Episode 236 · 30 September 2025 · 53:21
Office frogging, A.I. workslop and Deloitte's awkward pay gap. PLUS! Are lefties really more creative?" - This Week in Work, 30th September 2025
Office frogging, A.I. workslop and Deloitte's awkward pay gap. PLUS! Are lefties really more creative?" - This Week in Work, 30th September 2025
0:000:00
Tip: click any timestamp below to jump there and keep playing.
Enjoying the show? Subscribe for free
Chapters & timestamps
Click any timestamp to jump the player to that moment.
Office frogging: Gen Z's job-hopping trend
news roundup#gen-z#job-hopping#career-trends
Workslop: AI's productivity problem
news roundup#ai#productivity#technology
Deloitte's £4.9m pay rise problem
news roundup#executive-pay#deloitte#salary
Truth or Lie: Are left-handed people more creative?
truth or lie#creativity#left-handed#myths
Workplace Surgery: Is DiSC profiling useful for leadership?
workplace surgery#leadership#disc#personality-assessment
Workplace Surgery: How do senior leaders answer tough questions without committing?
workplace surgery#leadership#communication#tough-questions
Workplace Surgery: What do you call the role when you step back from your business?
workplace surgery#business-owner#role-transition#career-change
Show notes
Office Frogging, A.I. Workslop & Deloitte's Awkward Pay Gap — Plus: Are Lefties Really More Creative?
This Week in Work — Al Elliott and Leanne Elliott (Chartered Occupational Psychologist) unpack two brand-new workplace words — "office frogging" and "workslop" — before digging into Deloitte UK's awkward £4.9m pay gap. Plus, in a brand-new segment: Truth or Lie, where Leanne tests whether left-handed people really are more creative. And in the Workplace Surgery: is DiSC profiling worth it, how do leaders dodge tough questions, and what do you call yourself when you step back from your own business?
🔥 Stories Covered
1. Office frogging: Gen Z's job-hopping trend Gen Z workers are hopping from job to job like frogs on lily pads, chasing better pay and growth. But here's the thing — this isn't new. Millennials did this too, they just didn't have a catchy name for it. The real question: are you giving people a reason to stay? Source →
2. Workslop: AI's productivity problem AI-generated content that looks polished but has no real substance. Research from BetterUp Labs and Stanford found 41% of workers have been on the receiving end, costing almost two hours of rework each time. AI use at work has doubled since 2023, but 95% of organizations see no measurable ROI. Source →
3. Deloitte's £4.9m pay rise problem Deloitte UK's chief executive Richard Houston received a 17% pay rise to £4.9 million while staff got 2.9% and revenues actually fell by 1%. He's now paid 65 times the median Deloitte salary. When staff see the boss's pay racing away from their own, fairness goes, then trust, then loyalty. Source →
🧠 Truth or Lie: "Left-Handed People Are More Creative Because They Use the Right Side of Their Brain"
The verdict: LIE.
While Roger Sperry's Nobel Prize-winning split-brain research showed the hemispheres have distinct strengths, creativity doesn't belong to one hemisphere. Both sides work together constantly in healthy brains. Left-handers may have language spread across both hemispheres and larger corpus callosums, but that doesn't make them automatically more creative.
💬 Workplace Surgery
Three listener questions, tackled live:
- DiSC profiling: "Is DISC profiling actually useful for leadership or just another personality tool with slick marketing?"
- Tough questions: "How do senior leaders answer tough questions without actually committing to anything?" (Featuring the SCARF model)
- Stepping back: "What do you call the role when you're ready to step back from day-to-day running of your business?"
(Got a question? Submit it via the connect link below.)
Connect With Us
Get in touch, book a call, or find Al and Leanne on LinkedIn — all in one place: truthliesandwork.com/connect
Mental health support: findahelpline.com — UK: Samaritans 116 123 · Mind 0300 123 3393 — US: 988 — Australia: Lifeline 13 11 14
Truth, Lies & Work is part of the HubSpot Podcast Network.
Full transcript
Expand full transcript
Al ElliottComing up this week in work.
Leanne Elliott2 new workplace words, office frogging and workslop. You've probably never heard of them, but there's a good chance you're already living with the consequences. So what are they? Why do they matter? And what can leaders actually do about them?
Al ElliottAnd in our brand new segment, Truth or Lie, are left-handed people really more creative because they use the right side of their brain? It's a claim you've heard everywhere and I've heard everywhere, but does the science actually back it up? So we're digging into split-brain surgery— ugh, don't even want to think about that— Nobel Prize-winning research, and what creativity really requires.
Leanne ElliottPlus, in the workplace surgery, a new leader has discovered DiSC profiling and wants to know if it's genuinely useful or just another personality test for slick marketing. Um, stay tuned for that one.
Al ElliottI bet you can't guess which way it's going to go. This is Truth, Lies and Work, the award-winning podcast Where behavioural science meets workplace culture.
Leanne ElliottWe are brought to you by the HubSpot Podcast Network, the audio destination for business professionals. My name is Leanne. I'm a Chartered Occupational Psychologist.
Al ElliottAnd my name is Al. I'm a business owner.
Leanne ElliottAnd together we help organisations build amazing workplace cultures.
Al ElliottSo let's get right into this after a very quick word from our sponsors. The dirty little secret is that most businesses think they know their customers. They have the data, the records, the history, but it's scattered across 3 teams and 4 systems. And in our case, it's about 216,000 spreadsheets, which means nobody can actually use it.
Leanne ElliottWhat you should be doing is using HubSpot, because why? HubSpot connects it all— every interaction, every support ticket, every conversation— into one platform every team can work from. So when sales talks to a customer, marketing already knows the full story. And when you know more, you grow more.
Al ElliottNice. Check out hubspot.com, the agentic customer platform for growing businesses. Welcome back. It's Leanne's favorite time of the week. It is time for the news roundup. It is. You say it's your favorite time of the week, but then also you have a lovely gin and tonic with cucumber and lime is your, is your recent thing.
Leanne ElliottGinger gin with cucumber and lime.
Al ElliottSo is that your favorite time of the week or is it?
Leanne ElliottMaybe.
Al ElliottWell, let's pretend for podcast production purposes. It is your, your favorite time of the week is the news roundup.
Leanne ElliottIt's one of my favorite times of the week.
Al ElliottIt's one of Leanne's favorite times of the week is time for the news roundup. What have you Jingle! What have you seen, my love?
Leanne ElliottI have a new word.
Al ElliottWell, we know what it is because you said it in the, in the top.
Leanne ElliottI do. Office frogging.
Al ElliottYep. Okay, office frogging. Are you— not listened before. Leanne gives a new word, I try and guess what it is. Uh, if leapfrogging is jumping over something, so office frogging is— is it when you take turns to try and jump over the office?
Leanne ElliottYes.
