Episode 280 · 3 March 2026 · 51:40
Jack Dorsey’s A.I. Gamble, Friction-maxxing and The 10:47 PM Email. PLUS: Are Leaders Born or Made?
Jack Dorsey’s A.I. Gamble, Friction-maxxing and The 10:47 PM Email. PLUS: Are Leaders Born or Made?
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.
Story 1: The rise of friction-maxxing
news roundup#friction-maxxing#workplace-trends#employee-experience
Story 2: Jack Dorsey's AI gamble
news roundup#jack-dorsey#ai#tech-leadership
Story 3: The climate of constant connectivity
news roundup#constant-connectivity#burnout#workplace-culture
Truth or Lie: Leaders are born, not made
truth or lie#leadership#nature-vs-nurture#management
Workplace Surgery: The nepotism trap
workplace surgery#nepotism#hiring#workplace-fairness
Workplace Surgery: The vanishing spark
workplace surgery#employee-engagement#motivation#management
Workplace Surgery: The transparency gap
workplace surgery#transparency#communication#management
Show notes
Jack Dorsey’s AI Gamble, Friction-maxxing and The 10:47 PM Email — PLUS: Are Leaders Born or Made?
This Week in Work — Al Elliott and Leanne Elliott (Chartered Occupational Psychologist) explore why "friction" might be the secret to better judgment, the brutal reality of AI-driven layoffs at Block, and why your boss's 10:47 PM emails are exhausting your entire team. Plus, in Truth or Lie: are leaders born or made?
🔥 Stories Covered
1. The rise of "friction-maxxing" Leanne introduces a new term: friction-maxxing. Inspired by reporting in the Financial Times, this movement sees workers deliberately choosing slower, more effortful ways of working — like handwriting notes or reading full documents instead of AI summaries — to combat "cognitive atrophy" and build nuanced judgment. Source →
2. Jack Dorsey's AI gamble Al discusses the recent layoffs at Block (formerly Square/Twitter), where CEO Jack Dorsey cut 4,000 jobs — 40% of the workforce — and explicitly blamed AI productivity gains. They debate whether this "rip the plaster off" honesty is refreshing or a dangerous precedent for the future of work. Source →
3. The climate of constant connectivity New research in the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology reveals that when leaders use smartphones for work after hours, they create a shared "climate of constant connectivity." This doesn't just annoy individuals — it leads to collective emotional exhaustion across the entire team. Source →
🧠 Truth or Lie: "Leaders Are Born, Not Made"
Leanne tackles the "Great Man" theory of leadership. While studies of identical twins show that between 37% and 59% of leadership style variation can be linked to genetics, that still leaves more than half the equation down to environment, experience, and development.
The Verdict: It's a Lie — leadership is not a genetic script; it is a practicable skill shaped by opportunity and self-awareness.
💬 Workplace Surgery
Three tough listener questions, tackled live:
- The Nepotism Trap: How do you push back when a senior leader pressures you to hire their less-qualified relative?
- The Vanishing Spark: What do you do when "star" employees suddenly settle for "just fine" without being dramatic about "quiet quitting"?
- The Transparency Gap: Your manager is telling the CEO a project is "on track" when you know it's failing. Do you speak up or stay complicit?
(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 ElliottNew research shows that when leaders send emails at 10:47 PM, it's not just annoying, it's creating a climate of constant connectivity that is draining entire teams. So what's really happening when the boss never switches off, and what does it cost the business?
Al ElliottAlso this week, a tech company just shed 4,000 jobs, but they explicitly said it was because AI was replacing them. Yep, The CEO said it publicly. Was it the right thing to do, to be honest, or should they have sugarcoated it just a little bit?
Leanne ElliottAnd in Truth or Lie, leaders are born, not made. It's one of those statements people repeat like fact, but what does the actual research say? Are some people just wired to lead, or is it something anyone can develop?
Al ElliottAnd in the Workplace Surgery, you've done the work, you've got 3 strong candidates shortlisted for hiring, and now you're being quietly pressured to hire a Senior leader's relative instead. They're not unqualified, but they're not the best. How do you push back?
Leanne ElliottThis is Truth, Lies and Work, the award-winning podcast where behavioural science meets workplace culture, brought to you by the HubSpot Podcast Network.
Al ElliottThe audio destination for business professionals. See, I can do it too.
Leanne ElliottYou can.
Al ElliottMy name is Al. I'm a business owner, and I'm here to ask the questions you might be afraid to.
Leanne ElliottMy name is Leanne. I'm a Chartered Occupational Psychologist, and I'm here to answer them. And together we help you simplify the science of work and And build amazing workplace cultures.
Al ElliottWe'll be right back after a quick word from our lovely 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. Hello. Welcome back. Welcome back. Um, it's been a bit of a week, hasn't it, in the news? Let's not touch any of that.
Leanne ElliottNone of that. Goodness me. Anxiety is high, I think, this week.
Al ElliottYeah, I think we'll just move swiftly along.
Leanne ElliottBring you a bit of levity.
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottYou've got enough gravity.
Al ElliottIn a flying gravity.
Leanne ElliottYou won't hear us talking about how somebody's laid off 4,000 people because of AI. How tone deaf would that be in a week like this?
Al ElliottOh, maybe I might quickly change my— no, I can't because it was sent in by Jeremy Klein, a friend of the show. No, it's important to talk about. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So we'll talk about that. Uh, we'll tell you what we will talk about, our little miniature pinscher who's a bit of an asshole at the moment.
