Speaker 1: Welcome to Time Out. I'm Eve Rodsky, author of the
Speaker 1: New York Times bestseller fair Play and Find Your Unicorn Space,
Speaker 1: activists on the gender division of labor, attorney and family mediator.
Speaker 1: And I'm doctor add Neru Kar, a physician and medical
Speaker 1: correspondent with an expertise in the science of stress, resilience,
Speaker 1: mental health, and burnout. We're here to peel back to
Speaker 1: layers around why it's so easy for society to guard
Speaker 1: men's time as if it's diamonds and to treat women's
Speaker 1: time as if it's infinite like sands. And whether you
Speaker 1: are partnered with or without children, or in a career
Speaker 1: where you want more boundaries, this is the place for
Speaker 1: you for all family structures. We're here to take a
Speaker 1: time out to learn, get inspired, and most importantly, reclaim
Speaker 1: our time. So d D, I'm gonna tell you a
Speaker 1: story today about communication. I love your stories. It's a
Speaker 1: small story, but it's a couple that I really love
Speaker 1: because they decided to implement and play fair play during
Speaker 1: the pandemic and in the process of having a communication
Speaker 1: check in together around what was valuable to them. The
Speaker 1: couple I'll call them Richard and Amy decided that they
Speaker 1: really cared and they wanted to keep magical beings in
Speaker 1: their deck. That was something they were not going to
Speaker 1: throw out. By magical beings, I mean Sanna, I mean
Speaker 1: the tooth Fairy. So in the course of this conversation,
Speaker 1: Richard decides that he was going to be the card
Speaker 1: holder for magical beings. He wanted to be the tooth
Speaker 1: fairy for his daughter. And his daughter, they're telling me
Speaker 1: the story that she loses her second tooth, and today,
Speaker 1: I guess what happens. Tooth Fairy doesn't come that night.
Speaker 1: So what I love about this story is the way
Speaker 1: that Richard and Amy told it to me about what
Speaker 1: their communication patterns would have been before a fair play
Speaker 1: versus what happened in the moment. So before fair play,
Speaker 1: what they told me would have happened because they didn't
Speaker 1: have any practice communication practice, they just defaulted into their
Speaker 1: old bad patterns would have been that Amy would have
Speaker 1: reverted to her verbal assassin personality, which is what she
Speaker 1: calls herself, or she would have said to Richard, Wow,
Speaker 1: you know you've ruined our daughter's life, so that that's
Speaker 1: the end of it. There's no magic. There's no magic
Speaker 1: she will never believe in magic again. And so that's
Speaker 1: all your fault. It's all your fault. And she would
Speaker 1: probably be in therapy the rest of her life because
Speaker 1: the tooth Fairy goes to every other child and not her.
Speaker 1: So she would have gone really big and really mean.
Speaker 1: And how he ruined his daughter's life. And what Richard
Speaker 1: said as he laughed and said, yes, that's how Amy
Speaker 1: would have reacted. Richard said, and not only that, but
Speaker 1: he would have blamed Amy for not reminding him to
Speaker 1: put the dollar under the pillow. So after what happened
Speaker 1: now in the story, since he took the card, he
Speaker 1: owned the mistake right because he had the responsibility. So
Speaker 1: he was able to say, my bad, I totally messed
Speaker 1: up and I can't believe I didn't get the dollar
Speaker 1: under the pillow. But not only that, he took action
Speaker 1: to carry through his mistake. He communicated with his daughter
Speaker 1: and said I was able to email tooth Fairy at
Speaker 1: gmail dot com, which was true. He did email, and
Speaker 1: creepily he got a response, and he had printed out
Speaker 1: the response for his daughter and said, look tooth Fair
Speaker 1: at gmail dot com says she's backlogged. She's having a
Speaker 1: you know what I guess would be now called the
Speaker 1: supply chain issue with the tooth fairy. And you know what,
Speaker 1: when she comes the second night or the night late,
Speaker 1: she brings double the money. And now he says, his
Speaker 1: daughter is always asking when the tooth fairy comes, can
Speaker 1: she come late? Because I want to get double the money.
Speaker 1: But what I love about that story so much it
Speaker 1: shows a pattern of communication that could have been so
Speaker 1: toxic and damaging, and instead it was filled with grace
Speaker 1: and humor and generosity and a very different type of
Speaker 1: family interaction. And so I love that story because it's
Speaker 1: so small, but it really sums up a lot about
Speaker 1: what we're gonna be talking today, how we communicate, how
Speaker 1: we check in, how we are allowed to give some
Speaker 1: grace to people in our lives that we love, yet
Speaker 1: still hold our firm boundaries and say we expect a
Speaker 1: certain standard of how things should it could be done
Speaker 1: because we've agreed to it together. As you're telling us
Speaker 1: a story about Richard and Amy, I'm thinking about my
Speaker 1: own communications snaffoo, which happened just last week. Last week
Speaker 1: I had to do a TV interview, my husband had
Speaker 1: a meeting, and the Times coincided. In the morning, it's
Speaker 1: a hectic time. People are running around getting ready for
Speaker 1: school drop off. So I said to my husband, this
Speaker 1: was around seven fifteen. I said, can you do school
Speaker 1: drop off today? And he said, I have a meeting
Speaker 1: that starts at eight thirty. I interpreted that as great,
Speaker 1: plenty of time to do school drop off. So I
Speaker 1: started getting ready for my work day. Now it's seven
Speaker 1: five and I said, oh, are you going to get
Speaker 1: ready to go to school? And he said, but I
Speaker 1: have a meeting at a thirty. I told you that,
Speaker 1: And that was kind of an AHA moment for me
Speaker 1: because what he went when he said I have a
Speaker 1: meeting at a thirty was and therefore I cannot do
Speaker 1: school drop off. I interpreted it as I have something
Speaker 1: at a thirty. It's seven fifteen or seven o'clock. Now easy,
Speaker 1: I can make it work. There's so many layers to that.