Al ElliottTake a trampoline, you jump over the office, a bit like in the The original The Office, the UK Office, which is better than the American. No, it's not. The American's better than the UK.
Leanne ElliottIs it?
Al ElliottSaddens me to say that.
Leanne ElliottYes. Not me either, to be honest.
Al ElliottNo, the UK, the UK's great, but really cringey. The American's not. Anyway, well, how— sorry, how do we get onto this?
Leanne ElliottOffice frogging.
Al ElliottWhat is it?
Leanne ElliottOffice frogging. Well, this came from a Forbes article, um, and it's, it's the idea that Gen Z, those pesky Gen Zers, uh, they are hopping from job to job like frogs on lily pads. Chasing better pay, better growth, or just a better fit. How dare they?
Al ElliottHow dare they want a better life?
Leanne ElliottHow dare they? So they're not staying anywhere too long, and employers are starting to notice. Our thoughts.
Al ElliottI think you said it all. How dare they want a really nice job, a nice life, when us gens, Xers and millennials, had it really tough? I would doubt, doubt it, you know. Well, when I was a kid, we've seen that. Have you seen that thing? It's a Really old, but I think it's Monty Python when they sit there and go, oh yeah, but when I was a kid, I had to— I got killed twice before breakfast and then had to walk to the mill. Anyway, sorry, what was the question?
Leanne ElliottDo you— office frogging, do you like it as a term? Do we think it's fair? Do we need to pay attention to it?
Al ElliottNo. Yes, yes, and no.
Leanne ElliottOkay.
Al ElliottIn that order.
Leanne ElliottSay more.
Al ElliottI think it's a bit of a weird term. I think it's just one of those, We have it all the time. TikTok, TikTokers, I blame them because they say, oh, we've come up with a brand new word and a brand new term, and this is what Gen Z is doing. And actually, I'm pretty sure that most of us have been doing that for a long time. There used to be something back in the day, used to say, uh, oh, they acted like a monkey. They never let go of one branch until they got hold of another. And that was more kind of like, you don't quit one job until you get another one, which just seems common sense to me.
Leanne ElliottYeah, yeah. Do you know what? I think, I think you're right. Some of these Some of these are kind of coined on social media by the Gen Zers themselves. Others, I think, are just a word to take the responsibility away from the organisation and put it on the individual. Like, I'm not, I'm not a lacking employer, you're an office frogger. And it's like, all right, children, okay.
Al ElliottMy lily pad isn't lacking, you're just frogging.
Leanne ElliottExactly. And do you know what? The article did, did kind of go on to call out some of this. So Peter Juris, who's the CEO of Kickresume, described the so-called office frogs as people who aren't afraid to take a leap of faith. Um, and some data from Culture Amp backed it up, suggesting that nearly half employees are actively looking to leave because trust in leadership is dropping, motivation is down, and people are getting restless. Interesting, because our word of the week last week was job hugging.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottAnd we've also got job frogging. And didn't we say, don't be fooled that this lower retention is employee engagement, the minute opportunities come up, the minute people feel safe to leave, they will. And I think you're right, you know, this isn't, this isn't new. This really isn't new. I think it was probably the, the younger Gen Xers like you, Al, that kind of started this trend, certainly the older millennials, because we were the first generations to be shown that loyalty doesn't pay.
Al ElliottMm.
Leanne ElliottYou know, it's not the, you're employed by one employer until you retire with a gold watch and And 2 kids, we watched our parents do that and that was great, but then we got ourselves made redundant and we saw other people get made redundant. Recessions and stagnating wages and no pensions. So we learned to self-protect. And I think as well, there is just a hunger that comes from being young. You want to learn, you want the best opportunities, you're in a rush when you're in your early 20s. It's not new. I think the only word of caution that I would give is if you are, if you are job hopping too frequently. For example, if it's less than 12 months, questions will be asked. If you've got 4 jobs in 2 years, questions will be asked. That's not to say you can't defend it, you can't explain it, but it may put you at a disadvantage if the job market is particularly competitive. So a word of caution, but I think organisations just need to accept that if people are not going to get meaningful work, be paid fairly for it, and be treated well, they're going to look for an alternative, as they well should.
Al ElliottIf you want to do the whole like jumping around, just do gig work, do project work, because I know that can, that looks really good on a CV. I did 8 projects in 8 months. Um, and, and to be honest, I mean, I'm not advocating you do this, but if you do, if you were to job hop, you could always potentially position it on your resume as a, as a project. Would that be dishonest?
Leanne ElliottUm, yeah, maybe a little bit. It's whether you can get the references as well that people are gonna going to require. But you're right, there are ways to cleverly structure your resume to not be at a disadvantage. But I think the real thing is, as a business owner, you have to ask yourself, are you giving people a reason to stay? And if you're not, then the job hopping may be on you. What's it called? Sorry, office frogging might be on you. Al, what have you seen this week?
Al ElliottWell, I've got my own new word. I was a bit jealous of mine.
Leanne ElliottWhat?
Al ElliottYeah, I know. I was a bit jealous of you coming up with a new word, so I've got my own. When I said got my own new word, it was in Harvard Business Review. Check me out. As I'm speaking to you, I'm drinking tea and I've got a monocle in because I'm that fancy.
Leanne ElliottWow. I didn't even know you knew what HBR was.
Al ElliottTo be honest, I did use your subscription to log in, so.
Leanne ElliottDid you? Cheeky.
Al ElliottAnyway, so my new word is called workslop. What do you think that means?
Leanne ElliottPleasant.
Al ElliottPleasant, yes.
Leanne ElliottWorkslop. I don't enjoy the word.
Al ElliottNo. No.
Leanne ElliottI'm guessing it would be kind of like tasks that are just, ugh, not very good.
Al ElliottKind of. Well, no, I was being kind. No, it's not that.
Leanne ElliottOkay. It's a new word.
Al ElliottIt's a new word. Yeah. Nobody knows. Nobody knows. Well, have you heard of AI slop?
Leanne ElliottNo.
Al ElliottRight. So something which is big on X, Twitter, Twix, whatever you wanna call it. AI slop is when All of the replies or the posts are written by AI. And so—
Leanne ElliottSay that again.
Al ElliottSo the post— so a post is written by AI, that's classed as AI slop. There's so much more AI or so many more AI replies on Twitter than you think.
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottAnd once you start to understand and you can see patterns and you'll see the AI replies are basically empty, they'll go, what an amazing insight. I love when I learn stuff like this. No human's gonna write that. And there's so many people out there who are using AI to reply to posts on Twitter.
Leanne ElliottSo that's what workslop is.
Al ElliottWorkslop is similar, but it's when you use AI at work to produce something and it's a bit rubbish. Now I'll just use, I'll just give you 2 scenarios.
Leanne ElliottSo the majority of guest requests that we get, we'd call them workslop.