Leanne ElliottYeah, he's being a bit problematic recently, isn't he?
Al ElliottYeah, if you're listening and you are a Caesar, or if Caesar Milan's listening, then, uh, then drop us a, drop us a line. Um, he's just, he's spinning every time the big dog gets up. The little dog just spins round and round, tries to bite his tail. We, we had this last year. Unfortunately ended up losing— we had to chop half of his tail. Well, I didn't do it, a vet did it for us, but chopped some of his tail off and he's still doing it. So yeah.
Leanne ElliottHe's 10 years old. He's a rescue. We've had about 18 months. So our working theory is he's— it's usually this time where he'll be moved on. So whether his perception of time is maybe causing some anxiety because he's expecting a change perhaps, but then we're not sure if we're humanising him too much, trying to create boundaries or trying to keep the energy calm. Which is very difficult, but we're trying to keep it calm. If anyone has any suggestions, tips, let us know, please.
Al ElliottYeah, talking of times, it is time for your favourite time of the week, Leanne. It is time for the news roundup.
Leanne ElliottYes, it is. I'll cue that jingle.
Al ElliottOkay, Le, what have you got?
Leanne ElliottI've got a new word.
Al ElliottTalk to me.
Leanne ElliottFriction-maxxing.
Al ElliottWhat? No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, this was my word for next week.
Leanne ElliottNo.
Al ElliottI've got it in my web queue. Read later. Oh man.
Leanne ElliottOh, you know exactly what it is.
Al ElliottNo, I don't actually. I just saw it. It was on the BBC or something yesterday or today, and I just saw it and I thought, right, I'm having that.
Leanne ElliottOh really?
Al ElliottYeah, yeah, go on. I didn't look at what it was though.
Leanne ElliottAh, well, this is the— if the BBC has picked this up, um, then they're a bit late because this was a couple of weeks ago this came out. It was in the Financial Times by Isabel Berrick.
Al ElliottOh, another friend of the show.
Leanne ElliottYes, exactly, friend of the show. So friction maxxing, do you want to take a guess?
Al ElliottMaxing out your friction. So go— when I first saw it, I thought approaching problems with people head on. So you actually go out and seek the fraction, the friction.
Leanne ElliottYou go look for the fires.
Al ElliottYou look for the fires. You rub up against the one. You can't do that in a modern workplace, but you met—
Leanne ElliottYou couldn't do it in— you could never do it. It's just—
Al ElliottIt's just we did. Oh, not we. I didn't. As a— so what do— what is your word? Friction magic maxxing?
Leanne ElliottFriction-maxxing, it describes a small but growing pushback against ultra-convenient tech, especially AI. So Isabel said that basically, instead of making everything faster and easier, some workers are deliberately choosing the slower, more effortful option.
Al ElliottSo instead of— so this is what's terrible. I use ChatGPT to ask questions like, what I just asked him about, about the dog.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm.
Al ElliottWhereas 2, 3 years ago, I would've Googled it, looked at lots of different articles, and maybe 10 years ago, I would've got my book out and read my book.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm.
Al ElliottSo are you saying that we, I, that friction-maxxing is going back to actually not saying, all right, AI, answer this question straight away. It's going to get the book and sitting down with the book.
Leanne ElliottYeah, exactly. So basically it's the, it's the antidote to convenience.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottRejecting shortcuts.
Al ElliottOkay.
Leanne ElliottSo yeah, the article, which is brilliant, you should go and read it, did trace the idea back to Kathryn Kuhlman. Jezza Morton.
Al ElliottWe have some brilliant names on this, on the show. Jezza Morton.
Leanne ElliottI don't want to sound like one of those complete a-holes, but like whenever I see a name starting with a J, I panic.
Al ElliottWhy?
Leanne ElliottBecause it's like, because in English it would be probably Jezza, but then we spent 4 or 5 years in Spain where that would be Jezza, and then we now live in the Balkans where that would be Jezza. So it's like, well, I don't, I don't know this person's origin. I don't know where they're from. Which one do I pick that doesn't make me sound like a complete arse?
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottSo I went with Jezza Morton.
Al ElliottYep, yep. Fair enough. That works.
Leanne ElliottKatherine. So Katherine wrote in The Cut about building tolerance for inconvenience. So her concern was actually rooted in parenting. She argued that if everything feels frictionless, children won't experience boredom, and without boredom, they may never develop a love for things like reading or learning to think for themselves.
Al ElliottI suppose those are boring.
Leanne ElliottYeah, exactly. I have seen this called by the Gen Z raw-dogging boredom. When they'll just sit in a room, they're not allowed to do anything for 10 minutes. Like, they can't even fidget with anything.
Al ElliottI like, I like sitting in the garden and my morning rituals. I wake up usually, usually about half an hour before Leanne, not because I think you, we wake up at the same time. It's just I get up half an hour before you. I like to have a cup of coffee, sit in the garden. And my, my rule is I don't touch my phone until I finish my coffee.
Leanne ElliottThat's a good rule.
Al ElliottAnd, and I, it's lovely because I have all these lovely thoughts and then it starts getting a bit existential and Yeah. It gets a bit weird. So then I have to—
Leanne ElliottBy the time I get up, you're in a full-blown panic.
Al ElliottExactly. I'm just in the shower, fully clothed, crying. Yeah.
