speaker 1>And so the social psychologists were saying, this is how

0:08:30.160 --> 0:08:35.000
<v Speaker 1>you can time a goal in someone's sub conscious to

0:08:35.120 --> 0:08:40.000
<v Speaker 1>be interested in physical fitness and dieting. What have you? Now?

0:08:40.360 --> 0:08:44.559
<v Speaker 1>I and my co researcher at Locke and we're working

0:08:44.600 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>on consciously set goals send the sixties and we just

0:08:50.320 --> 0:08:54.760
<v Speaker 1>didn't believe any of this, but we considered to be

0:08:54.960 --> 0:09:01.280
<v Speaker 1>utter nonsense. So we did for see to a laboratory

0:09:01.360 --> 0:09:07.080
<v Speaker 1>experiments and much to his shock and mine, he replicated

0:09:07.559 --> 0:09:12.400
<v Speaker 1>the results of the social psychologists. So my reaction with

0:09:12.600 --> 0:09:15.319
<v Speaker 1>my doctor, she was then my doctoral students, is now

0:09:15.880 --> 0:09:20.440
<v Speaker 1>a psychologist, Amanda Shance. I said to her, you know,

0:09:20.800 --> 0:09:25.559
<v Speaker 1>we need to do an experiment in an organizational setting,

0:09:26.120 --> 0:09:29.320
<v Speaker 1>and this is the win win if, uh, if it

0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:33.800
<v Speaker 1>doesn't come out, we can keep this nonsense cementering into

0:09:33.840 --> 0:09:38.319
<v Speaker 1>our field, which is organizational psychology. If it does work,

0:09:39.440 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 1>you'll get your first publication. But if it works, I'm

0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:45.360
<v Speaker 1>going to eat the paper that you print us on

0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:49.800
<v Speaker 1>and it's not going to work. And so, much to

0:09:49.960 --> 0:09:56.040
<v Speaker 1>my chagrin, this was published in two thousand nine. Much

0:09:56.080 --> 0:09:59.679
<v Speaker 1>to my chagrin, I would confess I didn't actually eat

0:09:59.720 --> 0:10:04.680
<v Speaker 1>the pay Well, there was a diet book in the room,

0:10:04.720 --> 0:10:07.560
<v Speaker 1>and there wasn't that. I didn't like it with salt

0:10:07.640 --> 0:10:11.360
<v Speaker 1>or sugar, So what the heck? But here's what we found.

0:10:11.400 --> 0:10:16.359
<v Speaker 1>We had call center employees, and we didn't measure performance,

0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:19.160
<v Speaker 1>so we couldn't have biased the results in one way

0:10:19.240 --> 0:10:25.560
<v Speaker 1>or the other. A computers senses how many donors call

0:10:25.640 --> 0:10:30.880
<v Speaker 1>center employees can get to contribute money and the amount

0:10:30.920 --> 0:10:36.760
<v Speaker 1>of dollars actually raised, and we then randomly assigned employees

0:10:36.840 --> 0:10:42.080
<v Speaker 1>to one condition versus another. In our experimental condition, they

0:10:42.120 --> 0:10:46.640
<v Speaker 1>saw a backdrop. A backdrop simply means you write the

0:10:46.720 --> 0:10:53.480
<v Speaker 1>words the instructions for soliciting donations over a picture us

0:10:54.360 --> 0:10:59.000
<v Speaker 1>a racer breaking the finish line, winning the race. The

0:10:59.160 --> 0:11:04.840
<v Speaker 1>control people they have the exact same instructions for soliciting

0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>money from donors. And the instructions weren't made up by

0:11:09.280 --> 0:11:13.640
<v Speaker 1>Amanda's chance or me. The made up by management. So

0:11:14.120 --> 0:11:19.440
<v Speaker 1>we're simply watching to see if there's any difference between

0:11:19.480 --> 0:11:24.839
<v Speaker 1>this racer who allegedly, we didn't believe this, but allegedly

0:11:25.480 --> 0:11:30.520
<v Speaker 1>is priming a high need for achievement, and lo and behold,

0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:36.080
<v Speaker 1>the racer in fact prime the need for achievements and

0:11:36.280 --> 0:11:40.560
<v Speaker 1>resulted in way more money being raised. And in the

0:11:40.679 --> 0:11:45.000
<v Speaker 1>case where they didn't see the backdrop of the racer,

0:11:45.280 --> 0:11:49.040
<v Speaker 1>now here's the hoot. When you asked employees when this

0:11:49.240 --> 0:11:53.040
<v Speaker 1>was all over, by the way, did you notice the racer?