Al ElliottWe would call them guestslop. That's what we'd call them.
Leanne ElliottBut no, but it's work. Somebody writing a pitch email, sales pitch email using AI that's not very effective.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottThat's workslop.
Al ElliottThat's workslop.
Leanne ElliottOkay.
Al ElliottSomeone who says, Oh, I need a report on so-and-so. So they go to ChatGPT and say, please write a report on the tree frogs of Amazon, their decline in the last 5 years. And it comes up with like, you know, that's slop.
Leanne ElliottRight.
Al ElliottThe difference is what this HBR article described it as, empty content. They said empty calories was what they used. Basically, anything which comes out and says a lot of things but doesn't really say much is AI.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm.
Al ElliottOr workslop. Now, to be fair, we know a lot of people who also talk that way.
Leanne ElliottThey would do.
Al ElliottBut—
Leanne ElliottThat say a lot and say nothing at all.
Al ElliottYeah, that's talkslop.
Leanne ElliottSome of us have made a career out of it.
Al ElliottBut the, the content looks fine. You produce it, but when you scratch the surface, there's no real substance. Now, it is starting to cost companies a little bit of money because the research from, let me see, BetterUp Labs and Stanford found that 41% of workers have been on the receiving end of this workslop. So you think, well, is it, is it harmless? No, because usually if you ask someone to write a report and then someone sends it to you and you can't really put your pin on, your finger on why it's bad, but you know it's bad, you're gonna have to spend hours rewriting it. And generally it's about 2 hours, um, on average people spend rewriting this workslop. So that's hours of lost productivity. There's frustration, there's trust, all that kind of thing. Lee, what are your thoughts?
Leanne ElliottI, I think there are people out there who are lazy and not clever.
Al ElliottYes, yes.
Leanne ElliottAnd they're the people that are gonna engage in workslop.
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottI think there are plenty of other people out there that are lazy and clever.
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottSo we'll leverage AI to the best of its ability and then spend the time putting the polish on.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottI'm seeing so much backlash against it that it's like you can never use AI for copywriting or any kind of content creation. It's like, of course you can. It's, it's a, it's a speedy little way of just getting the bones of something on there that you can then use your expertise and knowledge and research to flesh out. Um, but yeah, I think, I think it's getting old quickly, and I think I can see it, I can see it reducing, particularly in terms of content creation, um, because the strategy won't work, and the minute it doesn't work, there's no point in doing it. So people have to pivot.
Al ElliottYes, you're absolutely right, as ChatGPT says all the time. What else have you seen, my love?
Leanne ElliottDeloitte's UK chief executive has received a 17% pay rise, taking his annual salary up to £4.9 million.
Al ElliottSorry, I thought you said that was 4.9 million.
Leanne Elliott£4.9 million.
Al ElliottThat's his salary?
Leanne ElliottThat's his annual salary, yeah. Richard Houston, um, who runs Deloitte, uh, in UK. It was reported in The Times this week that his pay has gone up by £700,000 in a single year.
Al ElliottWow.
Leanne ElliottTaking him to almost £5 million. Now, on the surface, you might say, Al, fair enough.
Al ElliottI don't think I would.
Leanne ElliottWell, you might, because Deloitte is, to be fair, a multi-billion pound company. It's one of the Big 4. It's highly influential. Richard Houston's been there for 6 years. He's been in charge for 6 years. He also has wider responsibilities across Europe. and sits on Deloitte's global executive. So you might say, do you know what, he's earned this, good for you, Dick.
Al ElliottDick as in short for Richard?
Leanne ElliottYes.
Al ElliottYes, yeah, just checking. Yep.
Leanne ElliottUm, but actually, if you look at it, it does start to get a bit icky.
Al ElliottOh no.
Leanne ElliottSo Richard got a 17% pay bump, right? Staff at Deloitte in general got an average pay rise of 2.9%.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottEquity partners, who are the senior leaders just below Mr. Houston, averaged 4%. So while the vast majority are getting very small increases, the boss's pay has jumped by almost 5 times that of the average Deloitte employee.
Al ElliottYes, but to be fair, well-performing chairpeople or CEOs, they usually get bonuses, don't they, when business is good?
Leanne ElliottYeah, you'd think so, and that might make it okay, but here comes the awkward bit, Al. Business ain't so good. So a few months ago, Houston himself told staff in Deloitte's biggest division, which is Technology and Transformation, to expect smaller bonuses and fewer promotions because the division had underperformed. And in fact, revenues in that part of the business had dropped by 10%. Overall, Deloitte UK's revenues fell by 1%. Um, profits, yes, were up by 4%. That was thanks to growth in other areas like tax and audit. But the headline is still this: revenue down, warnings to staff, tightening belts, and yet the chief executive takes home a double digit pay rise. And the real shocker, I think, for me is when you put these ratios, um, or when you put this into ratios. So Mr. Houston is now paid 65 times more than median Deloitte salary of £75,000. Last year it was 58 times. So the gap isn't just huge, it's growing. Which leaves the question, how do leaders justify rewards at the top when the results don't seem to back them up? And what message does this send to everyone else in the business? Al's thoughts.
Al ElliottWell, it's the— yeah, it's the message, isn't it? I think what you're saying there is, yeah, lots of CEOs, like the Boeing CEO, I think they, they know.
Leanne ElliottBoeing CEO has had a pickle of a year, hasn't he?
Al ElliottHe has, but he's still taking home like $30 million or something as a salary. Um, I mean, I was about to say something like a career-taking nosedive, but that's bad, that's in bad taste, so I will not be, I will not be saying that. Just so we're clear, right? So Houston's paid 65 times the median salary. So that means that there are 65 people he could employ if he didn't take any money.
Leanne ElliottYeah. Yeah.
Al ElliottRight. But his increase is £700,000 and the median £75,000. So actually just the increase alone could pay for 10 median Deloitte. Yeah. Yeah. So if he, if he went, do you know what? I'm not taking this increase. He's still going to do very well and get paid the same as 65 employees, but he's also going to save 10 jobs. It just seems in really bad taste, if the truth be told. Really bad taste.