Leanne ElliottYeah, exactly. In terms of the adult world, though, going back to our article, friction-maxxing might mean for us things like reading a full document rather than relying on an AI summary. It could mean writing notes by hand instead of using automated transcripts.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottOne learning and development professional in the article quoted, she actively writes everything down and reviews it because she believes she remembers it more that way. Others are turning down quick Teams calls in favour of meeting in coffee— meeting in person for coffee, even if that means that it's going to be a couple of weeks out. The article also referenced Tim Wu, a US law professor at Columbia University. He is known for his work on technology and media and a 2018 New York Times essay where he argued against what he called the tyranny of convenience, suggesting that difficulty is a fundamental part of the human experience. And if everything becomes about speed and destination, we're gonna lose the value of the journey. Very woo indeed. There's also concern—
Al ElliottVery nice, very nice.
Leanne ElliottNo, I'm sorry, that's probably disrespectful. Sorry, I made it funny. Okay, there's also concern in the article about what researchers call cognitive atrophy. Took me a minute then. Atrophy. The risk that outsourcing too much thinking to AI weakens our judgment over time. We have actually seen some neuroscience research on that that does show that it's true. So there you go, Al. What was it again? Friction-maxxing.
Al ElliottFriction-maxxing.
Leanne ElliottThoughts?
Al ElliottI saw a great video. In fact, my brother, thank you, Andrew Elliott, Blue Goats Books, his publishing house, which is publishing, he's published quite a few of our previous guests. I think it's actually the other way around. But anyway, go and look at blueghostbooks.com. Uh, he said, well, why'd I, why'd I bring him up? Oh yeah, he sent us a video, um, which I'm gonna talk about next week, but about Xennials. And Xennials—
Leanne ElliottWhat's a Xennial?
Al ElliottA Xennial is those people who were born between, specifically between 1976 and 1985. So they're neither Millennials who grew up fully with technology.
Leanne ElliottOh, see, now that's confusing. Why would you call 'em a Xennial? Because surely that would be the person. Yeah, I understand that, but it still sounds like Zed, doesn't it? It still sounds like, like the, the bitch between millennial and Gen Zed.
Al ElliottXennial.
Leanne ElliottYes.
Al ElliottXennial's better. Maybe it is supposed to be said Xennial.
Leanne ElliottWell, I hope it is. Otherwise they've just ruined it for themselves and everybody else.
Al ElliottMy point, my point, which is really weak and diluted now, my point was that when you grew up, 'cause I grew up in that time and you just grew up in that time.
Leanne ElliottWhat's the time period?
Al Elliott'76 to '84, I think.
Leanne ElliottYeah, I'm '84. Yep.
Al ElliottThen you remember the time when you were gonna go and meet your friends and had no idea whether they were gonna be there. Whether you'd got the right place. You were out for hours. You remember a time when it was all analogue, so you had your tapes and your cassette spat it out and you had to get a pencil to wind it back in.
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottAnd then you remember the time when it was all Spotify and you grew up over that sort of spectrum.
Leanne ElliottAnd the bits in between that were highly illegal.
Al ElliottNapster. Yeah. All that. God. Yeah. I think I downloaded most of the internet.
Leanne ElliottLimeWire.
Al ElliottYeah. LimeWire. I remember LimeWire. I loved LimeWire. I used to leave it on all night.
Leanne ElliottWell, it had to be 'cause it would take like 12 hours to download one 2-minute song.
Al ElliottIt's true.
Leanne ElliottOh, good times.
Al ElliottBut I think the point is that back then we were allowed to be bored and we had no choice but to be bored. So my mum used to say, if you're bored, go out and do something, go out and make something. And so I used to go and like make 5-bar gates and all sorts of stuff. But anyway, anyway, yes. So that was a bit off topic, but I'm with you. Friction-maxxing, we should all be doing more of it and stop relying on AI.
Leanne ElliottYes. I also think it's worth considering— oh, sorry, not going on.
Al ElliottI'm excited.
Leanne ElliottI also think it's worth considering how much friction you currently have in your life anyway, right? Because I'm thinking for some parents, they've got a fair amount of friction in their life trying to entertain the kids that aren't used to being bored. We have a lot of friction in our life because we don't have Amazon. We don't really— we can't do online shopping.
Al ElliottNo.
Leanne ElliottIf we want to do anything in terms of government processes, it literally takes us half a day.
Al ElliottYep.
Leanne ElliottAnd we need to go to 4 different offices.
Al ElliottYep.
Leanne ElliottHand in millions of different pieces of paper and hope for the best. Like, so we— I think we have quite a lot of friction in our lives.
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottSo I'm not sure introducing unnecessary friction in our work life would necessarily be the, the best thing, but I equally totally get in terms of making sure we continue to develop our own nuanced judgment and thinking processes and just keeping our mind quiet, we probably need to disconnect. And be a bit friction-maxxing at times. But I think maybe it's, it's maybe looking at the bigger picture of how much friction you have in your life, generally speaking.
Al ElliottFriction is good. Friction is good.
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottYes, totally agree.
Leanne ElliottAnyway, what have you seen then?
Al ElliottOkay, well, it's not necessarily what I saw, it's what Jeremy Klein from Change Work Life Podcast saw. He sent me a WhatsApp message because we are that kind of friends. We have— we watch—
Leanne ElliottAs opposed to other kind of?
Al ElliottTrue.
Leanne ElliottThere's some friends you don't give your number to.
Al ElliottYeah, I will not be naming them here.
Leanne ElliottActually, I have some friends like that. Yeah.