0:11:53.920 --> 0:11:57.439
<v Speaker 1>They said no, He said, how can you not see

0:11:57.480 --> 0:12:00.240
<v Speaker 1>the racer? It's right there, It's just the print over.

0:12:00.640 --> 0:12:04.000
<v Speaker 1>They said, we were too busy making phone calls to notice.

0:12:04.720 --> 0:12:06.920
<v Speaker 1>And then when we told them the effect that it

0:12:07.040 --> 0:12:12.200
<v Speaker 1>had on their behavior, they laughed uproariously. They laughed. I didn't,

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:17.080
<v Speaker 1>but they laughed. So then I told Amanda she was

0:12:17.160 --> 0:12:20.920
<v Speaker 1>too young to ruin her reputation with these kinds of results,

0:12:20.920 --> 0:12:24.200
<v Speaker 1>and I was too old. We would have to replicate it.

0:12:24.600 --> 0:12:28.800
<v Speaker 1>So the first experiment that I just told you about

0:12:29.000 --> 0:12:32.439
<v Speaker 1>was done at the call center at the University of Toronto,

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:38.040
<v Speaker 1>calling a LUMBI. She then replicated the results at McMaster

0:12:38.280 --> 0:12:43.320
<v Speaker 1>University in Ontario and McGill University of Montreal, and we

0:12:43.440 --> 0:12:48.040
<v Speaker 1>got the exact same results. So now I knew we

0:12:48.040 --> 0:12:52.800
<v Speaker 1>were onto something. Yeah, it's like those posters in high

0:12:52.800 --> 0:12:55.160
<v Speaker 1>school that we had to sit here. We're actually doing

0:12:55.200 --> 0:13:00.240
<v Speaker 1>something for us exactly. I'm wondering. Yeah, I'm on ding

0:13:00.320 --> 0:13:03.520
<v Speaker 1>I um so you've you've had these studies and they

0:13:03.559 --> 0:13:07.840
<v Speaker 1>do seem unbelievable. Have offices integrated any of your findings

0:13:07.840 --> 0:13:11.920
<v Speaker 1>at all? Well? I think in lots of cases, you know,

0:13:12.000 --> 0:13:15.640
<v Speaker 1>the public is ahead of science. And way back in

0:13:15.760 --> 0:13:21.400
<v Speaker 1>the eighties, I became department chair and my co author

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:25.640
<v Speaker 1>of some forty years had locked to congratulate me, sent

0:13:25.760 --> 0:13:30.320
<v Speaker 1>me these posters around high achievement, you know, the persons

0:13:30.440 --> 0:13:34.720
<v Speaker 1>jumping over a high bar and touched underneath that something

0:13:35.280 --> 0:13:38.440
<v Speaker 1>has tried. As at first you don't succeed, try again.

0:13:39.080 --> 0:13:42.720
<v Speaker 1>So when I first went to publish the these results

0:13:42.840 --> 0:13:45.080
<v Speaker 1>and in two thousand and eight the editor, one of

0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:50.559
<v Speaker 1>the comments the journal editor had, uh, do you have

0:13:50.640 --> 0:13:54.959
<v Speaker 1>posters like these on your office? I suddenly looked up

0:13:55.480 --> 0:13:58.480
<v Speaker 1>on my walls and thought, oh my lord, I do

0:13:58.600 --> 0:14:01.840
<v Speaker 1>have these posters on my walls, and I haven't paid

0:14:01.880 --> 0:14:07.480
<v Speaker 1>any attention to them in some years. So have they

0:14:07.520 --> 0:14:11.040
<v Speaker 1>had an effect on my behavior? I suspect they must have.

0:14:11.760 --> 0:14:14.160
<v Speaker 1>I also understand when we are we had been talking

0:14:14.240 --> 0:14:18.560
<v Speaker 1>before that you're now working on research about um words

0:14:18.600 --> 0:14:21.040
<v Speaker 1>and how words can affect us subconscious and emails. Can

0:14:21.080 --> 0:14:23.640
<v Speaker 1>you talk about that research a little bit? Well, I've done,

0:14:24.560 --> 0:14:28.720
<v Speaker 1>I've done studies on asked that it's a huge national

0:14:28.920 --> 0:14:31.600
<v Speaker 1>retail store. I don't think I've got permission to say

0:14:31.640 --> 0:14:37.320
<v Speaker 1>who they are. But the CEO sends out a weekly