Speaker 1: And you know your story about Richard and Amy, the
Speaker 1: conversation that we're going to be having today, my communication
Speaker 1: Snap who really makes me think about the fact that
Speaker 1: so much of our communication, very deeply important communication, happens
Speaker 1: often at the most inopportune times that we're not sitting
Speaker 1: down together at the table having a deep conversation when
Speaker 1: we're both fresh. It's often two ships passing in the night.
Speaker 1: We're working, we're taking care of kids, we're doing so
Speaker 1: many other things, and you say something and you think
Speaker 1: someone's going to pick up on it, and then they don't,
Speaker 1: and it's no one's fault. It's just a shoddy system.
Speaker 1: So it was something important you just said, I want
Speaker 1: to pause on it for a minute. And that is
Speaker 1: the idea of communication as a what a like you said,
Speaker 1: ships passing in a night, It's going to be in
Speaker 1: the moment, feedback in the moment that often can feel
Speaker 1: like our emotions are high and our cognition is low.
Speaker 1: So many of us are communicating that way, and it's
Speaker 1: the way we've always done it and with the way
Speaker 1: we will always continue to do it. But what we're
Speaker 1: going to be talking about today is communication as a practice.
Speaker 1: D D. I interviewed over a thousand people on social
Speaker 1: media and text with a survey question that was deliberately vague.
Speaker 1: It asked what is your most important practice? And I
Speaker 1: declined to give more context for when I asked that question,
Speaker 1: and so a lot of people said, well, I'm confused
Speaker 1: by your question. But when they finally were prompted to answer,
Speaker 1: most people were responding with things like running, meditation or
Speaker 1: taking my dog out for a while. They were equating
Speaker 1: practice with something more along the lines of personal self care.
Speaker 1: I didn't get one person that said communication is our
Speaker 1: most important practice, and listeners were here to tell you
Speaker 1: that communication is your most important practice. And if you
Speaker 1: don't have a partner, with your roommates, with your parents,
Speaker 1: with your work colleagues, communication in all contexts will be
Speaker 1: your most important practice. And it's a lifelong practice, and
Speaker 1: it's work, and you keep working at it, and it's
Speaker 1: a skill, and it's something that you keep building. And
Speaker 1: you know what that reminds me of. It reminds me
Speaker 1: a d D when I sit there for the seventh
Speaker 1: hour on the couch and say to myself, I just
Speaker 1: want to be fit by sitting here on the couch, Like,
Speaker 1: why have they not invented away for me to get
Speaker 1: cardio and muscle strength by just sitting on the couch,
Speaker 1: And sadly it doesn't happen. So just like the muscles
Speaker 1: in our body, right, communication is a muscle. Good things
Speaker 1: don't come to those who wait good things come to
Speaker 1: those who practice. So that's why after the break we
Speaker 1: were so excited to talk to my high school friend
Speaker 1: and man with the coolest job I can think of,
Speaker 1: conversation designer Daniel Stillman, who's going to teach us much
Speaker 1: more about these topics of how to communicate, why to communicate,
Speaker 1: and what to communicate. So our guest today is Daniel Stillman.
Speaker 1: He's an executive coach and facilit tator, and Daniel worked
Speaker 1: with clients of all shapes and sizes on leadership and
Speaker 1: team dynamics as well as on product and organizational innovation.
Speaker 1: Daniel hosts the Conversation Factory podcast and as author of
Speaker 1: Good Talk How to Design Conversations that Matter, one of
Speaker 1: my favorite books and really a handbook for change makers
Speaker 1: and innovators. Welcome Daniel, Hey you thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Not only I think do you have the coolest job
Speaker 1: that exists? But we also know each other from stuyves
Speaker 1: in high school. Go peg legs, Go peg Legs exactly.
Speaker 1: But I really wanted to ask you before we start,
Speaker 1: how did you become a conversation designer and get the
Speaker 1: coolest job of all time? I'll just say that often
Speaker 1: I feel like the title conversation designer just makes people nervous.