Al ElliottAnyway, so Jeremy Klein, thank you so much. He basically sent me the link about Jack Dorsey from Square, how he got rid of 40% of his workforce. Now, I'm sure you know Jack Dorsey, he's ex-Twitter.
Leanne ElliottOf course.
Al ElliottYou can always tell if someone was part of Twitter in the early days by looking at their username on Twitter. His is just @jack. And then one of the other founders is like @mo or something, or @— it begins with E, I can't remember. Just write, write in, tell me. Anyway, so he's CEO of Block. Uh, this is the company behind— have you ever come across Square or Cash App? Square, those things? Yeah, yep, yep. He's announced he's cutting 4,000 jobs. That's 40% of the workforce. I didn't know it was that big, actually, to be honest. So that's nearly half the company is gone. But here's the thing, he didn't just sort of like quietly do it. He actually posted on Twitter. And when I, when I, I followed the link from Jeremy, it got 43 million views.
Leanne ElliottWow. Wow.
Al ElliottUm, he didn't blame market conditions or restructuring or that, you know, aligning our strategic priorities. He was completely direct. He basically said, and I'll read, intelligence tools have changed what it means to build and run a company. A significantly smaller team using the tools we're building can do more and do it better. So the bit— and the— and this is the thing, business isn't struggling at all. Um, it's actually beat Wall Street expectations last year. Uh, revenue is Up massively. And I think the revenue per employee has doubled over the last 12 months.
Leanne ElliottWell, they've just got rid of half his workforce.
Al ElliottWell, no, no, no. Well, this is the thing.
Leanne ElliottOh, sorry.
Al ElliottPrevious way. It will, it will quadruple. But yes, it did double. So, but the thing is, that's all cool. Like, glad his company's doing well, but is it— Yes.
Leanne ElliottVery glad to see another billionaire is just billionairing. Excellent news, Jack.
Al ElliottIs it the, the question I've got for you, Leanne, is Did he do it right by being brutally honest? The investors thought so. They loved it. Their shares jumped 20% the next day because obviously they're looking at efficiency, margins, profitability. But the employees, hmm. Some people, so in Wired magazine, someone reported that the morale was the worst I've felt for 4 years and the overarching culture at Block is crumbling. Maybe that's not a problem though, because essentially, can he run the company on 1,000 people Not 10,000, and use AI to do the rest. And then his employee— his revenue per employee is like 10 times. What are your thoughts on the whole thing?
Leanne ElliottThis is quite a swing for Jack Dorsey, isn't it? Because he was quite famously criticised when he was heading up Twitter that it wasn't a very profitable company, but it was a massively large organisation, like running a country kind of thing. Yeah, so quite a swing. It's almost like, I won't do that again, I'll go the complete opposite. On one hand, I'm like, the transparency, cool.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottIt would've caused more problems if you'd have blamed something else. Then you got all the commentary around, oh, it wasn't about that, it was about AI, or people talking from the inside who had either left X of the business or remained. So I think the transparency was really the only thing he could do to minimise the massive amount of backlash I imagine he's gonna get, because this isn't a small round of layoffs, this is half the company. And we know in terms of survivor's guilt, we know in terms of the voluntary turnover after a round of redundancies, it's typically 1%. Um, if it's— or typically, if it's 1% of your workforce is laid off, you'll get a 30% voluntary redundancy rate over the next 12 months. So he's laid off 50%. So who knows what— you know, the maths doesn't math in terms of what that number should be for voluntary turnover.
Al ElliottActually, what he's talking about in terms of actually, it's costing him because he's, I think he's paying like 6 months salary to everyone plus 1 month for every year tenure. So the estimate— How old is this company? I'd say probably about 8, 10 years old.
Leanne ElliottOkay.
Al ElliottAnd so I think estimates are around about $500 million it's costing him to get rid of these people. So just, but I didn't know that. I don't know if that helps at all or not.
Leanne ElliottNot in the example I was talking about, no. But I think, I think you're right in terms of, yes, giving runway is good practice. Helping people find other alternative employment is good practice. Transparency is good practice. My concern is more what this looks like in terms of how, how Jack stands in terms of AI first versus human first. And I think at a time where everyone's already quite anxious about that, the people remaining are not going to feel safe in any way because you've done it before brutally. You could absolutely do it again. You've made a very public declaration that you are now AI first.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottI have a feeling that give it another 12, 18 months, organisations are going to swing back round. to be human first as a point of competitive differentiation when the labour market swings back in favour of the employees, when we see that Great Resignation 2.0, I can see Jack flip-flopping in the future. So I think it is— whilst yes, it's probably dealt with in the best possible way, it is brutal. It's still going to have a massive impact on the people being left behind because all the research shows that to be the case. And I think it's a very bold move. To kind of declare you are AI first when we're still not entirely sure how this is all going to shake out. But then that's because I'm quite human first. So, yeah.
Al ElliottAnd I think to be fair on Jack, sorry, Jack, if you're listening, to be fair on Jack, he's, I think he's bullish on AI and I don't see him turning it around. And I can see him actually going, well, it'd be great if we could have 100 employees running this entire thing and the rest of us are just agents. So I, I can see him going down that road.
Leanne ElliottBut what happens to the world if every organization does that?
Al ElliottWell, that's the thing you just said. What happens if organizations went human first? Well, some will go human first, some will go AI first. It's not like just because Jack's doing it, everyone's gonna do it. I mean, all right, Salesforce got rid of 4,000 people earlier this month. Um, but, but it's, it, it, it, there was an overemployment at some point in some of these SaaS companies, and now there's It looks like it's a correction, a market correction.
