Kurt Nelson 0:00 Kurt Nelson, welcome to behavioral grooves, the podcast that explores how behavioral science connects with the way we work and live. I'm Kurt Nelson and Tim Houlihan 0:15 I'm Tim Houlihan each week, we talk with authors, researchers and practitioners who help us uncover the science and the art of better living and better leadership. Kurt Nelson 0:25 Our guest today is Don Kiefer, co author of there's got to be a better way now. Don is a self described factory rat who worked his way up from the shop floor to leading major projects at Harley Davidson, and along the way, he partnered with MIT social sciences Nelson repenting to create a model they called the dynamic work design. Tim Houlihan 0:47 Yeah, dynamic work design challenges long held assumptions about efficiency and adaptability. And with this model, the authors argue that common sense lessons leaders learn are often exactly the wrong ones, because the real signals of good work show up months or years later, not the next day. He also believes that the best solutions come from those closest to the work, but only if leaders and technical experts create genuine partnerships with those Kurt Nelson 1:18 people. Yeah, in our conversation, Don talked about why meetings are often the worst form of organizational abuse. Love that, right? And why managers frequently become the very obstacle that they're trying to remove, and why making work visible, literally drawing it out on the wall, can change everything Tim Houlihan 1:39 I tell you I'm using Don's draw out complex issues all the time now, like I absolutely love it. Kurt Nelson 1:45 You have your whiteboard behind you. I use it all you've shown it to me. Look. I drew it. There you go. So with that, people, please grab a strong cup of java. Don's favorite fuel and enjoy our conversation with Don Kiefer. Speaker 1 2:13 Don Kiefer, welcome to behavioral grooves. Happy to be here. Thanks for having me. Tim Houlihan 2:17 It's really a pleasure to have you here, and we want to start by loosening up with a little speed, round, for short, simple, silly questions. And to start with, would you prefer to learn a new language or a new instrument? Don Kieffer 2:31 New language, which I have attempted many, many times I always fail at. I for a long time, I traveled for business and consulting. I was in every continent and in the globe, and I always tried to learn a few words in every language I went to because I think it's the key to culture, and it's, you know, it's a just in my business, just trying to get along with people, even making an attempt to speak in their language, was was good. So I always knew how to say, Can I have a beer, please? Where's the bathroom? Where's the bus stop, the name of the hotel, but it served me well, like when I was in China, people would say, Oh, you speak pretty well. Can we switch to English now, because they want to practice their English so well, yes, but I I could never get really the hang of formal language. I wish I could we Kurt Nelson 3:20 get it dose, dose survey support for that's, that's my two i The asking for a beer in multiple languages is about as good as I've gotten. So, all right, we will, we will go to the next Speed Round question, and it's our classic one. So are you a coffee drinker or a tea drinker? Don Kieffer 3:39 Oh, there's no doubt. There's no doubt I'm good, good coffee. Unknown Speaker 3:42 Good coffee. Was Don Kieffer 3:45 that cold coffee? No, no, it's hot, just in a clear glass instead of a opaque but yeah, Kurt Nelson 3:50 are you very particular about the type and style of coffee that you get? Don Kieffer 3:56 Well, I've learned to appreciate good coffee now, so I even have an espresso machine. But you know, when I started working, it was 25 cent cup of coffee out of the machine. And that was, like, that was like, prison money, you know, it's like cigarettes in prison. You go buy someone a coffee on the machine. They'll do anything for you. So it was, like, I drank that stuff all day long. Kurt Nelson 4:15 And that was the coffee out of the machine where it dropped the paper cup, drop down. Yeah. It was hard, it was Don Kieffer 4:21 hot, you know, whatever, so, but, but I walked around with a 16 ounce cup of coffee in my hand for 2030, years of my career. Tim Houlihan 4:29 Yeah, wow. And you're and you, you're still alive. I think Unknown Speaker 4:35 I've had a decaffeinate, though. But, Tim Houlihan 4:37 all right, well, blah, blah, blah, okay, all right, third speed round question, true or false? True or False? Common sense is a good guide for business improvement. Unknown Speaker 4:48 No freaking way. That's the whole part of the that's the entire book. You just said the entire book. Tim Houlihan 4:54 Well, we're gonna just, we're gonna actually get to. More of that in some detail here, then as we go. Kurt Nelson 5:03 Yeah, so last, more speed, round questions. And again, I think this will be a longer conversation as we get into the details of the book. But from your perspective, which structure is better organizations that are structured for efficiency or organizations that are structured for adaptability? Don Kieffer 5:22 Well, generally, I'd say has to be adaptability, because things you can get so efficient that you get stuck. But that's actually a it's a false belief. It's like, do you want low cost or high quality? Because you can't have both. And actually you can have so I think again, this the, this is the theme of the book, you can have adaptability and high efficiency. It's a matter of how you do the high efficiency, that you don't lock people into just doing one thing. So again, that's kind of the breaking, the breaking kind of these long held assumptions about work that we've tried to do in the book, that you can actually and that my my colleague, the MIT social scientist, is one of his big things is, is a formal way of saying it, but basically, you can break this model between you're either efficient or adaptable. You can you can actually be both. It's, apparently, it's a big thing in the business psychology things, okay, well, why Tim Houlihan 6:13 is efficiency a bad thing? Just what's wrong with that? Because we have leaders who are working hard at making organizations more efficient all the time. Don Kieffer 6:23 It's more how you do it. Tim, so for example, if you just automate heavily around one thing, okay, like, let's go to, I do a lot of mostly intellectual work now, but let's go to factory, physical products. If I build a factory just to make one thing and only one thing, and it's hard wired, okay? If the market changes, I'm screwed, okay, but if I can, if I can get that efficiency in a way that I can easily adapt, that it's not so complicated to adapt, maybe I trade off a tiny bit of efficiency. But in intellectual work, we that doesn't really, we don't find that that's happened, but the world is always moving. So this why it's called dynamic work design. We have to be on that leading edge, but you can get high efficiency doing that. Tim Houlihan 7:06 Yeah, thank you. Okay, we're talking with Don about his new book. There's got to be a better way. And we were thinking, you know, when we read Unknown Speaker 7:14 the title, to do that, the brand Kurt Nelson 7:17 new book that you just got, Tim Houlihan 7:21 like we tend to think of there's got to be a better way as sort of like a frustrating comment, like, when everything else is just going to hell. You and you and your your co author, basically, are you more or less fed up with the way leadership is treating organizations these days? Don Kieffer 7:37 I'm way past that. I mean, that's okay. People say, Well, why do leaders act that way? I have no clue, but I can help fix it. I worked with a guy from from Japan for a long time. He's the one that taught me about visual management. And he'd go, like, Don Why are American managers so crazy? I have no clue. Let's just go fix it. Tim Houlihan 8:00 Well, what are what