Speaker 1: They're like, oh, you're the expert, and I'm like, I'm
Speaker 1: just a fan of conversations. My thesis, and I know
Speaker 1: you've heard me say this before, is we're all conversation designers,
Speaker 1: were all designing our conversations at work at home all
Speaker 1: the time. I just, um, I'm a nerd. I've become
Speaker 1: a conversation nerd over the last couple of years. I
Speaker 1: mean it's like I I studied design. I said industrial
Speaker 1: design in grad school, and years later I heard somebody
Speaker 1: put those two words together. I'd gone through all these
Speaker 1: evolutions of different types of design that came through There
Speaker 1: was like interaction design, and then experience design and service design,
Speaker 1: and it's like conversation. So I'm like, what does that
Speaker 1: even mean? That was and I thought about it for
Speaker 1: a while and I was like, that is very confronting
Speaker 1: and weird. And that's actually one of the reasons why
Speaker 1: I started my podcast. Got was like, what does it
Speaker 1: mean to design a conversation? I was just curious. So
Speaker 1: that's how I got that title curiosity. That's my answer.
Speaker 1: I love it. I love it, and would you consider
Speaker 1: a conversation a subset of communication. That's a really interesting
Speaker 1: question because I think some people would say, like, oh,
Speaker 1: a real conversation is only one where all parties are
Speaker 1: fully engaged in discovering a surprising outcome. I would say
Speaker 1: that's a great conversation. I would still say, somebody shouting
Speaker 1: at someone else is just a very shriveled version of that.
Speaker 1: It's a one way conversation with a broken power dynamic
Speaker 1: and with somebody who wasn't really clear on how to
Speaker 1: get what they want, and somebody who didn't have a
Speaker 1: good conversation with themselves about how to get what they
Speaker 1: want from someone else. So I would say, like, yes,
Speaker 1: any time anybody is talking, it is a conversation. One
Speaker 1: way communication is one type of conversation because we always
Speaker 1: want something to happen afterwards, right. I also think that's
Speaker 1: interesting because that's sort of how I link your work
Speaker 1: to the active design of a conversation to broader communication,
Speaker 1: because we're all communicating, whether it's dubbing twit clothes and
Speaker 1: someone's pillow right there. Yes, But I think the way
Speaker 1: I'd like to connect your work as a conversation designer
Speaker 1: to broader communication is that idea that the intention of
Speaker 1: a conversation means that you can actually have an outcome
Speaker 1: afterwards and behavior that's different than it was in the past.
Speaker 1: What is that Albert Einstein quote? Right? The definition of
Speaker 1: stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again
Speaker 1: and expecting a different result. You can get a different
Speaker 1: result by listening to Dan still Home and how he
Speaker 1: designs conversations. I was very inspired by good talk your book.
Speaker 1: I was very inspired to take part of your learnings
Speaker 1: to my relationship, and I'm going to pass it over
Speaker 1: to Dr A. D. D To ask you some of
Speaker 1: that questions that relate to how we bring your work.
Speaker 1: Two the hardest domain the home. Wow, And that's what's
Speaker 1: really up. When people say, like, what's what's at stake
Speaker 1: for designing conversations? Off and I talk about business conversations
Speaker 1: because you're like, well, we a lot of salaries in
Speaker 1: the room and we just burn them all. But I
Speaker 1: think the home is a much much higher stakes conversation
Speaker 1: because that's like our whole lives. Daniel, you asked the
Speaker 1: question in one of your writings what are conversations made of?
Speaker 1: And then you said the answers are diverse, voices, ideas, vibes, connections, collaboration, listening, emotions, reactions, gaps, openness,
Speaker 1: and when I think about what makes a happy home,
Speaker 1: or what makes a happy partnership or what makes a
Speaker 1: happy family structure, these are the sorts of things that
Speaker 1: come to mind. I'd left for you to talk a
Speaker 1: little bit more about this concept of what our conversations
Speaker 1: made of. So two things come up. One is the
Speaker 1: idea of that we can design something comes from this
Speaker 1: idea that a superbroad definition of design as intentionality and
Speaker 1: choices that we make. And so designing as intentionality and
Speaker 1: purpose means you could just ask like, well, what are
Speaker 1: we optimizing for? And so we could say like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to optimize for joy or clarity or speed
Speaker 1: or consistency. But also noticing what the conversation can be
Speaker 1: made of means how do I affect my choices? And
Speaker 1: so just the idea of the realization that dumping wet
Speaker 1: clothes on a pillow is sending a signal that I
Speaker 1: am communicating, like, oh, I have a choice about how
Speaker 1: I communicate what I communicate with. My mom, who I
Speaker 1: really admire, has this wonderful phrase, which is to start
Speaker 1: as you mean to continue. And I was literally just
Speaker 1: talking about this on a coaching call with someone in
Speaker 1: An example I gave is I sometimes get angry with
Speaker 1: something that my wife has done or hasn't done. And
Speaker 1: so the question is, will expressing my anger through anger
Speaker 1: get me what I want? Now? No? Right? But that
Speaker 1: requires a lot of emotional maturity to realize, like, am
Speaker 1: I getting what I want? It also has to do
Speaker 1: with understanding that like, it's really hard to change your
Speaker 1: tone of voice and hide the fact that you're angry.