Leanne ElliottBut they've been correcting since just after the pandemic, haven't they? And that was before kind of AI went mainstream. There was all that market corrections.
Al ElliottI just don't think you can say, what if everyone does it? Because that's like saying, well, everyone should be vegetarian. It's like, well, they're not gonna, are they? You know, burgers taste too good.
Leanne ElliottYeah, I know.
Al ElliottAnyway, well, look, we'll come back to this.
Leanne ElliottAnd also, I'm very sad for the 4,000 people because as we know, the deathly arithmetic of compassion, it's hard to empathise with that large number of people, but there are going to be tens of thousands of people impacted by that in terms of the family independence of those 4,000 people. So yeah, if you are one of those and you are listening, I'm very sorry. It's a very, very tough time. You have my empathy and my sympathy.
Al ElliottAnd if you are listening, one of those people there, and you could either do one of two things. You could either get in touch with us and we'll do a LinkedIn Live with you and we'll talk about what it was like and your opinions on it. Or perhaps we've had a couple of people actually, someone from Twitter, I think, who you spoke to a while ago when they were laid off and you basically did some free coaching for a couple of weeks. And so that's available to you as well. Leanne, what else have you seen? What's the last thing, last thing on our list?
Leanne ElliottWell, speaking of leaders being annoying, right? This is a bit of research I came across that was basically looking at what is the impact of leaders' late-night behaviour on employees.
Al ElliottWhere'd you see this?
Leanne ElliottThis was in the Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology.
Al ElliottOh, the JOOP.
Leanne ElliottThe JOOP.
Al ElliottThe JOOP. I like— one of my favourites, that. I do like the JOOP.
Leanne ElliottWhy have I not noticed that before? Brilliant. So this is in the JOOP 2025 study. So fairly warm, warm off the press, not hot, warm. Yeah. So basically it was looking at what happens when leaders are sending emails Late at night, doing messages, all that type of thing. The researchers weren't looking at in like a technology is ruining life type way. They wanted to really understand what happens when leaders regularly use their phones, their devices outside of normal work hours, and how that behaviour impacts the organisation. So they introduced something called climate of constant connectivity, right? Which makes the CCC exactly. They did actually shorten it to that. The CCC. Which is basically meaning that it's a shared belief within the company that employees are expected to be available and responsive during non-work times, like always-on mentality.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottSo what they did is they didn't just ask one person if they felt pressured. They surveyed employees within the organisation and looked for agreement. There needed to be a consensus. So if people within the same company broadly agreed that there was an expectation to be reachable after hours, Then that counted as a real shared climate. So they had to kind of reach a critical point of consensus.
Al ElliottMakes sense.
Leanne ElliottThen separately, they measured how frequently leaders were actually using their smartphones for work in the evenings, at weekends, and that would include sending emails, responding to messages, or making work-related calls. Then they analysed whether organisations where leaders were more active after hours were also the ones where employees perceived stronger expectations of this constant availability. And they were. So the researchers found that leaders' after-hours communication predicted a stronger climate of constant connectivity, and that climate in turn predicted high levels of collective emotional exhaustion. So that's not just people feeling drained, that's like a shared sense of real depletion, like on the road to burnout across, across teams. Am I boring you, Al?
Al ElliottNo, I'm listening.
Leanne ElliottYou're like, hmm.
Al ElliottI'm listening.
Leanne ElliottSorry.
Al ElliottI was actually thinking about what we're gonna have for lunch as well.
Leanne ElliottWere you?
Al ElliottYeah, yeah.
Leanne ElliottOh, what are we gonna have for lunch?
Al ElliottI don't know. Chicken pie? No, we're vegetarian now.
Leanne ElliottI love chicken pie. Anyway, what was I saying?
Al ElliottYou were saying, you were saying it's collectively across the entire organisation, not just like individually some people were feeling a bit burnt out because Because, um, because they were— the manager was emailing them. It's like the whole collective feeling was—
Leanne ElliottYes. And the researchers said that this comes from conservation of resources theory, which is basically about energy. So when people feel that their time and their attention and their recovery space, that time at home recovery space, are continually being eroded, then the strain accumulates and then the recovery stops being as effective. It's all very conditional, and over time that shows up as exhaustion, which we know is one of the, one of the 3 symptoms of burnout. So the researchers also describe late-night communication as a form of non-family-supported behaviour, which makes sense. You're not respecting my family time as a boundary.
Al ElliottAbsolutely.
Leanne ElliottIt doesn't necessarily mean that leaders were doing it deliberately. They didn't look at that. It just showed how that behaviour sends a signal signal to the employee. And if senior people are visibly working into the night, that employees see that as being expected to be responsive outside of hours, um, at the very least to be valued. Thoughts?
Al ElliottI mean, it makes sense. I mean, we don't need all these studies to know that if you're receiving emails, uh, or even you look at an email, it was sent at quarter to 9 the previous night, and even if it says something like, you No need to reply now or something. There's still— it feels to me either it's an expectation that you should reply, but they're just covering their asses by saying no need to reply, or worse, it's someone who wants you to know they're still working.
Leanne ElliottMm-hmm.