are leaders getting wrong? Don Kieffer 8:03 The main thing that they get wrong is they just focus on people. So I'm going to give you a target, and if you the target could be made up, usually they're not very connected to the work. So I'm going to give you a target that may be good target or bad target, but if you don't make the target, then I'm going to punish you. If you do, I'm going to give you a raise. They don't really get to like, how did you get there? Did you cut corners? Did you keep kill people or cheat people, or did you really improve things? I have no way of knowing, but you met the target. So let's go. It's they're being divorced for how the work is really done. That, I think, is where they mostly go wrong. Most managers are trying to do the right thing. They're trying to they're faced with difficult problems, a lot of a huge load, cognitive load. Can I throw in a behavioral word? A huge load. And they're trying to, you know, pick out the best thing to do, but, but when they're divorced from the work, then there are assumptions about what's happening. And there are common sense about what's happening was usually wrong. Forces them to give solutions that just layer on top of other parts. And so what we say is, you know, go see what's really happening in the work. Get connected to the work. Then you use those skills, and now you can, now you can move forward. So just frustration with people just just not connected with the work and the people doing the work and what they have to go through to try and try and win the game. Yeah. Kurt Nelson 9:27 I mean, it's, it's really interesting the way that you say that, Don because both Tim and I do a lot of work with organizations as well, and one of the things that I see all the time is that target, that goal, the senior leadership sets a goal that's based on not necessarily even reality, right? And oftentimes it's revenue targets, or whatever that would be, and you're working with sales people, and then you get down and they're going, sales people are like, this is an unrealistic goal, and why are you even there? And that just sets up a whole Di. Dynamic that I think creates this, this aspect where we look and there's got to be a better way, is what comes to our heads when we think about that. I'm sure we're going to get into this more as we get further into the conversation. But, you know, you base a lot of the book on on this version of dynamic work design. Can you kind of overlay what dynamic work design is in a and I'm sure we'll get more in depth in that is that? Don Kieffer 10:29 Yeah, yeah. Kurt, first, can I go back to the previous comment about the leaders? Because I think there's a counter argument to, oh, that's an impossible task. A lot of times like, look at Steve Jobs. Yeah, you know people, he gave what people thought was a crazy goal, like one button on the phone. But the difference with Steve, I believe, I didn't know him, was that he knew enough about the market and he knew enough about the technology that he could get there. But what he saw is people weren't focused on they were just focused and stuck in their own kind of thought process and their own assumption about what was possible. But he see a way he just wasn't the engineer to do it. So I think sometimes leaders can give those breakthrough goals, but usually they know what they're talking about, because it's a deep knowledge, like inventors, you know, Thomas Edison did the light bulb. He just didn't want to say, Go, do to say, go do the light bulb. He did 10,000 experiments on the bench, sleeping on the bench, with his, with his, with his engineers, you know, working 20 hours day to find it. He knew it was possible. He just didn't know where. So I think sometimes those goals are appropriate, but it's the people that just make stuff up. And then when people don't do it, they blame it on the people. You're not a leader enough. So I think there, there is this balance between what is a good target, so right amount of stretch that can get there, that we can actually do it. And sometimes it's too much stretch, and when it is, we recognize it. And thank you anyway, for getting as far as you get. So I think there's a big middle ground in there so that people can move fast. Kurt Nelson 11:58 Thank you. And thank you for that clarification. Because I think what you just mentioned, it is something that we see is this idea where the the way that a manager approaches those, those targets, those goals, is just as important as what those goals are, right? And as you said, it's that it's Steve Jobs understood enough to know that this, while it might feel impossible or difficult or super hard, that there is a way to get there, and even if you don't get exactly to what he wants, you're going to get to a far better place than you would by just saying, all right, we're going to just do the incremental gain that we typically think about. So I think I appreciate that. Tim Houlihan 12:40 Yeah, Don I want to come back to something we were talking about before, before we went live here. And that is just the relationship you you partnered, and you have partnered for many years with, with an MIT social scientist. What? Why? I guess you're a smart guy. You've been, you've been walking factory floors for a long time, right? You've accumulated a lot of knowledge. Why would you why would you partner up with a social psychologist, a social scientist, to help solve some of these Don Kieffer 13:13 problems? Well, I'll tell you the story how we met, and I think that will probably answer it. Great. So I was started on the shop floor with a high school degree, ended up going to engineering school later, and was ended up at Harley Davidson to talk my way into leading the biggest engine project that they had had in 15 years. And I was from the factory, so it wasn't a design engineer. Was like, the first time this ever happened, like they they let a guy from the factory lead the engine project, and I was a problem solver, so I was good at, like, fixing stuff, you know, I could run the machine, I could run the department, I can run the organization. And I thought I had a better idea for introducing new products into the into production, which I had been on the receiving end of for a long time. And so, and this was the biggest Harley almost went out of business in 1985 they had a huge layoff, like 40% of the people almost went bankrupt, and they were, you know, five years later, they're on their way back. But this project was so big, it started breaking every system it touched. So I was in my glory, like fixing this, fixing that. And one of the things I did was, when they gave me the assignment was I studied how they had done the last few projects and tried to make like a process map. So I ended up inventing a Stage Gate process in product development, which, of course, the automotive industry had done 20 years before. But I figured out myself. So I'm so proud of myself for doing all this stuff. And Nelson, Nelson repenting is his name. We've been working. This is 1996 when we first met, he had been hired by Harley, by Ron, the late Ron Hutchinson, to come and help Harley think about, where's the next battleground for quality, because they'd fixed a lot of stuff in the factory, but like, where's the next battleground? And he basically said, well, in. It's now, you design the product, you have to design the product better. And they said, Oh, you got to go talk to Don Kiefer. So they, they, they had, we had lunch together Nelson. And I Okay. And I, you know, I'm like, 15 years older than him. He had just got his PhD, or just got his tenure or something, and, and I'm, like, in my mid, late 40s, and, and I'm like, you know, I'm like, working 20 hours a day in the same so excited, like a kid in a candy store, and he's like, this wise old soul sitting back. So So I explained to him, I showed him the piece of paper where I, like, graphed it out, moved it around, and created this Stage Gate process. And Nelson, just like, listen to me go on and on for like, 15 minutes. He goes, Don Why don't you read a book once in a while? This is done by the automotive company. 