Speaker 1: So you actually have to have a conversation with yourself
Speaker 1: before you have a conversation with someone else. Right. So,
Speaker 1: this is the thing that came up for me over
Speaker 1: the years of studying conversations is realizing that that before
Speaker 1: we have conversations with other people, we have conversations with
Speaker 1: ourselves about like, well, I don't deserve that? How dare they?
Speaker 1: I can't believe I always they never write all of
Speaker 1: those things that are our reactions. It's very hard to
Speaker 1: change your first reaction. This is mental processing and saying, well,
Speaker 1: what do I really want out of this? Do I
Speaker 1: want to share my anger with them so that they
Speaker 1: feel my pain as I'm feeling it. Do I want
Speaker 1: to just pass it along and say, like here, now
Speaker 1: you are angry too. Where do I want to have
Speaker 1: a peaceable relationship? Do I want to have a tidy
Speaker 1: year home? Start as I mean to continue? Right. To
Speaker 1: think that sending an angry signal in an angry way
Speaker 1: will result in a peaceable home is just not understanding
Speaker 1: how physics works. For every action, there's an equal and
Speaker 1: opposite reaction. So we're just talking about the physics conversations here.
Speaker 1: So you've got to do that internal processing to say, well,
Speaker 1: what do I want? What do I need? What do
Speaker 1: I think is possible here? Like, what will help me
Speaker 1: communicate more clearly with them? What do they want, what
Speaker 1: do they need? What do they expect? I need to
Speaker 1: pause in the importance of what you're saying, because we
Speaker 1: literally prep for everything. We prep for a five K race,
Speaker 1: as we prep for parenteager conferences for our kids, or
Speaker 1: at least we have to find out what the zoom
Speaker 1: link is that never seems to work. We prep for dinner,
Speaker 1: But ironically, the thing that's probably the most portant thing
Speaker 1: to prep for in our homes our conversations with our
Speaker 1: partners are children. The stakeholders around us that make our
Speaker 1: home organization function. We give literally no forethought too. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's no prep We're shooting from the hip based on
Speaker 1: all of our habits. And so this is the other
Speaker 1: aspect of conversation design is understanding either I'm going to
Speaker 1: run with habit or I'm going to apply some conscious
Speaker 1: intention to it. But there's another piece to it, which
Speaker 1: is our partners are also coming with their own designs
Speaker 1: and their own expectations. And that's why having the conversation
Speaker 1: about the type of conversation you're going to have. So
Speaker 1: if you said, like, honey, I'd like to yell at
Speaker 1: you for five or six minutes brate you and then
Speaker 1: have makeup sex. Does that sound cool for you? And
Speaker 1: then they'll be like, yeah, let her loose if that's
Speaker 1: what you need. But if this is designing the conversation
Speaker 1: for someone versus and for yourself or designing with so
Speaker 1: like what do they want, honey, I'd like to talk
Speaker 1: about this? The idea that we can't propose. We proposed marriage, right,
Speaker 1: but we can't propose like here's my agenda for this evening, right?
Speaker 1: And I get it. There's this infantilization of ourselves and
Speaker 1: others where we just really want our loved ones are
Speaker 1: significant other just to read our minds, to know exactly
Speaker 1: what we want and need. And the fact that I
Speaker 1: should have to explain myself and to be as prepared
Speaker 1: for a conversation at home is I have to be
Speaker 1: at work seems laborious, and yet I think it doesn't
Speaker 1: have to be that hard. It's really just saying, hey,
Speaker 1: this is what I want. What do you want? Let's
Speaker 1: talk about how this is going to go. I want
Speaker 1: to just ask you why, and I tell you what
Speaker 1: I did with Seth because earlier you were talking about
Speaker 1: this conversation operating system, which is really your elements of
Speaker 1: conversation and within history or the length or the life
Speaker 1: of a conversation. The hardest part I saw in my
Speaker 1: research was the invitation when I asked, very very very
Speaker 1: diverse lived experiences in seventeen countries, how do you communicate
Speaker 1: about domestic life? And I'll give you an example. I
Speaker 1: went onto a Facebook group that somebody told me about.
Speaker 1: It's called the Reason I Hate my husband and kids
Speaker 1: during COVID, and in this Spacebook group that someone told
Speaker 1: me about, I was my typical lurker watching people post
Speaker 1: and one woman posts, if my husband dies during COVID,
Speaker 1: it won't be because of the disease, It'll be because
Speaker 1: of me. So that was a very provocative post. So
Speaker 1: I d m her and I said, I'm a researcher
Speaker 1: on the couples dynamics and conversation and community ptation. I
Speaker 1: would love to know how you typically communicate about domestic
Speaker 1: life with your partner. And she wrote back earnestly, I
Speaker 1: don't communicate about domestic life. It's too triggering. This is
Speaker 1: my safe space. So I want to just reflect on
Speaker 1: us for a second as we're talking about communication and conversation.
Speaker 1: That probably threatening to murder her partner in front of
Speaker 1: thousand strangers felt more safe to her than directly inviting
Speaker 1: her partner into a conversation about what is troubling her
Speaker 1: about the dynamics in her home. So why why is that?