Leanne ElliottIt does seem in bad taste. And I think the only thing to say is Deloitte isn't the only firm who's under scrutiny for this. Famously, CEO-to-worker pay ratios in major companies are massive. I think in the US it averages about 270 to 1. By that comparison, maybe he's not as bad. Um, but I think the thing is, when the staff see bosses' pay increasing at that rate, when they're being told not to expect pay rises, not to expect as much bonuses, and loyalty starts to slip, and then performance dips because that extra effort that you get from saying we're all in this together just isn't there anymore. Yeah. And it is, it is mainly a corporate problem, but it's not confined to the corporate world. Smaller businesses can face similar risks as well if leaders are taking rewards in a way that feels out of step. And we have seen this with some of the clients that we work with. Although it'd be very unintentional, these, these things can happen. So there's, there's a few simple things that will go a long way to avoiding this trap. The first thing is being really transparent. People don't need every payslip to see that of their MD, but they do want to know how decisions are made, how people are rewarded, how bonus works. That has to be really, really transparent, especially if you're taking something away. Think about that proportion. If times are tough, it really lands well for leaders to be seen as taking— it doesn't land well for leaders to be seen as taking more themselves. And actually, this is my frustration when it comes to layoffs. So as you said, Al, if just that pay rise hadn't been taken, would it potentially save 10 jobs? And that I have beef with, more from an organisational perspective, because it's just going to tank the organisation for years to come. Um, and yeah, so it could be anything. It could be profit sharing, it could be better benefits, it could be smaller gestures. But the point is, it's not just about money, is it? As you said, Al, it's the message. Um, and people want to know that their contributions count, not just the dicks at the top.
Al ElliottThe dicks at the top. I like that. That should have been the headline, I think. Myopic, is that the right word? When you don't really look at something properly. There are plenty of— I've read quite a few people. I wanna say the chairman of Costco, maybe I've made that up, but there was someone, a chairperson or a CEO, who instead of taking the bonus, split it amongst their employees because they said, no one else, you know, we're not— no one else getting bonus, so I'm not getting bonus. So split it. So I'm sure everyone only got like 50 quid or something, but still, it's like you say, it's that extra bit. And I've never actually earned £4.9 million, £4 million.
Leanne ElliottI've never earned £700,000. That was just the increase.
Al ElliottBut the thing is, at that point you go, well, do you need that extra £700,000? Is it really gonna make a difference?
Leanne ElliottWhen are you just simply rich enough?
Al ElliottAnyway, that's a different— if you're interested in that kind of conversation, then go back to MFD, Meghann Furlong Detroit. She was, she was maybe episode 2. 234 or something, 235. She's a really interesting woman, but also she talks a lot about this kind of thing whilst also building a business, being an entrepreneur herself and making money. So it's not about like, you can— no one can make money. It's about, come on guys, don't be a dick. There you go. Don't be a dick.
Leanne ElliottThat's when— it's when making more money is actually making things harder for you in other places. Yes. You know, it's just, it's not worth it.
Al ElliottIt's not worth it.
Leanne ElliottIt's not worth it.
Al ElliottIt's not worth it. Anyway, Lee, does that conclude our business?
Leanne ElliottThat concludes our news roundup. Thank you very much.
Al ElliottOkay, thank you. Love all the links are in the show notes. Uh, we will be— we'll come back to you after this very short break with our brand new segment, a second week of it, Truth or Lie, plus our world famous Weekly Workplace Surgery where I put your questions to Leanne. We'll see you in just a second. Don't go anywhere.
Leanne ElliottDid you know that the UK's number one management podcast— that's us, by the way— and the UK's number one marketing podcast are both on We actually have a lot in common.
Al ElliottWe both use behavioral science to help people do better at work.
Leanne ElliottAnd we both had to wrangle Rory Sutherland on an episode.
Al ElliottAnd 2 out of 3 of us are devilishly good looking. And you're not gonna say which. Fel, host of Nudge, UK's number 1 marketing podcast. It's brought to you— we need to do this in 3s— the HubSpot Podcast Network.
Leanne ElliottThe audio destination for business professionals.
Al ElliottSeamless. Seamless. Tell us about your latest episode, Phil. We've just done an episode on fake fandom and how New York indie bands are paying agencies to create fake TikTok videos about how much they like their work. And we talk about the behavioral science behind fandom and how that encourages people to enjoy the music and all of that good stuff and do some big things about how this affects the world of politics, business, and brands as well.
Leanne ElliottIt is. It's such, it's such a good show. Of course, Of course, you'll hear all the stuff you want to hear about how to grow your business by using behavioural science in your marketing. But there's also just some really interesting episodes that'll be right up your street. Personally, I enjoyed Can Balsamic Vinegar Make Beer Taste Better?
Al ElliottIt can.
Leanne ElliottAnd Are We All Just Status-Seeking Monkeys?
Al ElliottI am. Go and listen to Nudge wherever you get your podcasts.
Leanne ElliottBut come back.
Al ElliottYeah, come back. Definitely come back because Nudge isn't as good as this.
Leanne ElliottSo come back. I'll cut that out.
Al ElliottKeep that in. Welcome back. It is time for our new segment, Truth or Lie. We need a, we need a theme tune for this. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Leanne ElliottCue the theme tune.
Al ElliottYeah, I'm not gonna put a theme tune in this week. Sorry, I know I've disappointed you. Anyway, time for Truth or Lie, which is our weekly myth-busting segment. This is where we take those psychology soundbites you've probably seen on TikTok or LinkedIn posts, or as Leanne and I call it, TikTube, which is the TikTok for YouTube Shorts. Yep. Or maybe it's a management training session. We're gonna ask you, does the evidence actually back this up?
Leanne ElliottYeah, let's be honest, psychology appears full of nice little neat claims that feel very true. They're simple, they're catchy, and they spread fast. But when you do scratch that surface, a lot of them are built on half-truths or they've been stretched way beyond the research entirely.
Al ElliottLast week we talked about white noise and concentration, and next week we're gonna pick something That, like we've said, that in fact, if you've got an idea for it, drop us an email. But today, our truth or lie is this. Ah, Leanne, are left-handed people more creative because they use the right side of their brain? Just in case you haven't heard that, I think that is true, isn't it? That the left hand is controlled by the right-hand side of the brain. Is that right?
Leanne ElliottI shall get into this.
Al ElliottRight. I'm sorry, I'm jumping ahead.
Leanne ElliottLeanne. So yeah, are left-handed people more creative? I've definitely heard this before. I think the majority of people have. So yes, basically the left side of your brain is logical and analytical. The right side is creative and artistic. That's the thought. And that's because the right hemisphere controls the left hand.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottSo left-handed means the right side of your brain is dominant, which means it's creative and autistic. So left-handed must be—
Al ElliottCreative or autistic?
Leanne ElliottArtistic.
Al ElliottSorry. Sorry, I thought you said autistic.
Leanne ElliottCreative and artistic. So yes, left-handers must be more creative. It's a nice little story, isn't it? But humans are a little bit more complicated than that, Al.
Al ElliottYes, I thought they might be.
Leanne ElliottSo let's start at the beginning. The brain does have 2 hemispheres. This is true. And they are connected—
Al ElliottAnd we have 2 hands.