Al ElliottBecause really, in the real world, unless you're like dealing with something which is like, you know, nuclear reactors where you do need to speak to someone straight away, then if you scheduled that email for Yeah. Then you'll— no one's— nothing's gonna happen. I think again, if you're working in a very time-sensitive operation, then perhaps it would, but that makes sense. And also, I think there are some people, and I do know of some people, um, who— well, I did not know of them— who used to schedule it, who used to write at 4 o'clock and schedule it for like quarter to 10 to look like they were still working.
Leanne ElliottI did that yesterday because I needed to ask our accountant a question, but I knew it's a bank holiday.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottSo I wrote it yesterday and I showed you this morning.
Al ElliottThat's nice.
Leanne ElliottYeah.
Al ElliottThat's nice.
Leanne ElliottSo little things, isn't it? I get what you mean. Like, it seems, well, that's obvious. That's intuitive that if somebody, you know, a leader is expecting people to always be on, that's going to have an impact. But equally, you're going to hear people going, oh, well, it's just easier for me. I don't expect them to reply. It's not about the intention. The leader could have the best of intentions, but still have this negative impact. And that's why stories like this are are quite important. And we know that once people get tired, we're looking at lower engagement, weaker performance, and eventually a higher turnover risk as well. So energy needs to be considered a business resource, and it's not. So in terms of what people can actually do, the researchers did offer some suggestions, and they did emphasise it's not one late email that matters. If you're sending— if you send one email, don't panic. It's the repeated nature of that. If you're regularly active at night, if it becomes standard, um, then it's a problem. So yeah, as we said, scheduled it for the morning. You've got the capability to do that. You can still write your email in the time that you need to, but just schedule it for another time. Second, remove ambiguity. So people— if people don't know what's expected, they'll assume that they should always be available. So be very clear about response times, what's genuinely urgent, And what the expectations are around working after hours. And third, role model boundaries. And it's so important. If you say to people as a leader, switch off, but never switch off yourself, people notice.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottAnd they're gonna associate that always-on with leadership success. Recovery will only work if it feels like it's legitimate, like you have permission to do it. So leaders, please protect your downtime. Do it visibly. Don't be available when you're on holiday. Don't be logging on when you're not very well. Hard boundaries, because it's those behavioural shifts, even though they're small, are gonna start to add up to, to something much bigger and better.
Al ElliottNice. Thank you very much. Okay. All the links are in the show notes as they always are. We're gonna have a short break, but after that, we've got our truth or lie. And the truth or lie at the moment is, or today is, leaders are born, not made. So, we'll find out whether that's true or that is a lie.
Leanne ElliottDid you know that the UK's number 1 management podcast— that's us, by the way— and the UK's number 1 marketing podcast are both on the same podcast network?
Al ElliottWe actually have a lot in common. We both use behavioural 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. Phil, host of Nudge, UK's number one marketing podcast. It's brought to you— we need to do this in threes—
Leanne Elliottthe HubSpot Podcast Network, the audio destination for business professionals.
Al ElliottSeamless, seamless. Tell us about your latest episode, Phil. Uh, 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, 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.
Al ElliottI'll cut that out. Keep that in. Welcome back. Welcome back. It's time for Truth or Lie. You should know by now, that's where we basically take an idea and I put it to Leanne and I go, is it true or is it a lie? Leanne, today, what's the truth? We are talking about leaders are born, not made.
Leanne ElliottSo when people say leaders are born, they're usually talking about one of two things.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottThey're talking about leadership as being genetic, so something you inherit like your eye colour, or they believe that it comes down to fixed personality traits. So things like confidence, intelligence, charisma.
Al ElliottSomething I've got all of those things, yes.
Leanne ElliottAll of those things.
Al ElliottYes.
Leanne ElliottSo that's people who, who believe that leaders are born. The alternative view is that leadership is a skill, it's something you can learn, and it's something you can, you can train. Researchers have tried to separate these 2 ideas to study them, and they've done this by studying twins.
Al ElliottThat's clever. I hope they call it the Gemini Project.
Leanne ElliottMaybe they did. Well, you just reminded me of Dexter. Has anyone seen the new, um, Dexter Resurrection?
Al ElliottOh yeah, yeah.
Leanne ElliottIt was really good.
Al ElliottReally good?
Leanne ElliottYeah. Are serial killers born or made?
Al ElliottI don't know.
Leanne ElliottI have to get Danny on the, on the pod for that one.
Al ElliottYes, we will do that. But can I just remind you we were talking about leaders?
Leanne ElliottYes, leaders. So we're talking about twins. We like twin studies. Psychologists love a twin study. So let's start with the case for that there is a genetic component to being a good, effective leader. So one study had looked at 247 pairs of adult twins. Of those, 183 were identical twins and 64 were fraternal twins. And that's important, Al, and I'll tell you for why. Identical twins share almost 100% of their genes, whereas fraternal twins share about 50%.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottSo they're like regular siblings. But importantly, both types of twins will grow up in a very similar environment. So we're controlling variance in terms of the environment.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottWhat that means is if identical twins are more alike in leadership style, than fraternal twins, then that extra similarity could reasonably be linked to genetics.
Al ElliottGot it. Understand it.
Leanne ElliottYes. Yeah. So the researchers took all these twins. So they have the fraternal twins, the identical twins, and if there's no difference, then it would suggest that there's no genetic component to leadership. There is a difference, then there is a genetic component. Yeah.
Al ElliottGot it. Okay.
Leanne ElliottSo, the researchers measured leadership using 3 pretty well-known questionnaires that assess things like inspirational leadership, rewards-based leadership, confidence, influence, all the things we know make effective leaders. What they found, I was genuinely quite surprised by. So, when it came to transformational leadership, so that's the very inspiring, vision-setting type of leadership, that showed a heritability estimate of 59%.