Speaker 1: There's so many layers to that. Here's the thing. Most
Speaker 1: negotiations stop on the internal conversation before they even start
Speaker 1: because there's this term called aspiration value. We ask for
Speaker 1: what we believe we deserve. There's all these studies that
Speaker 1: show that people won't ask for a raise or A
Speaker 1: lot of women won't apply for a job unless they
Speaker 1: feel like they meet of the things that they're asking
Speaker 1: for it, whereas for whatever reason, men will apply for
Speaker 1: that job at of qualifications. So take that with as
Speaker 1: many grains of salt as you want. I don't know
Speaker 1: why this is, but it is very possible that people
Speaker 1: look at the history of their relationship and say, well,
Speaker 1: there's just no point, and so the conversation stops before
Speaker 1: it starts. But as you say, with invitation, the question
Speaker 1: is how can I bring them to the table. It
Speaker 1: is my job because I want it to find a
Speaker 1: way to bring them to the table, to invite them,
Speaker 1: to appeal to their sense of play, to their sense
Speaker 1: of purpose or potential. Right, three ways to motivate someone
Speaker 1: plays the most motivational, which is why I think fair
Speaker 1: play is a really powerful approach. Right. It's a playful
Speaker 1: approach to say like, hey, let's put it all on
Speaker 1: the table, let's talk about it. But there's also a purpose,
Speaker 1: which is say like, well, what kind of a marriage
Speaker 1: do you want to have? Right, that's purpose and potentially,
Speaker 1: you know, five ten years down the road, like how
Speaker 1: do you think we should be interacting? Right? So that's invitation,
Speaker 1: and we talked about what our conversations made out of
Speaker 1: and how to think about them more intentionally. One of
Speaker 1: the things that's really challenging is that we are really
Speaker 1: good at being efficient. We jump to conclusions about what
Speaker 1: somebody thinks. We're trying to guess what somebody's thinking all
Speaker 1: the time, what they mean. But the truth is we
Speaker 1: can talk at about twenty words per minute, but we
Speaker 1: think at four thousand words per minute, which means there
Speaker 1: will always be more to say than we can say,
Speaker 1: which means it's always a good idea to slow down
Speaker 1: the conversation and ask people tell me more, rather than
Speaker 1: going to jump the conclusion and say he's always like
Speaker 1: this or she's always like that, Say well, what do
Speaker 1: you mean by that? Well, what did you mean to say?
Speaker 1: Tell me more about that. We expect a two hundred
Speaker 1: millisecond gap between when we say something and when we
Speaker 1: expect a response. If somebody weights longer, we think they're
Speaker 1: overthinking it, and yet it actually takes around six hundred
Speaker 1: milliseconds or somebody to cook up a reasonable answer for
Speaker 1: their brains to catch up. There's research on that. I
Speaker 1: think it's Tanya stiffers out of the Max Plank Institute.
Speaker 1: Like you, people need time to think, and yet we're like,
Speaker 1: tell me, tell me right now. And that's because we
Speaker 1: get heated because there's so much at stake, and so
Speaker 1: slowing things down is always going to be a great
Speaker 1: way to design a more safe, an effective home conversation.
Speaker 1: This leads me to this wonderful thing that you said.
Speaker 1: Curiosity smells a lot like empathy. Many folks will tell
Speaker 1: you that empathy is the secret key to transforming conversations,
Speaker 1: and they're right, but it's hard to empathize with someone
Speaker 1: you truly disagree with, and it's really hard to fake.
Speaker 1: Curiosity is easier to fake and just as effective. Active
Speaker 1: listening is the key. I love it. Yeah, thank you
Speaker 1: for I think it is hard to fake. It's hard
Speaker 1: to veil your distaste for someone. But if you can
Speaker 1: just squeeze yourself and say, like, you know, it sounds
Speaker 1: like you said this, but I'm guessing that that's not
Speaker 1: really what you meant to say. So you know, now
Speaker 1: that you've heard me say what you said, tell me
Speaker 1: what you really think. Now I'm on the edge of
Speaker 1: blowing a fuse, but I'm slowing it down a little
Speaker 1: bit by using that ace In the whole of active listening,
Speaker 1: it's just a safe place where it's like, I think
Speaker 1: I heard you say this? Is that everything was there? More?
Speaker 1: Do you want to say about that? Tell me more,
Speaker 1: because otherwise I'm going to divorce you. Right, don't say that?
Speaker 1: Did you? Did you actively threatened to murder me in
Speaker 1: front of strangers? Meant to say? I mean the flip
Speaker 1: side of this, If we're talking about a relationship between
Speaker 1: people who identify as male and people who identify as female,
Speaker 1: there's some roles that we slip into. And even in
Speaker 1: a relationship where maybe both people don't identify as anything
Speaker 1: or however they identify, people take up a certain role,
Speaker 1: like somebody's going to be more invested in planning and logistics,
Speaker 1: and somebody's gonna be like, well, why can't we just
Speaker 1: I can't we just let it roll? My wife and
Speaker 1: I had a whole conversation about like not planning our honeymoon.