Leanne ElliottThat is also true. So our 2 hemispheres in our brain are connected by a bundle of fibres, and that's called the corpus callosum. It's not important, but I wanted to sound clever. And yes, each hemisphere does have its specialties. So, the left hemisphere, or what we here call the logical brain, is more involved in language structure and step-by-step processing. So, the sort of thing that you rely on when you're writing an email, you have to be very precise, you're working through a budget, you're following a formula. The right hemisphere, on the other hand, the creative brain, In, in, you know, little bunny ears, is stronger when the task needs imagination or pattern spotting. So it's when, um, a designer is sketching out a new logo. It might help you catch the meaning behind someone's expression. It's what gets you swept up in a piece of music, Al. It's that whole picture awareness, and that's a big part of what we call creative thinking. So there is some truth there. We have a left hemisphere, a right hemisphere. They control the other opposite sides of the body. Um, so yeah, it's, it's that, that part is true. This idea caught on in the 1960s from a very famous study from Roger Sperry. This is so famous, actually included on the curriculum in the UK for A-level psychology.
Al ElliottIs it?
Leanne ElliottYeah, it's one of like the, the seminal works that, that need to, to be taught. So basically, and I'm going to try and explain this really simply because it's a bit It's a bit head fudgy, but—
Al ElliottLiterally.
Leanne ElliottYeah. Yeah, literally. So, Roger Sperry was studying patients who had a split brain— blip. So, Roger Sperry was studying patients who had a split brain procedure. So, that was when people had really severe forms of epilepsy. They didn't know how to treat it at the time. So, to stop the seizures spreading, surgeons would cut the corpus callosum, those fibres in between that would bring up— Oh, that makes me dizzy.
Al ElliottI don't like it.
Leanne ElliottConnect the brains. So yes. So Sperry then realised that this gave him a chance to study 2 sides of the brain, almost as if they were separate minds, because they're no longer connected, they're no longer communicating with each other. So he ran a series of experiments. Are you with me so far?
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottOkay.
Al ElliottJust out of interest, the people were like, could still, they could still like Walk about and eat and all that kind of stuff with it, with this corpus Christi thing split?
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottRight, okay.
Leanne ElliottYeah. Well, yes, there was some complications which we're gonna go into actually.
Al ElliottRight, okay, okay.
Leanne ElliottYou're just one little step ahead, aren't you though?
Al ElliottSorry.
Leanne ElliottSo one of the most famous experiments, what he did is he flashed a picture of a house in the patient's right eye.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottYeah, so cover the left eye, show the patient's right eye a picture of a house. Because of the way vision is wired, that information went into the left hemisphere.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottYeah. And in most people, the left hemisphere has the language centre there. So the patient could instantly say, that's a house.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottNo problem. When he flipped it, so when he showed the house only in the left eye, that information went to the right hemisphere. The right hemisphere could recognise the picture perfectly well, But it doesn't have the machinery for language. So normally it would send that information across to the left side of the brain so you could say the word. But because those, the hemispheres are disconnected, the information was trapped in the right hemisphere. So when Sperry asked, what do you see? The patient was speechless. They knew, but they just couldn't say it. But here's the really cool bit. So what he did is he handed the patient a pencil in their left hand, 'cause this information is trapped in the right hemisphere.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottAnd asked them to draw what they'd seen. And that's exactly what happened. The patient sketched out a house.
Al ElliottWow.
Leanne ElliottThey couldn't name it, they couldn't say it, but they could reproduce it.
Al ElliottWow.
Leanne ElliottHuge breakthrough moment, really to show that each half of the brain can take in and act on information, but only the left hemisphere can put it into words. That's where all of our language centres live. So yeah, completely ground-making. Unbelievable. Sperry won a Nobel Prize for showing it. And because of this famous experiment, because the right hemisphere could draw and imagine when the left couldn't, and the right hemisphere means you're left-handed, this kind of got oversimplified and generalized to the creative right brain. Do we see?
Al ElliottI do see. I do have a question, but I'll wait till the end. You'll take questions at the end, I'm guessing, Leanne?
Leanne ElliottWe'll take questions at the end. So the reason this is a bit of an overgeneralization is because we have to remember that these people had surgically severed brains.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottIn healthy brains, the 2 sides are in constant conversation. They're working as one. So pop psychology stripped away that nuance and turned it into left equals logical, right equals creative.
Al ElliottMakes sense.
Leanne ElliottBut in terms of left-handers, there is also some nuance here. So research shows that left-handed people are more likely to have language spread across both hemispheres. Hemispheres rather than just the left. They also have a larger corpus callosum, the fibres that connect them.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottThere's more wiring between the 2 sides. So, that could make them a bit more flexible when switching tasks or making unusual connections, but it's not destined to be. There are plenty of uncreative left-handers and plenty of brilliantly creative right-handers. So, the best way to think about it is like, Mm-hmm. So, your brain is an orchestra, and on one side you've got the violins and they're carrying the melody. On the other side, you've got the brass and they might provide the power. And then somewhere else, you've got the percussions and they're keeping the rhythm. But you don't get a symphony from just one section. You need them all working together. And creativity is the same. It doesn't belong to one hemisphere. It takes the whole brain. So, in terms of truth or lie, The idea that lefties are automatically more creative, or that one side of your brain makes you logical while the other makes you artistic, that is a lie. The truth is really more interesting. I think both hemispheres are working together and creativity comes from the whole.
Al ElliottIf I remember correctly, when they covered the left eye, when this guy Parry or Sparry covered the left eye and showed a house to the right eye, it could draw the house but couldn't say it.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm.
Al ElliottDid he ever cover the right eye, show how it's the left eye, and ask them to draw it?
Leanne ElliottI would need to read it again, but I believe yes, they tested it in different scenarios in, and yeah, they couldn't do it. I would imagine. One would have language and one would have— and they did it in different ways as well. So they also had it where they'd search like behind a covered table with objects on it and they could pick out Like a key, for example, that they'd seen a picture of, as well as drawing it. Like, it was very much more physical. So yeah, really interesting.
Al ElliottI would imagine the Nobel Prize oversight committee would have asked that question back in the 1960s before they gave him the Nobel Prize.
Leanne ElliottSo, uh, I mean, I think it's enough, isn't it? Even if he didn't do that.
Al ElliottNot enough for me. I'm disappointed with you, Richard Sperry. Was that his name?
Leanne ElliottSperry.
Al ElliottSperry. I'm disappointed. I'm disappointed. I guess he's not around anymore.
Leanne ElliottNo, no, I don't believe he is. But, um, but yeah, a very cool study, proper groundbreaking. I used to tutor, um, A-level psychology students and we'd go through this one and their minds would be blown.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottIt would take a lot of it because it's so complicated as well, having to regurgitate this in an exam. Yeah, it's, it's, it's confusing, isn't it? But, um, but yeah, very cool. This is why psychology is ace. This is why humans are awesome and why It's hard to be very simple because we're very complex beings.
Al ElliottYou are less complex than most, but still quite complex.
Leanne ElliottAre you saying I'm simple?
Al ElliottSimple being.
Leanne ElliottThat's nice.