0:14:37.520 --> 0:14:43.040
<v Speaker 1>email to all employees and it's kind of a rara

0:14:44.000 --> 0:14:47.840
<v Speaker 1>speech to get them motivated as of Monday for the

0:14:47.880 --> 0:14:53.720
<v Speaker 1>rest of the work weeks. We convinced him to let

0:14:53.880 --> 0:15:01.240
<v Speaker 1>us inserts some achievement related words in his email, but

0:15:01.360 --> 0:15:05.960
<v Speaker 1>we only did it for half his employees. And again

0:15:06.160 --> 0:15:10.600
<v Speaker 1>there's randomly assignments as to who is going to get

0:15:10.680 --> 0:15:16.320
<v Speaker 1>the achievement message versus those who aren't. Now, the only

0:15:16.480 --> 0:15:21.160
<v Speaker 1>difference between the two email messages is that those in

0:15:21.200 --> 0:15:27.160
<v Speaker 1>the experimental group had twelve achievement related words. Oh, I

0:15:27.240 --> 0:15:31.280
<v Speaker 1>forgot to say. In all these experiments, we really probe

0:15:31.480 --> 0:15:37.000
<v Speaker 1>people after the fact as to whether they perceived caught

0:15:37.080 --> 0:15:40.080
<v Speaker 1>on to figure out what we were trying to test.

0:15:40.840 --> 0:15:43.880
<v Speaker 1>Uh in this case, could achieve the difference in the

0:15:43.960 --> 0:15:48.240
<v Speaker 1>message that the CEO said this week versus previous weeks.

0:15:48.320 --> 0:15:56.200
<v Speaker 1>We've done everything possible to debunk awareness versus unawareness, because

0:15:56.240 --> 0:16:01.680
<v Speaker 1>remember I'm a cognitive thinking psychologist. I'm into this subconscious stuff.

0:16:02.120 --> 0:16:05.920
<v Speaker 1>So I'm consciously trying to trip up my own results,

0:16:06.800 --> 0:16:10.960
<v Speaker 1>and we find again and again and again, with no exception,

0:16:11.440 --> 0:16:15.640
<v Speaker 1>people are unaware of what's being attempted. Now, end of

0:16:15.680 --> 0:16:22.080
<v Speaker 1>the work week, the store's computer, not a researchers who

0:16:22.240 --> 0:16:27.960
<v Speaker 1>assessed the results, and the computer showed that those twelve

0:16:28.080 --> 0:16:34.080
<v Speaker 1>achievement related words embedded in the CEO's message sent out

0:16:34.120 --> 0:16:40.320
<v Speaker 1>by email resulted in significantly higher sales then was the

0:16:40.400 --> 0:16:46.240
<v Speaker 1>case of their fellow employees who didn't read those twelve words.

0:16:46.960 --> 0:16:51.080
<v Speaker 1>I find this whole thing unbelievable. If this were reversed

0:16:51.480 --> 0:16:54.400
<v Speaker 1>and you were explaining all of this to me and

0:16:54.520 --> 0:16:57.640
<v Speaker 1>I was listening, I wouldn't believe a word of what

0:16:57.680 --> 0:17:02.080
<v Speaker 1>you're saying. The only reason why I believe this because

0:17:02.200 --> 0:17:05.399
<v Speaker 1>I collected the data, and I don't want to believe it.

0:17:05.800 --> 0:17:09.280
<v Speaker 1>But it's true. I'm wondering you've mentioned this a little bit,

0:17:09.359 --> 0:17:13.200
<v Speaker 1>but if the employees catch onto it, does that make

0:17:13.280 --> 0:17:15.919
<v Speaker 1>them aware in such a way that they won't be

0:17:15.960 --> 0:17:22.439
<v Speaker 1>as productive. Yes, people don't like to be manipulated. And uh,

0:17:22.960 --> 0:17:25.919
<v Speaker 1>and there have been some experiments not done by me,

0:17:26.160 --> 0:17:32.000
<v Speaker 1>but in the scientific literature showing that if people catch on,

0:17:33.040 --> 0:17:37.480
<v Speaker 1>then they act the opposite. I could see myself doing that.