Speaker 1: It was hilarious. I was like, wait, so let me
Speaker 1: understand this correctly. I really want to understand what your
Speaker 1: ideal vacation is because I'm interested in I love her,
Speaker 1: so when I over plan, or as I would put
Speaker 1: it plan. She's like, where is the space for you know,
Speaker 1: exploration and improvisation. I'm like, okay, well, like tell me
Speaker 1: your favorite vacations that you've taken with your family, and
Speaker 1: she laid out a couple and I was like, okay,
Speaker 1: Like so help me understand. I got curious and she
Speaker 1: was able to tell me. So there's always gonna be
Speaker 1: somebody who's too much or not enough of whatever it is,
Speaker 1: and somebody who's taking an active role in some he
Speaker 1: was taking a passive role, somebody who thinks that things
Speaker 1: aren't fair, and that person's job is to redesign the
Speaker 1: conversation as they feel like they can't. I love that.
Speaker 1: I need to be labor your three p s again
Speaker 1: because I want to go back to the invitation, because
Speaker 1: I do think that it is the hardest barrier i've
Speaker 1: seen to fair play. When people get there, you know,
Speaker 1: it's like anything right where anticipation is worse than the
Speaker 1: thing itself, Like, wow, this is actually really fun to
Speaker 1: talk about who planned holidays growing up, or what we
Speaker 1: both think about discipline and screen time. Once people are
Speaker 1: at the table, I've found that the conversations usually go
Speaker 1: much better than people think. It's this huge barrier to
Speaker 1: getting there. And so could you go back to play
Speaker 1: purpose and potential and give us three openers for people
Speaker 1: if they do want to have a conversation. We talked
Speaker 1: one of our guests. I had a viral article that
Speaker 1: was called my wife left me because I left dishes
Speaker 1: by the side of the sink. So say that couple
Speaker 1: is talking about trying to get those dishes off the
Speaker 1: side of the sink, washed and in the proper home. Um,
Speaker 1: what would three invitations be to get somebody to the table.
Speaker 1: I'll see what I can do, but I want to
Speaker 1: just pull back a little bit and say that play
Speaker 1: purpose and potential that comes from this research on intrinsic
Speaker 1: versus extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivators are things like emotional pressure,
Speaker 1: economic pressure, and inertia. Those are the anti patterns. So
Speaker 1: if we're just to say, like emotional pressure, like, how
Speaker 1: would you invite someone to engage in a conversation using
Speaker 1: emotional pressure, I will never speak to you again unless
Speaker 1: you sit down, never speak to you again. Right, Like,
Speaker 1: if we can't work this out, I just don't see
Speaker 1: us being able to go to that party next week,
Speaker 1: or go to your parents for Thanksgiving. That is emotional
Speaker 1: pressure and that is fed up, right, But that is
Speaker 1: not ativating. You're trying to use fear. That's like reading
Speaker 1: Machiavelli and thinking it's a guide book. But about one
Speaker 1: woman who said, if you don't start cleaning up every
Speaker 1: single time that you don't do it, I'm taking a
Speaker 1: picture of it. I'm posting it to my Instagram. Right.
Speaker 1: That's assuming that shame is a motivator for them, which
Speaker 1: for some people it is, right, but it's a very
Speaker 1: poor way of sustained motivation. And just to I go
Speaker 1: into the worst of them, which is inertia, which is like,
Speaker 1: but you've always done it this way, how could you
Speaker 1: possibly ask to change the way we've been doing things
Speaker 1: for years? And to appear which is like what will
Speaker 1: we just do it this way? And so recently, actually,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you a personal story. I cook a lot.
Speaker 1: I enjoy cooking. Chopping vegetables is one way for me
Speaker 1: to relieve, you know, anxiety. I'm a very natural fast
Speaker 1: chef and she is less so. So when she was
Speaker 1: in grad school and in school full time, I was like,
Speaker 1: I gotta cook, so there's enough food in the house
Speaker 1: so my wife doesn't die and she can go through
Speaker 1: grad school. Like I wanted to make sure there was
Speaker 1: just a cast role that she could just heat up
Speaker 1: all the time. And I realized we're not in that
Speaker 1: situation anymore. She's been her a new job for two years.
Speaker 1: I'm very proud of everything she's done. And so I
Speaker 1: said to her, I was like, hey, do you think
Speaker 1: maybe you could do dinner one night a week, like
Speaker 1: Monday nights I have my men's group and we only
Speaker 1: have like two hours. And I was like, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe you could do dinner like that one night, and
Speaker 1: she was like yeah. So there's another aspect of invitation.
Speaker 1: There's play, purpose and potential, but there's also foot in
Speaker 1: the door, which is Robert Caldini right. He talks about
Speaker 1: the like getting your foot in the door, Like just
Speaker 1: a penny would help. Anything you could do would be great.
Speaker 1: So doing a very very small ask is Another way
Speaker 1: to increase the intrinsic motivation is by reducing the barrier.
Speaker 1: It's like, could you watch that one one fork once
Speaker 1: a week? Right? Resorting to a playful approach means lowering
Speaker 1: the stakes. How I'd love to talk about the dishes.
Speaker 1: I'm feeling anxious about it. That's owning your own experience.