Al ElliottIt's a very simple being. No, no, that was absolutely fantastic. I really, I love these. And, but if you tell us when, if you're listening, what, what do you wanna hear next? Because I've got a whole list of things, but you come first. I will, if you send me in a suggestion of something you want me to ask Leanne, I will very happily ask it next week or the week after. Yeah. So thank you very much. Really enjoyed that.
Leanne ElliottThank you.
Al ElliottNow it's onto my favourite time of the week. Well, one of the favourite times of the week. to enjoy Gin Friday. It is time for the world-famous Weekly Workplace Surgery, where I put your questions to Leanne. If you've never heard this before, Leanne, as you already will know, is a psychologist specialising in work and organisations. She has the answers to the majority of your questions, and if she doesn't, very often she'll go and find someone who does. If you listened to the last couple of episodes, you'll hear we brought in some people from the Curve Group who are specialists in HR. Question number 1. This person says, I've just discovered DiSC, D-I-S-C. Is it actually useful for leaders or just another personality tool? Hmm. Okay, let's see how this goes. I've recently stepped into my first proper leadership role. I'm confident in the technical side of the job. Managing people is all new to me, and I want to approach it with a bit of structure. I came across DiSC profiling while looking into different leadership tools. Sounds promising, helping you understand your own management style, how your team operates, what motivates people, and so on. But I'd never even heard of it before, which makes me wonder, is it widely used? Have either of you used DiSC in a team setting? Is it something worth exploring further?
Leanne ElliottNo.
Al ElliottUh, do you know what? I think that might be the shortest and most complete answer. Just in case someone pushes back and goes, wait a minute, I've heard DiSC is all right, what do you say to them?
Leanne ElliottYou're incorrect.
Al ElliottAre we really just leaving it there?
Leanne ElliottNo, DiSC is very popular. Um, some fun facts about DiSC. Um, it was created by the same guy who wrote the Wonder Woman comment. Comics. To be fair, that guy was also a psychologist.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottBut it was first, it was, do you know what it came from? The model behind DiSC came in like 1920-something, and it's a theory that's never really been proved. And the scientific support for DiSC in terms of an accurate way of measuring personality or indeed behavior is very lacking. It's not very robust. And also, if you're not sure, DiSC basically will ask people questions and then give you a color. So you're a yellow, you're a red, you're a blue, you're a green. And as John Amici, my favorite psychologist in the world, said to me, Leanne, how have we got to the point where the complexity of the human psyche is distilled into a primary color?
Al ElliottThere we go. Mic drop moment.
Leanne ElliottYeah. It's, um, so yeah, DiSC isn't good. Speaking more broadly about psychometrics, and I'm pleased that you're curious and psychometrics can be useful in terms of understanding your team and figuring out the best way to manage them. Broadly speaking, psychometrics fall into 3 buckets. You have kind of anything around intelligence, which will include IQ and EQ. You have personality psychometrics, and you have behavioural psychometrics. Now, do you know what? I always thought DiSC was personality.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottBut when I looked into it more again recently, it calls itself a behaviour-based psychometric. I, I don't think, I don't think it's either, to be honest. I think it's nonsense, but I would want to dump it more in the personality because you're trying to put people into a type, which is very much steeped in the personality literature. Personality inventories have 2 main buckets. So they're either type where you'll get a color or an INTP, ENFP, ENFJ, whatever they are, or they're on a continuum like introversion to extroversion. We're all somewhat introverted or extroverted. We sit somewhere on a scale, and that gives, of course, much more, um, variety of profiles that will pop out. You're not just going to get 16 or, God forbid, 4. Um, so yeah, personality inventories can be useful if you pick a good one. Herrigan is a great test publisher, for example, as is SHL. The problem with personality when it comes to understanding your team is personality is pretty fixed. It doesn't change much from the point of like 20 to 75, it's fairly fixed. So, you're kind of giving your team members permission not to change if you talk about their personality, because they're going to go, oh, well, I can't finish that report. I'm not a red, or I can't do that sales call. I'm not a yellow. It just limits people's potential that they'll use either for bad because they don't want to do something, they don't want to do some grunt work, or it will limit them in terms of imposter syndrome and confidence.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottI don't think personality, regardless of how effective the tool is, is particularly useful in this scenario. I would go for a behavior-based metric. The Real World Group are one of my absolute favorites. Belbin is not a bad place to start as well. Um, it's not the same kind of robustness of psychology behind Belbin as there is the tools from the Real World Group, but it's a really nice place to start and will give you team roles that you can discuss. But again, it's preferences. It's not a defined, like, you are definitely this. So, good thinking. Honestly, if you're using any psychometric, you really should be engaging an expert, somebody who is trained in psychometrics, like an occupational psychologist, to really understand exactly the tool that you need to serve the task that you need it to. But broadly speaking, for this scenario, I would say behaviour-based is the way to go. Look at Belbin, look at Real World Group.
Al ElliottNow, can I just check, because this original Uh, letter, it's not a letter, but I'm pretending it's a letter, said, um, uh, it sounds promising, helping, helped me understand my own management style, how my team operates, and what motivates people. Is all of that encompassed under behaviour then? Is that where, what we're looking at? We should be looking at the behaviours which will help us with those 3 things?
Leanne ElliottExactly, because behaviour can be modified, behaviour can be changed, behaviour can be coached. So, in terms of a management style, managers also need to be adaptable depending on the team they're They're leading in the context they're leading it. So, for example, with the early onset of COVID we saw a very sharp shift to much more command and control levels of leadership. People needed quick answers. Go home. This needs to close. That needs to happen. And as the pandemic progressed, it became much more open, consultative leadership in terms of, well, how do we deal with this and how do we overcome that when we've got a bit more time to do it?
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottSo, understanding your own preferred style and how that looks in terms of the behaviours you enact in the workplace is going to be really important for you to know when the context changes suddenly, or you're given a task that is contextually specific. So, for example, if you're going through a merger or something like that. So, yeah, it's great for understanding how you show up as a manager and how you might need to start working on behaviours that you don't Naturally enact. Also, in terms of how your team operates, you're going to see how your typical behaviours might differ to the typical behaviours of your team. You might also get clues of people that you clash with, who might be very similar to you in terms of behaviours, or indeed very different. It could also show people that you might favour unfairly because of this similarity, and how they all work together. So, it gives you just a really nice framework to—
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottUnderstand yourself, understand your team, and understand how you can modify behaviours to get the performance you need in the context you're in.
Al ElliottFabulous. Okay, so we're saying no to DiSC, no to Myers-Briggs, no to anyone who does personality, because personality tests like Myers-Briggs and DiSC are kind of the equivalent of those things that went round talking about the pandemic of going, what kind of chocolate bar are you? And you answer 6 questions, it tells you you're a KitKat or something because you could be, because you have 4 fingers. No, don't go down that road. I don't know where that was going. Sorry, listener. So we're saying that's bad. What's good is something that measures behavior. And you said that, um, uh, the Real World Group is your favorite of that, which we'll probably put links in the show notes. If you do have to do a personality test, you rate Hogan, do you?