20 years ago. Tim Houlihan 15:48 He wasn't impressed. He called you out right away. Don Kieffer 15:51 Oh yeah, he was not impressed. This is young. He's like a kid to me. He was like, 28 and I'm like, my 40s, like, what? So we started taking a walk, and I started telling him some of the other stuff I'm doing, and I told him this one thing that I had done, and he goes, Oh, wait a minute, I want to know more about this. And I go, Well, Nelson, this just some little dumb thing I did. He goes, Yeah, but done that little dumb thing you did. There's not a lot written about it in the literature, but what's written says you should have done exactly the opposite of what you did, and your results are stunning. So I want to learn more about it. That was the moment the light went on and said, Look, I know I'm a bit of loose cannon. Oh, this guy can help me aim and and then, and it from his mind, he goes, like, this guy's doing stuff. He's He's a crazy guy, but he's got the mind of a academic. He's always trying to learn something, figured out, and so we started working together. That's how Kurt Nelson 16:43 it's I love the where you said, if he can help me aim because I think that's what behavioral science can do, right? I mean, for anybody that's in business, you know, behavioral science isn't necessarily rocket science. It's a lot of times, it's the things that we're already doing. We're putting names to it, as we talked about prior to getting on this. It's like just making it, but it is helping somebody who's in your position, or in any like leadership position, say, all right, how do I aim this better? How do I make sure that what we're doing actually tackles the right pieces of this as we're moving forward? And, oh man, we could just keep going on and on. But I want to get into some of the I was, actually, I was really fascinated by your like, when you started that whole story, you said, I talked my way into this job of leading this and I wanted to hear more about, how do you talk your way from the from the manufacturing floor, into the job of, you know, redesigning an engine? Because that's not typically how you think about leadership, but you don't talk your way into into something on that. Don Kieffer 17:45 That's another good story. But I want to, I want to respond to the other thing you said first, which is that that that relationship between doing something and thinking about it, why it worked, is actually what we've been doing for almost 30 years, like we would make change, either I would do it directly or in a client of mine, or some of our students would do it, and we're supervising them, and we say, Why'd that work? How it can put a sharper point on it? It's that back and forth that led to the content in the book. We just didn't read. Go study a successful company. We studied success and failure that we had seen. So, okay, there's Tim Houlihan 18:18 some important things we want to get to in the book, you organized the book in three primary areas, right, obstacles, principles and actions and kind of curious about obstacles. And I mean, it's a great way to start. It seems intuitive, right, that we're going to start with obstacles. But what do leaders get wrong when it comes to identifying and understanding obstacles? Don Kieffer 18:42 Well, I'm not sure if it's really obstacles. It's more. Why do they learn exactly the wrong lesson? When they do stuff, they take an action, they learn exactly the wrong lesson. I'll give you an example. And this the reason we started there, is because that was Nelson, how it got his doctoral thesis. That was doctoral thesis on this aspect. I'll make it much more simple. He wrote, you know, papers and book. Didn't write a book, but he can make he go for hours. I'll make it simple. Good. Tim Houlihan 19:10 We don't have hours. When you Don Kieffer 19:13 touch a hot stove, you feel it and you you get burned right away. So you learn very quickly not to touch hot stoves anymore. Yeah, okay, but imagine if you touch the hot stove and you didn't feel the burn on your finger for three months. Okay, how would you figure out what that was from? You'd probably attribute it to like, Oh, I was riding my bike and I burned my finger, you know? So, so the way we learn is when the when the action and the result are in close proximity and time. When they're spread over time, we have a hard time putting those two things together. So when leaders take short term actions that give short term results at the expense of long term performance, they don't really see the long term performance. So. Right? So, Tim, I want you to cut the maintenance cost for next year by 30% okay, Don I'll go do it. You come in the next day and say, Don, I cut it by 50% it's like, wow. How'd you do that? Well, I laid off 50% of the of the maintenance. Now, if I hadn't asked you that question, I'd maybe promote you, okay, but now if I understood, because I understand a long term impact, that we're not going to feel it right away, we're going to right away. We're going to feel it in six months or six years, maybe probably after I'm gone to another job, and that poor slob who takes my job is going to be suffering through a maintenance force that's half the size with twice the trouble. So I think that's how managers take these actions. They they learn exactly the wrong the wrong lessons from them many times. Tim Houlihan 20:42 Yeah. This also reminds me of a key lesson you point out in the book about how important it is that the best solutions can come from those who are closest to the work because they've had their fingers on the hot stove. They've had that experience very directly with with with great impact. I love the way that you emphasize that. Don Kieffer 21:05 But there's another piece to it, because it's a partnership between those who are doing the work and those that are managing the work. Because even though I know where the problems are and maybe where some solutions are, I don't know what's best for the business, and I don't know all the solutions. So I used to run a lathe, a metal cutting lathe, and it would get this harmonic. It would start singing, and I would put a wet paper towel in the end of the tool. It was like, I didn't and it was it would fix it. But an engineering came down and said, Don do you know about harmonics? Like, no, I have no clue about harmonics. It is because the the support for the tool is hanging out too far. You need to bring the support closer to change the harmonics. He had science for it. So I think it's this partnership between leaders and technical people and people doing the work that really makes the best. Because if you just say, oh, people know naturally what to do, you get to empowerment, which means, to me, abandonment. Oh, let's just let people run the factory the way they feel is best. Try that one day. Tim Houlihan 22:01 Not a good idea. No, Kurt Nelson 22:03 well, then there's, there's some aspect of that too, where the because they you only have a small perception of the overall business, right? So if I'm working away that's, you know, I get that. I can know that really well, but I don't necessarily know the other pieces that either lead into that or follow through with that which brings that whole picture into play. And I think you talk about that vision part of as you're talking in in the book. So I think that's really important as well. I did have a question, is it related to obstacles? And I'm not sure if you have an answer for this or not, but what happens when the obstacle is ourselves? That, in other words, it's me as the leader that is the actual obstacle. And how do we overcome that? I mean, is that something that you have a thought on or or do we just want to dismiss that question? Don Kieffer 22:56 No, I think a lot of