Speaker 1: It seems just totally innocuous. Making it this huge thing
Speaker 1: and bringing the whole story makes it very hard. You're
Speaker 1: not appealing to play or purpose or potential. This is hard,
Speaker 1: and that means you have to go to your own therapy,
Speaker 1: have that into a conversation with yourself to deal with
Speaker 1: it's always been like this or you never that that
Speaker 1: actually doesn't bring somebody to the table. I think it's
Speaker 1: much much more easy to say like hey, and anything
Speaker 1: else after that. Do you think, Daniel, that this is
Speaker 1: a personality trait of yours or do you feel like
Speaker 1: this is something that can be taught. I think empathy
Speaker 1: and curiosity can be learned if somebody is willing to
Speaker 1: be curious, if somebody wants things to be better, and
Speaker 1: if we're willing to ask for more than we think
Speaker 1: is pop stable. This goes back to the question of
Speaker 1: aspiration value. If you think there's no point in bringing
Speaker 1: it up, there isn't. If you're going to come with anger,
Speaker 1: expecting it to become peaceable seems absurd to me. So
Speaker 1: finding a playful way to appeal to what is playful
Speaker 1: in your partner means you have to empathize with them
Speaker 1: and understand what motivates them, what kind of potential do
Speaker 1: they want, what is their ideal situation. I think if
Speaker 1: you can process those emotions and also empathize with your
Speaker 1: partner and think about what motivates them, I can tell
Speaker 1: my wife I'm angry without without being angry. Can I
Speaker 1: tell you why I love this so much? Because um
Speaker 1: of a poll that I did during COVID, which was
Speaker 1: I've said this to you, which is sort of tongue
Speaker 1: in cheek where I've been servying people. Now, I'm over
Speaker 1: a thousand where I've asked people what is their most
Speaker 1: important practice, but not not one person now, and over
Speaker 1: a thousand people when I've asked it vaguely have thought
Speaker 1: of communication in that way is their most important practice.
Speaker 1: But you have shown us today how you can begin
Speaker 1: that practice in such a thoughtful, intentional way. And I
Speaker 1: hope you'll come back as a part two for how
Speaker 1: to continue the conversation. But this is the hardest part,
Speaker 1: getting to that table with play purpose and potential, and
Speaker 1: so you've helped us unpack that. Couple that with a
Speaker 1: splash of intrinsic motivation, and we're going to have much
Speaker 1: better conversations. God willing, good luck out there. Hi, it's
Speaker 1: me Eve. Are you a therapist, counselor coach or nutritionists
Speaker 1: that has thought about introducing the fair Play System directly
Speaker 1: to your clients? Well, now you can come and roll
Speaker 1: in the fair Play Method, a new online program that
Speaker 1: provides with hands on training, a ton of valuable resources,
Speaker 1: and a community of certified professionals who are all part
Speaker 1: of a greater cultural movement for systemic change. Learn more
Speaker 1: about how you can help your clients shift the domestic
Speaker 1: workload in their own homes towards more equity, more fairness,
Speaker 1: and greater connectivity. Visit fair Play method dot com. So,
Speaker 1: as you may know, now, every episode of this podcast
Speaker 1: ends with an action item for you are listeners that
Speaker 1: we call a time out. This is really a time
Speaker 1: for you to focus on yourself and reflect on what
Speaker 1: you're hearing today. And we're starting the conversation first with
Speaker 1: ourselves and then ultimately with those around us. Today we're
Speaker 1: thinking about how we communicate. That's our time out for today,
Speaker 1: before we think about how we interact with others. It's
Speaker 1: very helpful to reflect on our vulnerable cities are strength,
Speaker 1: what we can do better, what we don't do as well.
Speaker 1: So today's time out is an exercise that I'd like
Speaker 1: to refer to as the reverse newly Wed game, and
Speaker 1: I'm gonna play it with you a d D for
Speaker 1: our listeners. And you can do it by listening with
Speaker 1: us and thinking along about how you would track as
Speaker 1: a d D answers. So reverse newly what game? Communication? One?
Speaker 1: Oh one quiz that we're gonna be doing today that
Speaker 1: comes out of fair Play the book. It's in chapter
Speaker 1: five and we call it the communication vulnerability quiz. So
Speaker 1: how would Mac, your partner, describe you in a moment
Speaker 1: when emotion is high and cognition is low in your household?
Speaker 1: So think back to a time when I don't know,
Speaker 1: a dirty stock was on the floor, or you stepped
Speaker 1: on a lego or uh, dinner wasn't ready when you
Speaker 1: came in the door, something where maybe your emotion was
Speaker 1: high and your cognity asution was low. I want to
Speaker 1: know if Mac would one say that you're long winded,
Speaker 1: you're talking to no one's listening. Two that you use
Speaker 1: sharp commands sir, your drill sergeant delivery isn't always popular
Speaker 1: with the troops. Three you use bad timing, which means
Speaker 1: you drop your grievances or request for help and in
Speaker 1: opportune moments, Oh, I see your sleeping, but I'm gonna
Speaker 1: shake you away because I need to talk to you
Speaker 1: if that was happening tomorrow. For toxic word choice or is?