Al ElliottWow.
Leanne ElliottSo, what that means, it doesn't mean that 59% of a person's leadership is genetic. It means that when looking at why people differ from each other in terms of how effective they are at transformational leadership, about 59% of those differences can statistically be linked to genetic differences. That's quite a lot. So, there's 100 reasons why somebody's effective at transformational leadership. 59 of those are going to be genetics-based.
Al ElliottThat is quite a lot.
Leanne ElliottIt is quite a lot, isn't it? Yeah. They found a similar thing as well with transactional leadership. And I think people would probably link this more to management skills. So it's a more structured, reward-focused style of leadership. That showed a heritability estimate of 48%.
Al ElliottSo not that different. Not that different. That's fairly high.
Leanne ElliottJust less than half, yeah. That's not the only twin research either. So a much larger study analysed data from 12,000 Swedish twins, and this one looked at leadership emergence. So that's basically when, you know, when you get a group of random people and then one person will emerge as the leader of the group, like in Big Brother or Who Wants— not Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, it's all my brain, I've been watching that. I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here thing, that naturally a leader will emerge from the group. Psychologists call that leadership emergence.
Al ElliottRight.
Leanne ElliottSo they looked at this with these 12,000 twins, and they found that genetic factors explained about 44% of the variance in women and 37% in men. So again, in terms of leadership variance, there was a strong genetic component of that. Yeah? Still with me?
Al ElliottWith you so far.
Leanne ElliottOkay. We've also then looked at personality and how that potentially affects leadership effectiveness and the genetic components of that. Specifically, there was a study that looked at intelligence and the Big 5 personality traits, that includes extraversion, conscientiousness, et cetera, et cetera. Then they looked at what we know about the genetic basis of those traits.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottSo how typically they're inherited. What they found was about 70% of the differences in who emerges as a leader could be explained by inherited differences in intelligence and personality. So a much smaller Number.
Al ElliottRight. Okay.
Leanne ElliottNot quite as— so again, in very, very simple terms, if there's 100 reasons that you're a brilliant leader, then intelligence and personality is going to be about 17 of them.
Al ElliottGot it.
Leanne ElliottYeah. So smaller, but still not a small amount, you know, just less than 20%. So the point is that yes, the born argument does actually have real evidence behind it.
Al ElliottSo that's the reason For, or the case for. You have a case against, don't you?
Leanne ElliottI do. And this is when I think this is kind of a little look into how psychologists approach research when we're looking at it as a peer and how we can apply it. At this point, it sounds like leadership is largely written in your DNA, doesn't it? Like, it's fairly convincing that it's a significant proportion of that. But if we look at these studies again, the same studies, but with bit more of a critical view. So if we go back to the first study, the one with 247 twins measuring transformational, transactional leadership, yes, transformational leadership showed a heritability estimate of 59%. Transactional was 48%. But that still means that there's a good old chunk that isn't about genetics.
Al ElliottRight. The opposite number of that, 100 minus that.
Leanne ElliottExactly. So we've got 41%. 52%. So again, almost half is about the environment. It's about experience, about other factors that can support people in being a strong leader. So it kind of, it's not a huge difference, is it? It's only a little bit more than half.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottThen if we look at the larger Swedish study, the same stands. Genetic factors explain 44% of leadership variation in women, 37% in men. So actually that's less than half. So if you're flipping that, you actually realise that the majority of leadership emergence is explained by non-genetic factors.
Al ElliottRight. Okay. Well, that makes sense. Yeah.
Leanne ElliottYeah. This is also where it gets a bit interesting. So this Swedish study dug a little deeper and it found that for women, heritability was highest during mid-career and significantly lower later in life, meaning that genetic factors, the importance of genetic factors in terms of leadership emergence reduced with age. If this was a genetic component, we'd imagine it would stay fairly stable across life stages. What it's actually showing is that context in the environment that's shifting is changing how these genetic tendencies are showing up. So again, it suggests that context environment might be more important than genetic factors.
Al ElliottSo what we've got so far is That we thought, or I thought, that it was actually managers are born, but actually when you look at the statistics and flip them, then it's more likely that managers are made. Is that too simplistic?
Leanne ElliottIt's showing that at the moment it's a bit of both, isn't it? It's, it's, it's a little bit more than half in either scenario depending on the study, but it does show that the emphasis sometimes we can put on things can convince us that, oh yes, it does mean that 59% is genetic, but when you actually flip that, 41% isn't. It's not that much of a difference. In terms of other studies that might kind of go in the against category, there was a survey of some C-level executives, 361 of them. 52.4% said leaders are more made, and 19.1% said they're more born. I'm guessing the people in the middle couldn't decide.
Al ElliottVery likely.
Leanne ElliottThey thought it was a bit of both. So 52, so more than half of C-suite leaders suggested that leaders are more made.
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottAnd that's really important because if executives believe that leaders are made, they're going to prioritise development, and they're going to prioritise investing in people, and that's going to shape opportunity, and those opportunities then shape outcomes. So, in terms of the perception of executive leaders, in terms of what leadership is made up of, it's really important here that this is also as much about experience and actually having these skills developed. And then finally, there was a review by the Hugh University that described leadership as both art and craft. And it did acknowledge that some traits may have genetic roots, roughly a third, they reckon, in some cases, things like strategic thinking, communication, judgment, but also these things are highly teachable. So, while you might have a small genetic advantage, it's not to say that's the only component that's gonna decide if you are an effective leader. It almost just gives you a little bit of a head start. Like many things do in terms of how we're born and where we grow up in terms of socioeconomic background and that type of thing. So, it might give you a slight genetic advantage, but it's not enough to be the whole story in terms of whether you or somebody else is going to be a more effective leader at the end of the day. So, that's kind of where we're at with it all, that the verdict is, yeah, it's a lie.