times, and more often than not, it is the leader who's the problem. I remember. I remember distinctly going to solve a problem and and, you know, getting off my desk and going to another part of the office and talking to people and trying to track it down. And the poor person where the problems happening looks up and says, Well, Don this is how you told me to do it in the email you sent me three months ago. So I think that's just a tiny example, but I think leaders don't understand the always the impact on the organization of things they put in place, back to the thing we said in the beginning, because they don't really understand the work that well. So they they make a solution, they think is happening, but it's not really that, but it's not really fit for purpose. So I think the trick is, how do leaders know that they're the problem? Where do they get that insight? And I think that's in our method, which is you have to, you have to go see where the problems happening with a mindset of discovery, from the design of work, not just from people's personality or their behaviors, but from the design, how's the work driving those behaviors? How's the work producing that problem? All over time, and what part did I play in it? You rarely hear someone walk into in a meeting say, oh, yeah, this, this problem is here because I cut the budget two years ago. You just don't hear that. So I think this hard for hard for leaders, but I think part of the method is between visual management that we have. We put the work on the wall so everyone could see it and going to see the problem where it's happening in it with a discovery mindset, opens people's minds to, okay, I did that. It's not my fault. I was I was behaving rationally, but I can see where that was wrong. Now, let's just fix it. It's not a you know, you're bad, but it's like, no, I learned something, so I'll change my behavior to make this work better, and I think that's around it, but the key is getting leaders to recognize that they're part of the problem, which a lot are not willing to do. Kurt Nelson 24:52 Hey, grooves, we're interrupting your regularly scheduled programming with some big news, and we want you to be a part of it. That's right. We've got not one, but two massive milestones hitting at the same time, and we're throwing a party to celebrate both of them. Okay? So milestone number one, we are about to cross 500 episodes this fall, when we started this thing back in 2017 Tim, did you ever dream that we would make it to 500 Tim Houlihan 25:19 I did nothing, not at all that never, never crossed my mind. And milestone number two, it's our eighth anniversary, so we're combining both celebrations into a single, epic live event in Minneapolis. Kurt Nelson 25:33 Yeah, and that live event is gonna happen October 16, 2025, so mark your calendars, and we're going to be taking over a private room at Malcolm yards in my hometown of Minneapolis, where Tim used to live when he was cool. And here's the kicker, if you attend, you'll get to participate in a live behavioral science experiment with Nick Epley, Tim Houlihan 25:56 yeah, the famous university of chicago professor, the researcher who proved that talking to strangers can actually make your day better, he will be sharing some observations on a happy life, and the audience will participate in a hands on experiment. Kurt Nelson 26:11 And this isn't just a party, it's science in action. So check the show notes for details, but consider this your personal invitation to join Tim and me as well as many other people on Thursday, October 16 in Minneapolis. Make your travel plan. Sign up now. Make it make it happen. Folks, here we go. Tim Houlihan 26:33 We can't wait to see you, and until then, keep finding your groove. I'm glad you brought up discovery mindset, because that's one of the things that really hooked us, that Kurt and I really enjoy we think curiosity is such an important tool in life in general, and it do I get this right done when it kind of works as a counterweight to the experts or the people who think that they're expert, and it's Like I already know everything that there is to know is, maybe I'm I'm oversimplifying, but no, these are exactly right. Okay, okay, Don Kieffer 27:13 there's an old saying. It's, you know, we don't screw up because we tried something that we didn't know anything about. Is what we did, what we knew was absolutely right thing to do. We were convinced there was absolutely the right thing to do. We were sure of it, and that's where we went wrong. So I think part of this discovery mindset is is you don't you make a plan. You have a problem. Make a plan, you start executing the plan. But there's more than executing the plan. Every action, underlying every action, is a set of assumptions that this action will have X effect. If you begin treating that as an experiment, say we thought this would happen. Did it happen or not? Oh, it did happen. Great. What did we learn? Or it didn't happen? What did we learn? Now we've always testing those underlying assumptions, and I think then we can see the cracks in the existing knowledge, and through those cracks, that's where innovation happens? Kurt Nelson 28:01 Yeah, I love that. I love the way that you talk about, you know, being able to see that and that, I think, is another big piece of what you talk about. You talk about making the invisible more visible in the book, help us understand, help our listeners understand what you mean by that. Don Kieffer 28:18 Let me give you an example. So let's just take processing an invoice in a company. Let's go to intellectual work. I stopped working in factories 20 years ago. Now it's all, you know, biometrics and banking and all kinds of whatever. So let's just take an invoice going through, if you there's an old technique from the improvement people from Toyota and lean manufacturing, which is like, be the invoice. Like, tape the invoice to you and like you walk through the system and see actually where it goes. So we do something similar, which is on the wall, we map from person to person to person, the path of that invoice. And back to your question that you did. You asked, but didn't get, I didn't get to answer yet. Kurt is like, what is dynamic work design? Yeah, is that our primary filter is that people are the only source of value added work, the only ones doing work. Of course, you have computers, you have suppliers, you have departments, but it's actually people, one by one, that that create the value that's happening, either intellectual work or physical work. And so we actually trace the work from those people, and then we map out who that invoice goes to. And then we go investigate and track one piece of work through or several pieces of work, not spreadsheets in history, but like, let's just watch a couple invoices go through. And what we find out is it takes three weeks for that invoice to get through the system, but when we add up how much actual human work is involved in processing that invoice, it's like three hours. Tim Houlihan 29:52 Max. Shouldn't be laughing. Shouldn't Don Kieffer 29:53 be laughing. So why does it take three weeks to do? Because it's all just sitting around, waiting for people and waiting. So what we do is like. We focus on the human work, and then we link them up this, connect the human chain, and we get the work flowing. So that is right. There is the essence of dynamic work design. It's focused on people, focused on the work, and then we analyze it that way, and we actually get the work flowing. Kurt Nelson 30:14 You talked about the human chain, and actually that was one of my favorite chapters in the book. This idea of putting people back into the work. Can you expand on that a little bit? Because I think there's, there's an aspect of this that I found your perspective on. It was, it was when I read the title of the chapter, I'm like, going, Oh, I know exactly what this is. And then when I read the chapter, I'm