Speaker 1: My friend Claudia calls it the verbal assassin, where you
Speaker 1: say things in a really calm way, but they are
Speaker 1: really really mean, Like I didn't realize you're going to
Speaker 1: become the worst father that ever existed? Was that something
Speaker 1: that you knew was going to happen to you? Five
Speaker 1: all or nothing? You literally never replace the toilet paper roll.
Speaker 1: You always keep the seat up. Six dredging up the past.
Speaker 1: This is just like the last time you data DA
Speaker 1: or finally, seven which is avoidance and boiling over. I
Speaker 1: didn't say anything. I really didn't want to say anything.
Speaker 1: I really really didn't want to have this conversation. But
Speaker 1: now I'm really really pissed. What do you think Mac
Speaker 1: would say about you? I have a big smile on
Speaker 1: my face. As you've been reading all of those you
Speaker 1: know what's so interesting is that I pride myself on
Speaker 1: being an excellent communicator and do it for a living,
Speaker 1: and yet I still have communication conflicts with my partner,
Speaker 1: which is so fascinating to me. I would have to
Speaker 1: say different situations would warrant different responses, but I like
Speaker 1: the drill sergeant. I feel like that would be a
Speaker 1: common complaint. Mm hmmm, well that's mine too, So maybe
Speaker 1: that's why we get along so well. Uh. Seth often
Speaker 1: says I sound like nails on the chalkboard every time
Speaker 1: I say anything, and it's very very sharp commands. And
Speaker 1: I think the beauty of really understanding and starting to
Speaker 1: think about your own vulnerabilities, and I hope our listeners
Speaker 1: will do this alongside us as well, is that it
Speaker 1: gives the humor. It disarms things. When you have an
Speaker 1: invitation that Dan Stillman was talking about to come to
Speaker 1: the table. You know, often people are afraid afraid to
Speaker 1: come to the table if they're used to a pattern
Speaker 1: of you in your communication vulnerability. So when you can
Speaker 1: start saying things, or when I was able to start
Speaker 1: saying things to Seth like okay, I know I sound
Speaker 1: like nails on the chalkboard. I know you don't want
Speaker 1: to talk to me because my tone sucks, But I
Speaker 1: promise you that in this invitation, I'm going to do better.
Speaker 1: It not only disarms the other person, but it allows
Speaker 1: and opens up that invitation that we talked about today
Speaker 1: in a way that's much more palatable to the person
Speaker 1: you're speaking with. Yeah, it's almost like you become so
Speaker 1: self aware. You know what they're thinking and how they're
Speaker 1: feeling in that moment because you've been in that pattern
Speaker 1: so many times before, and you're calling yourself out. And
Speaker 1: I think in many ways, as you enter a high
Speaker 1: conflict conversation, being able to call yourself out, have a
Speaker 1: little humor going into it, like Daniel said, going into
Speaker 1: it with an open mind. You said something so wonderful
Speaker 1: about if you want the outcome to be anger than
Speaker 1: going with anger, or if you want the outcome to
Speaker 1: be sadness and going with sadness. And of course we
Speaker 1: don't want anger sadness in the conversations. We want resolution.
Speaker 1: And so by owning your own stuff and your own
Speaker 1: conversational vulnerabilities and communication vulnerabilities, I think that's one great
Speaker 1: first step into bringing together a conversation that ends in
Speaker 1: reconciliation and if not reconciliation, just a deeper understanding and
Speaker 1: low conflict. And so, based on Eve's quiz, think about
Speaker 1: Daniels communication tips and ask yourself, who are you as
Speaker 1: you enter these high conflict conversations and how are you
Speaker 1: going to start changing the conversation. Next week we'll be
Speaker 1: starting to talk about the three permissions needed to fully
Speaker 1: dive into your unicorn space. We have a special guest,
Speaker 1: Greg McEwen, one of my favorite authors of essential ism
Speaker 1: and his new book Effortless, and we get to talk
Speaker 1: to him about the perks and the permission to be
Speaker 1: unavailable from your roles. Thank you for listening to Time Out,
Speaker 1: a production of I Heart Podcasts, and Hello Sunshine. I'm
Speaker 1: Eve Rodsky, author of the New York Times bestseller fair
Speaker 1: Play and Find your Unicorn Space. Follow me on social
Speaker 1: media at Eve Rodsky and learn more about our work
Speaker 1: at fair Play Life. And I'm Dr Addi Narukar, Harvard
Speaker 1: physician with a specialty and stress resilience, burnout, and mental health.
Speaker 1: Follow me on social media at dr add ne Rucar
Speaker 1: and find out more about my work at dr a
Speaker 1: d d dot com. That's d R a d I
Speaker 1: t I dot Com. Our Hello Sunshine Team is Amanda Farren,
Speaker 1: Aaron Stover, and Jennifer Yonker. Our I Heart Media team
Speaker 1: is Ali Perry, Jennifer Bassett and Jessica Kranschitch. We hope
Speaker 1: you all love taking a much needed time out with
Speaker 1: us today. Listen and subscribe to Time Out on the
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your favorite shows.