Leanne ElliottYeah. Hogan.
Al ElliottHogan. Nothing to do with Hulk. It's a very different thing. If you just search Truth, Lies and Work Hogan, you'll see we had an interview with the Chief Science Officer, uh, Dr. Ryan—
Leanne ElliottSherman, who's, who's wonderful. Ryan Sherman. Yeah. Not to say personality frameworks and tests don't have their place, but I think in team development, it's limited because it's fixed. What are you going to do with that? Recruitment, different thing, because you're bringing in a personality. But yeah, I'd always go behaviour for a team-based setting.
Al ElliottInteresting. Thank you very much. Okay, so question number 2, how do senior leaders answer tough questions without actually answering them? Oh, this is going to be interesting. I've noticed something in company all-hands meetings and press briefings. When senior leaders get asked difficult or uncomfortable questions, they somehow manage to respond without really committing to anything. They don't dodge the question outright, but they also don't land on a clear answer either. It's like they've got a framework or script in their back pocket that helps them stay neutral and in control. Is there a technique leaders use to handle these moments, or is it just practice? Lee, do you think this person's asking how they can do it or how they do it? Does the, does the, does the, does the person writing in want to learn this skill, or are they just curious about how these people have learned the skill?
Leanne ElliottI think maybe it's a little bit of both. Mm-hmm. Um, but I think, is there a technique leaders can use? Yes. Is it just practice? And yes.
Al ElliottAlso yes.
Leanne ElliottAlso yes. Um, yeah. Do you know what? There's, you use 2 words here that absolutely nail down what leaders are doing in these moments. They stay neutral and they're in control.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottSo neutrality comes from high levels of emotional regulation. You don't panic, you don't react immediately. And senior leaders who are effective are very good at regulating their emotionals— emotionals? Emotions. And in terms of control, it's showing that you— people can trust you, that you've got this. You can provide that reassurance in moments that are often very ambiguous. So, yeah, being neutral and in control are key things that leaders are trying to do in their communications. There are so many different frameworks and stuff out there that you can follow across psychology research, across PR and comms research, marketing, behavioral science as well. Um, there are so many, so I thought I would maybe just share one that I quite like in terms of being science-led and looking at how our psychology and our brains can can be used in moments like this to, to look aloof as a leader, but also sound very in control. Um, so this was a model that is developed by a neuroscientist called David Rock in the late noughties, and it's called the SCARF model. S-C-A-R-F.
Al ElliottI like it already.
Leanne ElliottYeah. So it's based on—
Al ElliottWrap around care.
Leanne ElliottWrap around care. And I like the letters when you can—
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottWhat's it called?
Al ElliottIs it an acronym or is it— Um, anachronism is different. Let's just go with acronym because there's no one here to correct us.
Leanne ElliottTrue.
Al ElliottUm, look forward to your letters.
Leanne ElliottSo it's based on the neuroscience of kind of how our brains react to social threats. So it's that kind of fight or flight area of neuroscience. So how we react to things like embarrassment or power dynamics, uncertainty, the brain treats this as a threat and in the same way treats it Um, in a similar way, treats it like physical danger. So, if a tough question comes up in public, the brain is on high alert.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottSo, senior leaders will be media trained in how to manage this in the moment. So, the SCARF model basically says there's 5 things people are always scanning a context for. Status, am I respected here? Certainty, do I know what's happening? Autonomy, do I have any control? Relatedness, am I included and safe? And fairness, am I being treated Justly. So bearing in mind, this is for anyone who finds themself in a social or leadership context where there's a threat. If you've been called to a town hall, there's a good chance you're getting— feeling a little bit of threat because you know a big organizational change is coming. So whilst you're feeling it, the leader is also feeling it, but wanting to control that in both them and in you. So when the leader answers a tough question, what they're really doing is managing these 5 areas, and in that, managing the context as well as the content.
Al ElliottInteresting.
Leanne ElliottThat makes sense?
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottSo, in terms of how this might apply to a town hall question, let's say there's some layoffs coming, because that seems to be happening everywhere at the minute, right? Um, so, in terms of the first one, they want to protect status. They're gonna say things like, I know how much effort people are putting in. That's not going unnoticed. So, I'm not taking any respect away from you or status away from you.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottThen they give certainty. We will be reviewing roles across the next 3 weeks, and we'll get to keep everyone updated. Got a timeline.
Al ElliottClever.
Leanne ElliottI've got an idea of what's happening. Then they move to preserve autonomy. So, they'll say something like, managers will be speaking to teams individually. This won't be handled top-down without input.
Al ElliottClever. I feel reassured already.
Leanne ElliottThen they build relatedness. So, say something like, I know this is difficult. I've been through this in my own career, and it's never easy.
Al ElliottOh, that's a nice touch.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm. And then they frame the fairness. So, whatever decisions we make will be consistent across departments and based on clear criteria. So, if you've got somebody put their hand up and say, am I going to be laid off? You've not got an answer to that question.
Al ElliottNo.
Leanne ElliottBut you've been protected in terms of the respect and status people feel for. You've got a bit of certainty, you've got a bit of autonomy, you feel more— the leader's more relatable, and it seems like the process is fair. You've learned nothing to answer your question, but you feel reassured. And that's what, that's what leaders do. They're regulating the emotional climate, um, and that's why they pay them the big bucks.
Al ElliottThat makes sense why they get £4.9 million a year. But that totally makes sense. And also, you see that quite often in, um, I think you say quite often, like, if at the end of football matches, if they're, you know, interviewing the manager and they've lost, the manager will often seem to use that sort of thing.
Leanne ElliottYeah. And it's the ones that go off script and completely lose it will get on, they'll go viral, won't they? And get on the news and everyone will be talking about them. So, yeah, it's a cool model, but just to kind of recap it. So, if you're a leader listening and want to kind of write this bit down or give it to ChatGPT or something. What you're looking at in any of these difficult moments is status. So protecting dignity, don't undermine anyone. Certainty, offer timelines or next steps. Autonomy, give people some control or input. Relatedness, show empathy and connection. And fairness, be transparent about how decisions will be made. Um, and to be honest, that's also a great model for managing change within your business, any kind of comms in your business, not just stuff that's a bit difficult.