going, Oh, this is not what I thought it was. So help our listeners understand it a little Don Kieffer 30:43 bit well. Again, it goes back to the idea that the only real work that's being done is being done by humans in in factories. You can say, well, it's all automated, but okay, we don't focus on that. We're going to focus on the on the people, which in intellectual work, it's all people. So think about how a decision gets made. Someone asks a question or problem, and just try to map, draw, draw a layout of the office area and where people are sitting, and try to draw the threads of how that decision gets made in a certain meeting. So like you could even draw a meeting room with the eight people in that in that room that made the decision, then track backwards. Who got the data? Where were the issues? How many iterations did it take? It turns into a spaghetti diagram. But when you think about that and say, you know, we have to make the same decision every quarter, every month or every week, so let's organize it. Who's got the data? Let's get the right cadence of data at the right time, and then when we sit down, we're gonna have all the right people and the right information. And then we're gonna make the decision quickly. So that's what it is. So we could, we can map any kind of work this comes from. You can see, have a hard time putting two sentences together, and my employees, when I would go off and start talking for like, 30 minutes, they were Unknown Speaker 32:04 just like, Okay. Don, we have no clue what you just said, so they made a rule for me. Don Kieffer 32:11 Don, if you can't draw what you're saying on the whiteboard, then you're not allowed to talk to us about it. Oh, and that forced me to be super, super clear because and now I have a rule. I have a saying, If you can't draw it, you don't understand it, and you certainly can't fix it. So we take these complex intellectual systems and flows in startups, in huge banks, in BP, the big oil, I mean anything startup to multi billion dollars, and whatever people are talking about, we say, if you can't draw a picture of us, show us the flow of work. Then you, then we can't then we, you can't fix it. You can't even start to talk. So that's what we do for them. And we drove we draw these complex things, we interview people, and then we, we just fuss it around. And then we, we give them a picture. The the reaction is invariably like on the second day, we show them the picture. They go like, is that what we do? Because now they can see the moving pieces, because they can see the work moving person to person. They can see the all the loops and the detours, and they say, oh, let's just remove and that's like solving a geometry problem visually. You know, just like, take this loop out, put this here, and it becomes so clear and simple to them. Kurt Nelson 33:20 Yeah, I love the visual aspect of it. And I think there's a real again, the way that our human brains process information and that we are able to to, you know, cognitively think about it visually, is a different function within our brains than verbal, or even, you know, experiential and various different aspects of it. So I think that's really fantastic. One of the pieces that you talked about in that chapter was this idea of a handoff versus a huddle and the types of information that get handled in each Can you talk a little bit about that? I don't really need to go in deep, but I thought that was a really it crystallized for me, at least a really key thing that I'm now going to work with my team on because I'm going, Oh, I use them in the wrong we do it wrong Don Kieffer 34:04 Exactly. After years of mapping this and you know, work from one person to another, we came upon the insight that there's really only two basic ways that people pass information. One, if something is known, it's repeatable, it's well, discovered, then we just hand it off, like your paycheck. Okay? You don't need to have a meeting about your paycheck. You work so many hours, put the put the hours in or with a salary, and you get a check in the mail, right? We don't need to have a meeting about it, okay? But if there's a problem, then we need to talk about it. If you ever had, like, one of those with really long emails, you know, with 15 people on, it goes on forever, and then you get everyone in the office, call everyone to your office, like all eight people in your office, and to resolve the issue takes like, 510, minutes, yeah, whereas that otherwise, that email is going back and forth because they're using a handoff instead of a huddle, which is, we're going to get together, have a conversation, get. All the extraneous information. Let that conversation go wherever it needs to go quickly, come to a conclusion and go. So I think when you when you try to do a handoff on try to do a huddle with a handoff like email, then it gets crazy. Or if you ever have a meeting huddle wouldn't like have a meeting about your paycheck, it's super boring. So people mix up those two modes all the time. Ever sitting along. There's only two things that happen are supposed to happen a meeting, either make a decision to solve a problem. So anytime you're in a meeting and you're not doing one of those two things, you should probably be sending email. Kurt Nelson 35:34 Yeah, I think there's an awful too many times where I've seen the latter part right where it is. It should just be a simple handoff. Or you don't need the 10 people in here. You only need these three that are vital to what is being discussed. And, oh, but then we don't have to explain it to everybody else. And it's like you don't need to explain it to everybody else. Or B that could be in that email memo that comes out later. Your meetings Don Kieffer 36:01 are the worst form of organizational abuse to people that ever was invented. Kurt Nelson 36:08 A worst quote we might Unknown Speaker 36:11 Don't, don't, Candy Coat it, don't. Unknown Speaker 36:15 I tell you, I still have those rough edges from being in the factory so many years. Tim Houlihan 36:19 I love it. I love it. I want to, I want to push forward, just to get a little bit of the third section of the book is about action. You talked, I love this part where you said, it's not so much about fixing but removing friction, right? And this felt very much like a behavioral science, kind of a message, you know, to us, because we talk about friction and removing friction, or increasing friction. You know when it's when the behavior is undesirable, but how did you, how did, how did you get inspired to think about not just fixing but removing fiction? Don Kieffer 36:54 I'd say this evolved over time with with a lot of help from people and just a lot of experience that I think the biggest piece came from. At one point, when I was running the engine factory at Toyota at Harley, I hired one of the old masters from Toyota who was in this country, and he's consulting for Toyota with American suppliers, trying to teach him the system. And I called him up. I found out about him and a cousin. This is Mr. Oba, of course, yes. And I think working with him for a year and a half the work is the work. So let's think about, you get a finished product that either a piece of software or physical thing, like a car, if you take every extraneous piece of way. And just say, if I'm this software program is like, what's the least amount of effort to put into to get me here? Then you remove all the barriers. So when you go look at work instead of trying to fix the work, realize the work is the work. The card needs to be put together a certain way. The code needs to be written a certain way. So when you go actually watch the work, and you see all this barriers. I don't have the right information. That came wrong, you know, I didn't. I made a mistake. I didn't find, like, all this extraneous things around the work. If you just remove all those things, what you're left with is just the physical work. And it