0:17:37.640 --> 0:17:40.800
<v Speaker 1>Well sure, you know, in a romantic relationship, if you

0:17:40.880 --> 0:17:45.480
<v Speaker 1>know that she is just buttering you up, that's a

0:17:45.560 --> 0:17:51.560
<v Speaker 1>positive appall some of us like that. But alright, man,

0:17:51.600 --> 0:17:54.720
<v Speaker 1>I was planning on putting all of these motivational images

0:17:54.800 --> 0:17:56.960
<v Speaker 1>on my desk, but now they're not gonna work because

0:17:57.000 --> 0:18:00.240
<v Speaker 1>I know, yeah, well so you wouldn't you know. It's

0:18:00.240 --> 0:18:04.119
<v Speaker 1>not manipulation by others. I think I would be, And

0:18:04.440 --> 0:18:07.240
<v Speaker 1>I'll tell you I have done this consciously. I suddenly

0:18:07.280 --> 0:18:11.520
<v Speaker 1>have looked at the oil paintings on our walls and

0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:16.880
<v Speaker 1>our home, and I'm certainly aware my kids are now growing,

0:18:16.960 --> 0:18:21.879
<v Speaker 1>but for nieces and nephews, I'm certainly aware of the

0:18:21.920 --> 0:18:25.080
<v Speaker 1>photos and stuff that put up on their bedroom walls.

0:18:25.240 --> 0:18:29.720
<v Speaker 1>And I would certainly be aware of the kinds of

0:18:29.800 --> 0:18:34.280
<v Speaker 1>things that you're reading downers versus uppards. I have more

0:18:34.400 --> 0:18:40.159
<v Speaker 1>respect now for books written by Dale Carnegie and others

0:18:41.119 --> 0:18:45.600
<v Speaker 1>saying that I think probably doing fact have a very

0:18:45.680 --> 0:18:50.000
<v Speaker 1>positive effect on your outlook and as a result, your behavior.

0:18:50.680 --> 0:18:53.800
<v Speaker 1>Just another reason for me to stay away from all

0:18:53.840 --> 0:19:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the news on Twitter, exactly bringing me down absolutely absolute.

0:19:00.280 --> 0:19:02.600
<v Speaker 1>This was really really interesting, Thank you so much for

0:19:02.680 --> 0:19:04.720
<v Speaker 1>coming on and talking to us. Hopefully we will all

0:19:04.720 --> 0:19:09.399
<v Speaker 1>be more productive because of it. Thank you for It's like,

0:19:14.280 --> 0:19:16.760
<v Speaker 1>so I feel like I owe the makers of all

0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:21.040
<v Speaker 1>those successories posters of you know, power shooters making a

0:19:21.119 --> 0:19:25.280
<v Speaker 1>circle and horses jumping over barriers a big apology, and

0:19:25.480 --> 0:19:28.800
<v Speaker 1>I think, and also you're welcome because we're obviously going

0:19:28.920 --> 0:19:32.960
<v Speaker 1>to increase their sales greatly. That's right, So if you know,

0:19:33.280 --> 0:19:36.200
<v Speaker 1>send a little love this all right, maybe a sponsorship

0:19:36.280 --> 0:19:39.199
<v Speaker 1>or something. But yeah, I mean, we all scoff at

0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:41.800
<v Speaker 1>those silly posters that are up in office buildings, including

0:19:41.800 --> 0:19:46.000
<v Speaker 1>our own, and yet we're the ones that are idiots.

0:19:46.000 --> 0:19:49.560
<v Speaker 1>They work. Yeah, And I'm so inclined to believe Gary

0:19:49.600 --> 0:19:53.200
<v Speaker 1>because he was so incredulous himself. He was like, don't

0:19:53.240 --> 0:19:57.800
<v Speaker 1>believe me, but it's true. I've tested it a lot. Yeah. No,

0:19:57.880 --> 0:19:59.840
<v Speaker 1>and he's certainly been doing this for quite a while,

0:20:00.040 --> 0:20:02.440
<v Speaker 1>and you know, he's invested a lot of time in it.

0:20:02.640 --> 0:20:06.119
<v Speaker 1>So there is actually one quick trick to improve your

0:20:06.160 --> 0:20:09.879
<v Speaker 1>work productivity. Look at marathoners crossing a finish line. Yeah.

0:20:10.000 --> 0:20:12.720
<v Speaker 1>But another thing that we didn't really get to is

0:20:12.800 --> 0:20:16.320
<v Speaker 1>I think part of this problem of obsession with productivity

0:20:16.640 --> 0:20:19.800
<v Speaker 1>is that we hold ourselves to this. I hold myself

0:20:19.800 --> 0:20:22.200
<v Speaker 1>to a very high standard and then beat myself up

0:20:22.200 --> 0:20:24.439
<v Speaker 1>when I'm I'm not as productive as I want to be,

0:20:24.480 --> 0:20:27.120
<v Speaker 1>and that seems to making less productive. Even I don't

0:20:27.119 --> 0:20:29.560
<v Speaker 1>even hold myself to a high standard, yet still beat myself.