Al ElliottOkay, Le, I've got a final question for today, which is from a business owner. It says, I want to hand over the day-to-day running of my business, but what kind of role am I actually hiring for? This is really, really good. Love this. My husband and I run a small business with a brilliant team of 3. They're self-sufficient in their own work, but they still rely on me for day-to-day things like decision-making, et cetera, et cetera. I'm looking to step back from the day-to-day so I can focus more on growing the business to eventually have it running smoothly without needing me and my husband involved full-time. The issue is I'm ready to hire someone to take on a lot of this, but I have no idea what to call the role. I've seen everything from office manager to business manager to PA to director. I don't wanna pitch it the wrong way. Has anyone else brought in someone to take over an operational management in a small business? How did you define the role and what helped you attract the right kind of person? This sounds like a beefy subject for you to get into, Leigh.
Leanne ElliottIt does. I'm gonna brush over the, what do I call the role? Because at this point, that's not, it's not the question you need to answer.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottIt's the later questions you ask. So how do you define the role and what helped you attract the right kind of person? How do you define the role? Spend time defining the role. And how do we do that, Al?
Al ElliottJob analysis.
Leanne ElliottJob analysis.
Al ElliottYou almost caught me out there.
Leanne ElliottNo, I knew, I was confident. I knew, I knew you'd know. Um, it's such an important thing, particularly for your first hire, to think about what exactly do I want this job to do? It might be a very unusual job in a small business where you're bringing in, what, your, your 4th team member? It could be very varied. It could be that there isn't a typical job out there that would do this. Um, so the thing I would say is, is spend some time, you and your husband, and do 2 exercises for me. One, just write down general tasks that you want this person to do, very transactional things in your day you'd love for them to take away, and get that all down on paper and then theme it. So whether it's around people, clients, admin, finance, whatever it is, so you've got a rough kind of responsibilities list of what this person needs to do. That's then gonna give you an idea of kind of the level of, um, I guess seniority this person is, complexity in the tasks that they're gonna do. And then I want you to take each one of those categories and go, right, say it's managing people, supervising people. I want you to then do a task called repertory grid.
Al ElliottCalled what?
Leanne ElliottRepertory grid.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottOr rep grid, where you basically say, this is, this is a psychology thing now.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottYou basically say, right, people management. Let's think about one person we know of who we think is a phenomenal manager. Let's keep that person in mind. Then we're gonna think about somebody who is an awful manager, worst we've ever experienced. And then we think about somebody in the middle that's like, eh, they were okay, they were average. I then wanna say to you, what— let's take 2 of those people. Let's take the exceptional manager and the awful manager. The exceptional manager, what was it that they did?
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne Elliottthat made them exceptional and effective as a manager? And things will start to come up like, oh, they could communicate really well. Okay, cool. Let's talk about, dig into that. How did they communicate? In what way did they communicate? What made it so great? Was it they were empathetic? Was it they were direct? Was it that they were adaptable in their communication? Talk about it to death in terms of what that communication looked like and why it was effective. Then go to the person that was awful and go, what did this person do in terms of communication that was so ineffective, or indeed might have been effective?
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne Elliotteffective, but what do they do differently? So, then you can kind of see, well, our view of a great manager is somebody who is empathetic and transparent in their communication. Our idea of a terrible manager is somebody who is overly direct and unempathetic in their communication. Well, I now know that in my business, from my perspective, and what I need the job to do, for one, And the type of person I wanna do it, I'm looking for somebody who communicates openly and is empathetic, and I'm not looking for somebody who's the opposite of that. That's kind of your first assessment criteria for your job that you're gonna advertise. So then you go through each one like, okay, finance, what made this person particularly productive at managing invoicing and blah, blah, blah. And you go through that until you've basically got a list of what your ideal will look like. And you're gonna get that more nuance when you bring in the average person.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottSo, you're going to say this person was average at people management. So, what didn't they do that the amazing person did? Oh, they were great, but they just weren't very hands-on. They weren't very available. They weren't very approachable, whatever it is, to get really nuanced. Once you've then got this list of what we'd call competencies, you can then create a recruitment process that's going to assess these competencies and help you find the right person. And that is the real kind of rough bones of a job analysis in terms of figuring out what the job is and the type of person you want to do it. And then you design a recruitment strategy that's gonna, or process that's gonna select the perfect person for that job, whether that be through interview or work tests or EQ or whatever it is.
Al ElliottThat makes a lot of sense. So basically, it's rather than writing the job description, putting it up on a website, and then seeing what happens when people answer it, you're essentially imagining what the perfect candidate would be. Writing an interview for that perfect candidate, hoping they'd score 10 outta 10 on everything. And then, then that you've got this idea. So, if you've got someone who's scored 95%, you're like, well, they're close enough. That's good. But you're actually properly measuring them. Is that right?
Leanne ElliottExactly. So, say you included a role play in the recruitment process to do, to manage a difficult conversation because you need somebody who communicates with empathy and you have one candidate who just didn't quite Do it hit those behavioural indicators in terms of empathy that you were hoping for? So in, in terms of, um, being open, being approachable, being calm, talking clearly, holding silence for people to respond, all those behavioural indicators that you'd say this looks like empathetic communication. But that candidate scores 10 out of 10 on every other competency. There's going to be plenty of leaders that will go, Oh, we can train him in that. We can improve that. He's so good at everything else. But when you go back to your job analysis, you're like, no, this is the core thing of the job. This is the thing that we said that we needed. And the behaviours this candidate is showing, the behaviours that we said is what an awful, the worst case scenario would show, then it's a non-negotiable that that candidate is not suitable for that role. And that's really hard to do when somebody is so capable in so many other areas, particularly more commercial areas.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottBut the reality is you've spent the time obsessing over what this job needs to do and the type of person that will do it well, that you have to follow the data. And the data is telling you that that person is not right for that job.
Al ElliottExcellent. Like magic. I love it. I love it. Okay, so that's the end of the world famous Weekly Workplace Q&A. I told you I'd put your questions to Leanne. Uh, we've got another one next week, obviously next Tuesday. We've also got a new truth or lie. If you've got a question you'd like me to put to Leanne, then you just check the show notes. There's a way to get in touch. Um, Leanne, any other business before we let these good people go about their day?
Leanne ElliottTune in on Thursday. We have another great expert interview for you on hybrid work. We're going to get to the bottom of it, Al, aren't we?
Al ElliottWe are. And if you've listened to any podcasts or episodes on hybrid work before, you're probably going, oh, cool. Yeah, yeah. Okay, let's learn how to do it. This is not like that. This is very different. You'll be surprised. I don't want to spoil the surprise. Tune in Thursday. We'll speak to you then. In the meantime, Do the normal things, please. Subscribe, like, send us love letters.
Leanne ElliottLeave us a review, that'd be nice.
Al ElliottOh, a review would be nice.
Leanne ElliottYeah, it would.
Al ElliottAbsolutely. Or send us a poem.
Leanne ElliottOh, I would very much enjoy that.
Al ElliottYeah, send us a poem.
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottAnd if you want to make it rude, then I would very much enjoy that too. So we will see you on Thursday. Bye-bye. Bye.
Leanne ElliottBye-bye.