just keeps getting more and more elegant. So reprocessing without, I mean, this is where reprocessing from the 90s went bad. And the guy, I forget the guy's name that wrote that book, but he came back and wrote a second book, which said, Oh, I was wrong, but His thing was, start with this clean sheet of paper, and what he missed was like, go see what's happening. People say, oh, there's no process. If work is coming out, there is a process. It's just broken. But the pieces to get it done are in there. You just got to remove everything else, and you'll begin to see, layer by layer, how it all fits together in the most elegant fashion. Kurt Nelson 38:48 Yeah, I love that. I think there's a, there's a beauty to that aspect, which says, break it down to its simplest components. And then you know, if there's extra that you need to build on after that, but you need to understand. It's, it's that component of, know, what you're actually trying to do, right? And then, you know, otherwise, you just get caught up in, as you said, it's like, oh, this information is wrong. This is over here. This is we get. There's too many, you know, kind of things that just take your attention off of what's really important? So, yeah, so don one of the things we talk about here is being in your groove, finding a rhythm, having various different components, right? Those behavioral grooves and and over the the years, Tim and I have kind of come on this thing about people get into a groove and that they're different things. So is there a rhythm or a groove to, you know, doing the work that you kind of when you're working with people? Do you see that? And how do you help leaders or yourself find it? Don Kieffer 39:53 That's a great question. The underlying thing, one of the underlying issues in calm. The chaos in organizations is getting the cadence of work right. So there's an administrative cadence, like we have a weekly meeting, a daily meeting, a monthly meeting, a quarterly meeting, annual meeting, and like the management tries to process everything through those meetings in those but the work is not actually on that cadence. Sometimes the work is moving every minute or every day or every four months. So there are actually two cadences going on, like, think about a restaurant, you know, the the relative the way people show up to eat at a restaurant. So restaurants have been pretty good at building their administrative cadence around the times and the ways people show up at a restaurant, but in organizations, we try to fit into these daily, weekly, monthly buckets, and then stuff sits around or doesn't get addressed. So you have to understand the underlying cadence of the work itself. Sometimes, like in a crisis, it needs to be we're getting check every hour. But if I'm talking to a geologist who's trying to map out an oil field a mile underground that was formed 2 billion years ago, and he's doing it blindly. It's going to take him like three years to do it. So if I go into him every day and say, Geez, Kurt, how's it going today, he's going to smack me. So I think this is really the trick to get this, this dynamism working is to and then there's another cadence, like, we call it a trigger. So, for example, fires don't happen on a schedule. So fire departments don't just come around once a week and say, Do you have a fire happening? Kurt Nelson 41:37 Sorry, I did two days ago, but you weren't here. Speaker 1 41:40 That's the way work happens. Yeah, where were you two days ago? That burned down. So I think Don Kieffer 41:46 there's a thing. There's a signal that goes up to say, we have these cadences, but there's a thing called a trigger. When you run out of a certain boundary that we can set, or an expectation, then you pull the cord, the old and on cord for Toyota. The idea behind it is not the cord. The idea behind is I'm signaling for help. So think about project managers that lose a week and no one ever they never tell anybody. So said, Hey, I lost. The expectation is, Tim, if you lose a week in the schedule, you you call me right away. So where is that system of who do I call? When do I call? How does that organization respond to that trigger? And that's asynchronous, that's based on events, not a schedule. So getting those elements right is what makes an organization really work together. Kurt Nelson 42:26 I love it. Tim Houlihan 42:28 There's God Don this conversation is so much fun. This is really this is really tremendous. I have to admit, I was impressed with the number of times that music comes up in the book, the number of musical analogies, the idea of Yeah, Don Kieffer 42:45 orchestra, the orchestra. Yeah, the Tim Houlihan 42:46 orchestra, the band. You know, it's jazz as a as innovation. You know, it's not uncommon, but it doesn't, it doesn't show up in a lot of books. So I'm just kind of curious, if you were to pick a theme song for there's got to be a better way. Speaker 1 43:04 No, I can't answer this question. I'm going to come up with something really stupid because I and I can't remember the names of my kids anymore. I'm getting sold so I definitely don't remember the names of songs. Tim Houlihan 43:16 Okay, okay, yeah, okay. Well, how about this? Fair enough. How about, how about musical artists? How about, if you, if you had, let's say you're on a desert island and you've got a listening device and it's got two musical artists on it. Could you, could you name two musical artists that you'd want to have with you on the desert island. You get the whole catalog, everything recorded Don Kieffer 43:41 Pandora, the free version. Oh, Tim Houlihan 43:47 I think, I think that's a good cheat, though. Unknown Speaker 43:50 Yeah. John Coltrane, Kurt Nelson 43:52 John has advertisements. You're not going to even pay for it. I mean, get rid of those ads you like. Okay, there you Tim Houlihan 43:58 go. Okay. Jason Don Kieffer 44:00 Coltrane, I think the improvisation that's even on on Pandora, that's the one I listen to the most, because it's got everything. It's got the underlying structure to it that people always don't recognize until they study it. They see the repetition, they see the themes and the improvisation innovation that happens spontaneous. So it's all built in one package. So I think that's why I love jazz so much. But I'm a fan of all the all those things happen in all kinds of music, though. So yeah, it's like asking me which kid I like better. I I love them both in different ways, you know, Kurt Nelson 44:34 yeah, but you want that one a little bit more? I Unknown Speaker 44:37 don't answer. What's your favorite? I don't do that Kurt Nelson 44:39 one, except for coffee. There you go. There you go. Coffee versus tea. That's an easy one. It has been absolutely a pleasure talking. And I think, as Tim mentioned, we could go on and on and on. We just, you know, we'll have to have you, you back, and maybe we'll get Nelson along. With you next time. And then I think it's just a wonderful conversation you get. You guys bring so much experience, so much insight, and I love, you know, maybe, maybe Nelson shouldn't be here, because he'll go, you know, into the all the stuff you made it really easy for people to kind of grasp and understand. Don Kieffer 45:17 So thank you. So Nelson is good too, and we make a good tag team too. Yeah. So okay, Kurt Nelson 45:22 well, we'll have to have you back then. So yeah, we'd Don Kieffer 45:25 be happy to do that. Thanks. You guys. I really appreciate you. Read the book and had really great questions and helped me explain what this is about more. So it's really great and fun, too. You. Kurt Nelson 45:44 Tim, welcome to our grooving session where Tim and I share ideas on what we learned from our discussion with Don have a free flowing conversation and groove on whatever else comes into our handling razor brains, Unknown Speaker 45:55 oh, oh, I love that Kurt Nelson 45:59 you weren't expecting that. Were you not at all? I was malicious with it. That's why Tim Houlihan 46:06 it was not malicious. It was certainly wasn't stupidity. It was intentional. Tell, tell listeners what halens Razor is hanlon's Kurt Nelson 46:15 Razor, and I'm given, I'm going to give some background on this Tim that you brought up, right? So you you research this. But I think it's, it's fantastic. So let me give you what hanlon's Razor is, and then I'm going to give some background on it. So hanlon's Razor is the statement basically says, Never attribute to malice, that which can that which is adequately, oh my gosh, I can't even talk. Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity. There you go. So okay, what is? What is fascinating about this is hanlon's Razor is named after Robert J Hanlon, a computer programmer who submitted the phrase to a 1980s joke book, Murphy's law book number two more reasons why things go wrong. And the the adage is, what I just said, Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. And I have used this so many times, and it just, it's actually a really, I think it's like a philosophical insight on people, Tim Houlihan 47:21 it's also my driving companion. Whenever I'm in the car, driving my automobile, hanlon's Razor is my, is my go to driving companion thinking that God damn idiot, you know, like we're he's cutting Kurt Nelson 47:36 he's trying to cut me off. He's doing this on purpose, right? And then I go, Tim Houlihan 47:42 it could be stupidity. It could just be he doesn't know that. Driver isn't looking they're not paying attention. They're not a good driver, a whole bunch of other things. It doesn't always have to be malice. It doesn't have to be about me. Kurt Nelson 47:55 So yeah, which is what I bring in to work when I'm going and I'm dealing with stupid managers, actually, that's what Don is saying, right? Yes, it's there. I think that's a really good lesson to take into into this right? Is like leaders aren't necessarily failing because they're malicious, right? Yeah, they're, they're failing because they're not learning, right? They're, they're not learning from their experiences, right? And so to a certain degree, if you're not learning, you're stupid, right? So there you go. Tim Houlihan 48:38 So yeah, and they're also managers are oftentimes because of this stupidity and not maliciousness, they're creating their own bottlenecks. They're creating a whole bunch of downstream problems that they're not aware of right away, because sometimes this learning takes time, which makes me think of a cool part of our conversation, which was the hot stove problem. Like hot stove is such a beautiful example of how we learn. Touch the hot stove, instant learning, instant, right? How's it go? We've got the cue, we've got the response in when it comes to habits, right? We got the cue, we got the response, and we got the reward right. And so this is a behavioral, this model that came from early Kurt Nelson 49:25 19, yeah, this is, this is class. That's classical This is classical conditioning, if I get this right, not operant conditioning, right? So I always get those two confused anyway, but, but it is this, like touch, pain, learn, right? Or it is um, is child, cry, gets fed, learn, right? Yeah, it is, it is dog, you know, hear Bell, get food, salivate. Oh, that's not how that works. Tim Houlihan 49:59 That's. That's the other thing that's, that's operant conditioning, okay? Kurt Nelson 50:04 Or, No, is that? I don't remember, but anyway, but Tim Houlihan 50:06 this is the problem, right? That's for so many managers. There's a problem on the shop floor. There's, there's a problem in marketing. We created a piece we a month before the the marketing campaign was going to go live. Had all this rationale built up a month ago as to why we thought those were the right words, to use, the right media, the right frequency, all those kinds of things. Then a month later, or two months later, it goes live, it goes out and and something doesn't work, and then we just go, well, it must be we did a bad job of making decisions, or that wasn't the right marketing campaign, or it was just a failure, but we failed to take into consideration because the hot stove isn't applying here. It isn't this immediate knowledge of what was actually involved in all the decisions that went into why did we do those things at the time, there were some certain circumstances and environmental aspects of what was going on in the organization two months ago that might not apply today, that we're not thinking about. Kurt Nelson 51:08 Don's example of the maintenance. Cutting maintenance, I think was so on target, right? Because this is something I think we can all. We need cut costs. Great. You know, it's important. We need to cut costs. How are we going to cut costs? We're going to cut costs. I can, you know, get rid of half of my maintenance employees. Great. I save a whole ton of money immediately, immediately. So actually, you're getting rewarded for the behavior, because you may get them now a quarterly bonus. You might get the year end bonus. You get accolades from your manager going, you save so much money. This is awesome, great. You get held up. You get recognized at the company meeting. Hey, look at Tim. He's awesome. He saved the company X summer 1000s of dollars, and was, you know, went 150% over what we asked them to do, all this other great stuff. So you're getting a lesson. But the lesson is about the short term benefit, and it's not about the long term outcome that Don talked about. Now, two years down the road, we don't have we haven't been doing enough maintenance on these machines. They're breaking down more often. It's shutting the line down. We are actually losing production so that those you know, 7080, 90, $110,000, things that saved a half a million dollars a year are costing us two, five, $10 million dollars in the long run, way more than whatever cost savings. But we didn't learn those lessons because they're too far removed. And there's the this is what we talk about all the time with unintended consequences. You see it with incentives. We see it in other pieces of the world. Tim Houlihan 53:03 This also leads to a problem. When leaders are changing jobs in big organizations, they move from one one job to another. They can kick the can down the road. And this is a this is a trap that that leaders fall into. It's like they mentally know, I'm not going to actually face the consequences of this, because that might be a year or two before all those, all those cuts in maintenance are going to really impact the factory, so So somebody else is going to have to deal with that, and that's fine. Kurt Nelson 53:33 And I've already moved on. I'm in a new position. I got a promotion. I am in a different department, and that's not my problem, and and I got rewarded for it. I'm going to keep doing the same thing, because I'll just get moved on, because I never have to face the consequences of what was actually happening. Tim Houlihan 53:51 Yeah, I have a client right now in financial services, and they're working on cybersecurity, and cybersecurity, from a behavioral perspective, takes a long time to actually see the results. The interventions are going to take a long time and the technology changes, those interventions are going to be seen immediately. But to equate the two, the behavioral changes and the technology changes, and to measure them on the same measure is really Kurt Nelson 54:21 a mistake. It's apples versus oranges, or probably a better way, it's Tim Houlihan 54:27 apples versus end tables, Kurt Nelson 54:32 an Apple versus a apple cider that takes a while to create, right? You you see the apple, you know, right away you get to that. That's, that's the problem that you're facing, right? A part, part of the issue is that immediate, okay, we can, we can institute this technology piece, and we get, we can see, it decreases this risk by 2% right? Yeah. But it's there, whatever that is, and but the