0:20:30.000 --> 0:20:32.760
<v Speaker 1>So that's another issue altogether. But yes, I think it's

0:20:32.760 --> 0:20:37.000
<v Speaker 1>true that there's an unattainable goal here. Yeah, there's no

0:20:37.040 --> 0:20:40.399
<v Speaker 1>such thing as like perfect productivity. No, and all these

0:20:40.560 --> 0:20:45.840
<v Speaker 1>these bloggers and life hackers are feeding into our anxieties

0:20:45.840 --> 0:20:48.720
<v Speaker 1>and making them worse. That's right. There's someone else out

0:20:48.720 --> 0:20:51.840
<v Speaker 1>there more productive than you, and if you're doing up

0:20:51.840 --> 0:20:56.480
<v Speaker 1>your game, you're going to get passed by. So we're

0:20:56.520 --> 0:21:03.240
<v Speaker 1>all distractable, self centered morons. So buy some posters and

0:21:03.600 --> 0:21:05.800
<v Speaker 1>the movie, be kind to yourself, give yourself a little hug,

0:21:06.480 --> 0:21:12.800
<v Speaker 1>and now it's time for half big takes, half baked takes.

0:21:13.200 --> 0:21:16.720
<v Speaker 1>All right, Sam, what is you're not quite fully formed?

0:21:16.720 --> 0:21:18.879
<v Speaker 1>Idea for this week? This one actually came to me

0:21:19.000 --> 0:21:21.240
<v Speaker 1>last weekend. I took my six year old son to

0:21:21.280 --> 0:21:24.160
<v Speaker 1>the movies and it was one of those kids movies

0:21:24.160 --> 0:21:25.960
<v Speaker 1>where I knew I was not going to be interested.

0:21:26.040 --> 0:21:27.639
<v Speaker 1>Some kids movies, I might be, but this was not

0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:30.840
<v Speaker 1>going to be one of them. And I wanted to

0:21:30.880 --> 0:21:34.440
<v Speaker 1>just kind of maybe use my phone audibly, just use

0:21:34.720 --> 0:21:37.040
<v Speaker 1>my phone to read things and you know, text people

0:21:37.119 --> 0:21:41.720
<v Speaker 1>or whatever. And I know that can be wildly annoying

0:21:42.160 --> 0:21:45.160
<v Speaker 1>in a theater full of adults watching an adult movie.

0:21:45.240 --> 0:21:48.080
<v Speaker 1>I would never do it then, But I do think

0:21:48.119 --> 0:21:53.720
<v Speaker 1>this rule needs a slight codicil that makes it okay

0:21:53.880 --> 0:21:56.680
<v Speaker 1>to do this in children's movies, because when you're a parent,

0:21:57.320 --> 0:22:01.040
<v Speaker 1>it's just sometimes I want to ask to watch two

0:22:01.040 --> 0:22:04.040
<v Speaker 1>hours of a weirdo animated movie that makes no sense,

0:22:04.119 --> 0:22:06.840
<v Speaker 1>and just if you can just sit there and you know,

0:22:06.920 --> 0:22:09.840
<v Speaker 1>turn your screen down. Of course, silence your phone always.

0:22:10.000 --> 0:22:13.520
<v Speaker 1>But when it comes to kids movies, I say text away.

0:22:13.680 --> 0:22:15.960
<v Speaker 1>When you told me this, I was a little appalled

0:22:16.000 --> 0:22:18.439
<v Speaker 1>at first, but then I remembered what it's like to

0:22:18.480 --> 0:22:20.440
<v Speaker 1>be in a movie theater with kids and they're really

0:22:20.480 --> 0:22:23.960
<v Speaker 1>loud and disruptive anyway. Yeah, this is not some temple

0:22:24.200 --> 0:22:27.840
<v Speaker 1>of you know, film appreciation, right, They're all talking, they're

0:22:27.840 --> 0:22:31.160
<v Speaker 1>all dropping their popcorn anyway, Yeah, and laughing at jokes

0:22:31.160 --> 0:22:34.320
<v Speaker 1>that are not funny to adults. Not at all. So yeah,