long term behavior intervention, yeah, there is no immediate 2% but long term, it could be a 10% or a 15% increase, but it takes a while to measure it, and you have to measure it in a different way. And that, I think, is another tough thing for organizations is, how do you measure? How are we able to measure the impact? It's one of the instances that I you know with sales, that I do a lot of work with pharmaceutical companies. And the way that pharmaceutical sales are measured is not because they're you're basically trying to influence doctors and healthcare providers to prescribe your product, but you're not talking you're talking to those doctors and healthcare clinics and different things, but they're not actually buying your product. They're, you know, next week, next month, they're giving a prescription. That prescription needs to go and filled by a pharmacy, pharmacy, that pharmacy. Then, you know, it could be a local pharmacy, it could be a national chain pharmacy, it could be a mail in pharmacy, right? And so, how do you attribute your conversation with that doctor as a sales rep to, like, obligate all of this, you know, information or the sales data? And it takes a while. So it could be months. It can be months. And because pharmacies have or pharmaceuticals buy the data from the pharmacy. Actually, there's a third party even in there. Anyway, it's a convoluted, convoluted, convoluted, right? And so the the changes you're making in your sales behavior, so the marketing messaging that I'm using, the the the, you know, handouts, that I'm using with with physicians, you don't necessarily see those changes for 2345, months. And so again, what are you? You that learning of being able to apply my changes in behavior to the responses is is delayed, and it's just a it's a crazy thing. And then even, like, are you, what are you actually measuring? And there's like, all sorts of different things you could be measuring, and are you measuring the right things in order Tim Houlihan 57:28 to get the results? Yeah, yeah, which really calls into question, if you're going to be think, if you're thinking about making changes in your organization, look at the right measures. It's too easy for us to get into this binary thinking of it's going to be this or that when this is a good time to zoom out and use that system two thinking in your brain to really analytically look at what is important here. What is the problem I'm trying to solve? What is the answer that I'm really looking for and not give in to the binary. Oh, it should be this or this, yeah, which? There might be multiple options. Kurt Nelson 58:10 And again, it's the unintended consequences, right? So again, it's the it's the snake incentive, and I always forget which was like Venice or somewhere in India, you know, two very similar cities, right? They had us. They had a they had a snake issue. And so what they did is, you know, there were, there were too many snakes in the city. And so the city leaders said, we need to solve this. Instead of hiring people to go out and get the snakes, they said, Look, we'll be really smart about this. We'll just pay people if they bring a snake, a dead snake, into us, we'll give them some money. So it sounds wonderful, right? Sounds like create an incentive. Create an incentive, and you're now engaging the entire population. However, what they didn't anticipate is, oh, this is a great way to make money. I will start breeding snakes, and so I'm not reducing the number of snakes, I'm adding to the number of snakes that come in, and I'm doing it. And when they realized it, they go, Oh, we can't keep paying all these people, because they're just breeding snakes and then bringing in the baby snakes that they killed, etc, etc. So they stopped it. And what ended up happening? Well, now I don't have no any need for these snakes. Just gonna let them go. And the city had increased number of snakes. So again, wrong lesson. It was the wrong the unintended consequences of well intentioned again handling razor, right, Tim Houlihan 59:48 exactly. Okay. Anything else, Kurt Nelson 59:53 just how awesome you are. Yeah. Unknown Speaker 59:57 Keep going. Yeah. We. Kurt Nelson 1:00:00 Don't have enough time for me to talk about how the total awesomeness of Tim Houlihan? Well, the time we have would be a Joe Rogan show, and we don't want Tim Houlihan 1:00:10 to do that. Do we have enough time to talk about the awesomeness of Kurt Nelson? Kurt Nelson 1:00:15 No, but we do. Well, we've already spent that time. It's done, that's gone. That's all we needed. But we do have some awesomeness coming up. Yeah, this major awesome celebration that we are doing on October 16, 2025, in Minneapolis, where we are celebrating our 500th episode release, which will happen before that, but also eight years of you and me partnering on this, and we're going to have a great time Tim Houlihan 1:00:51 live event, you got to be there. So my recommendation is, if you're hearing this for the first time, book your tickets now, get your plane tickets, get your hotel all, get it all lined up, you know, because it's going to, this is going to bring down the city. I mean, Minneapolis is just going to come to a you know, Kurt Nelson 1:01:13 you better hurry up, because those, those rooms are going to be sorry to go right, Tim Houlihan 1:01:18 yep, yeah, absolutely, very few hotel rooms left in Minneapolis by the time you hear this. Kurt Nelson 1:01:24 And folks, no, it's not because of this episode there, this this event. But no, we are. We have a limited room. And so we do really, please go and sign up if you're interested, if you can. I mean, I know for many people, it's a it's a drive. If you live not here, but we'd love to have you, and if you come from far away, we might even give you a special prize the furthest person who comes to this up to the show. I don't know. I just threw that out. Tim's looking, oh my god. We don't have budget for prices. Don't have any budget because we are bootstrapped in this, this thing, and we have, we lose money on this program every, every month, because we only do it, because we only do advertising, and we don't, you know, so, yeah, so the good thing Tim Houlihan 1:02:15 is, we, we only lose money on a monthly basis. Kurt Nelson 1:02:18 So, yeah, it's not like a daily basis. It's just a monthly basis. Just monthly basis. Tim Houlihan 1:02:26 Okay, if, if you're not able to join us, if you feel like that's not within your time or our financial budget, support our sub sub stack, jump on and go out to sub stack and get our weekly updates and newsletters always have more insights than just the shows themselves, just our episodes. And if that's too much, write us a quick review. Go out to whatever you listen to your podcasts and just give us a quick two sentence review would be fantastic. And if that's too much, we can ratchet it down to just give us a rating, just just click the stars that that are equivalent with your joy and satisfaction with our with our eight year old, 500 episode podcast, Kurt Nelson 1:03:14 I do want to go back and double down on the sub stack, because Tim, you were talking with James Heyman, our very first, very first guest episode number one, behavioral grooves. And what did he say about the sub stack? He was complimentary of well, he was how good it was, and insightful. And coming from James, that's that's Unknown Speaker 1:03:42 a big deal, yes. Kurt Nelson 1:03:44 So So folks, please go out, check out the sub stack and and subscribe to our newsletter, $5 a month. It's one of the different levels that you can pick. It's not that much, and it would help us out immensely, and help you out as well. So yeah, and Tim Houlihan 1:04:01 ultimately, we hope that you take our conversation with Don Kiefer, and we hope that you can apply some of his really great insights this week as you go out and find your groove. You Unknown Speaker 1:04:14 you. Transcribed by https://otter.ai