0:22:34.359 --> 0:22:37.160
<v Speaker 1>I think it's okay. I will never reprimand anybody using

0:22:37.160 --> 0:22:38.600
<v Speaker 1>their phone in a kids movie. You do it in

0:22:38.640 --> 0:22:41.320
<v Speaker 1>an adult movie, though, get out. I'm going to get

0:22:41.359 --> 0:22:44.600
<v Speaker 1>all nosy Parker about it. Yeah, all right, I endorse,

0:22:45.000 --> 0:22:48.040
<v Speaker 1>and you Becca, tell me what is sort of on

0:22:48.119 --> 0:22:50.399
<v Speaker 1>your mind this week? I got is what I'm going

0:22:50.480 --> 0:22:55.000
<v Speaker 1>to call it, New Year, New inbox. Yeah yeah, stay

0:22:55.040 --> 0:22:57.840
<v Speaker 1>with me. So is the new year. And you decide

0:22:57.840 --> 0:23:00.280
<v Speaker 1>you want to clean out your life and that includes

0:23:00.320 --> 0:23:04.280
<v Speaker 1>your inbox. I say you make a conscious effort to

0:23:04.520 --> 0:23:07.480
<v Speaker 1>every time you get an annoying email that you're on

0:23:07.480 --> 0:23:10.360
<v Speaker 1>an email list for, you go down and unsubscribe. I'm

0:23:10.359 --> 0:23:12.760
<v Speaker 1>looking at you west Elm Yeah, oh my god. West

0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:17.359
<v Speaker 1>Um everline emails, I get bed, Bath and Beyond, I

0:23:17.440 --> 0:23:21.240
<v Speaker 1>get the hotel chain. I'm not going to you that off.

0:23:21.560 --> 0:23:25.800
<v Speaker 1>Jet Blue. Yeah, anything you've ever bought anything for, They

0:23:25.880 --> 0:23:29.400
<v Speaker 1>somehow trick you into signing up for multiple email lists.

0:23:29.400 --> 0:23:32.000
<v Speaker 1>And if you just methodically when every time you get

0:23:32.040 --> 0:23:34.080
<v Speaker 1>the email, just open it up unsubscribe. It takes a

0:23:34.080 --> 0:23:36.879
<v Speaker 1>little bit of work, but I think it's a good practice.

0:23:36.960 --> 0:23:38.600
<v Speaker 1>I think it really makes a difference. You know, people

0:23:38.680 --> 0:23:41.640
<v Speaker 1>used to have that conspiracy theory that unsubscribing didn't work.

0:23:41.640 --> 0:23:43.840
<v Speaker 1>It just confirmed that you were a person. Oh my god,

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:48.919
<v Speaker 1>don't tell me that. No, no, I've been getting fewer emails. Yeah, no, no,

0:23:49.040 --> 0:23:51.840
<v Speaker 1>don't listen to Sam, listen to I'm just crazy person.

0:23:51.880 --> 0:23:54.400
<v Speaker 1>Don't mind me? All right, And that has been half

0:23:54.400 --> 0:24:00.520
<v Speaker 1>Big Takes, Half Baked Takes. Thank you for listening to

0:24:00.560 --> 0:24:03.720
<v Speaker 1>another episode of game Plan. You can find me on Twitter.

0:24:03.880 --> 0:24:07.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm at rs Greenfield and i am at Sam Grobart.

0:24:07.680 --> 0:24:09.920
<v Speaker 1>And if you have your own half Big Takes, feel

0:24:09.920 --> 0:24:12.800
<v Speaker 1>free to tweet them at us or at game Plan.

0:24:13.680 --> 0:24:15.920
<v Speaker 1>And if you like this show, please head on over

0:24:16.040 --> 0:24:18.760
<v Speaker 1>to iTunes or wherever you listen to podcasts to rate

0:24:18.800 --> 0:24:21.640
<v Speaker 1>and review and subscribe. We read them and it means

0:24:21.680 --> 0:24:24.360
<v Speaker 1>a lot to us. Game Plan is produced by Liz

0:24:24.400 --> 0:24:27.719
<v Speaker 1>Smith and Magnus Henrickson. The head of Bloomberg podcast is

0:24:27.880 --> 0:24:31.080
<v Speaker 1>Alec McCabe. Thank you so much for listening. See you

0:24:31.160 --> 0:24:48.280
<v Speaker 1>next week. And maybe, like productivity is a state of mind,

0:24:49.560 --> 0:24:53.560
<v Speaker 1>productivities is a social construct, right,