Al ElliottOh, interesting.
Leanne ElliottLeaders are not born. They are more than likely made. It is a nuanced argument. Yes, genetics contribute depending on the study. As we saw, inherited differences explain somewhere between kind of a third and half why people vary in leadership style, but it's as much shaped by experience, opportunity, and development. I also think as well, there's a deeper question here in terms of if we took it very face value, leaders are born, Not made. Well, what does that mean for some people with traits that people are born with that make them very risky leaders?
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottSo, people on the, you know, have these dark personality traits, they're showing very confident, very dominant. We're seeing lots of that in the news at the moment. It can help people rise, but it can also lead to very toxic behaviours. And in an organisation, as we heard last week, that kind of pressure of management can reduce, can significantly impact turnover, and can damage organisations long-term if unchecked. So, I think the idea is, don't look for natural leaders. You probably won't be able to spot them. And even if you do, look deeper at character, self-awareness, ability to grow, coachability. That's what's going to make great leaders.
Al ElliottThat's brilliant. Now, if you have your own truth or lie, then get in touch because I'd love to put it to Leanne. But right now, it's time for the world-famous weekly workplace surgery, almost Got it right. Weekly Workplace Surgery, where I put your questions to Leanne. Lee, I have 3 questions, as I always do. Are you ready for question number 1?
Leanne ElliottYes.
Al ElliottSo, between a rock and a senior leader. Here we are. I'm in charge— this person writes, I'm in charge of hiring, and after a lot of work, I felt pretty happy with my shortlist of 3 very strong candidates. However, now I've been asked to expedite an application from a close relative of a senior leader. This person, they're not actually unqualified, but they're less experienced than my top picks. I'm getting subtle messages about culture fit and how this could be good for my relationship with leadership. I'm guessing this isn't your direct boss. This is one who's a bit higher. If I choose the relative, I risk losing credibility with my team. If I don't, I worry about damaging my own career prospects. Is there a way to push back without making an enemy of this person? Ooh, that is a bit toughly.
Leanne ElliottYou are between a rock and a hard place, aren't you, friend? That's, that's not an ideal thing for your leader to do, is it?
Al ElliottNo.
Leanne ElliottI think here you lean into your recruitment process, which sounds like it's pretty structured. It sounds like you've got some kind of scoring criteria to be able to say they're not unqualified, but they're less experienced than our top picks. I would look back through all of that in terms of how you've scored them across various activities throughout the recruitment process and try and demonstrate why there are people who are a stronger pick.
Al ElliottHmm.
Leanne ElliottI would then put it in, have a conversation with them and say, look, these are my top candidates that I think we should progress. To the next step. Your person did really well and they sounded great, but they are currently in third. To make sure that I'm not conducting any kind of unlawful recruitment process that is discriminatory or favouring one candidate or the other for no evidence-based reason, I'm gonna have to suggest that this is the candidate that we progress to the next stage. If they then still push back and put real pressure on you, my thought would be this needs to go in writing. You need to put this down somewhere to protect yourself, because as I said, this could be unlawful hiring practices if you're not careful. I'd be tempted then to put that into an email, reiterate exactly what you've just said, and then say something like, I'll await your, your advice in terms of how to proceed. So then you've got some kind of audit trail for it, and it's going to be really awkward and really messy and not great. But the reality is, who's— what's the bigger problem to have? And I appreciate that if you're making an enemy, in Bruni ears, of your, your senior leader, and that's gonna impact your ability to progress in the organization. My question for you would be, if this is how they approach things in terms of ethical and legal and everything else, Do you really want to progress into senior leadership of that organisation? Probably not. So, my thought would be, keep your credibility, keep your integrity, keep your team fully informed about what has happened and what the process has looked like. Don't compromise your standards. And if you are made to compromise your standards, that tells you as much about the organisation as you will ever need to know. So, I think you need to stick with your guns from this. Purely from a, it's the ethical thing to do, it's a moral thing to do, and it's also more than likely the legal thing that you need to do.
Al ElliottI think your idea of, of, of like firing a warning shot and seeing what happens, that's not the right analogy, but I think that's a great idea to send an email saying, hey, Derek, let's just assume it's a man. Hey, Derek, just thanks very much for putting forward Carol for this position. Currently, There are 2 other candidates who I think are actually better. Um, and then—
Leanne ElliottAnd these are my evidence points as to why.
Al ElliottYeah, these are my evidence points as to why. Um, just want to check you're okay with me, with me carrying on this way, brackets, or if you want to come and meet the candidates, something like that. What you're trying to do there is not necessarily get a decision, but just find out how they react. Because if they react and go, absolutely fine, yeah, yeah, whatever you think, then great. But if they say that and then corner you in the lift on the way back, way down on a Friday afternoon and go, You better give Carol a job or else you've got problems. You've just answered your own question.
Leanne ElliottAgreed.
Al ElliottYeah, agreed. Okay. Question number 2, where did their spark go? I manage a team of 12, and until recently, a few of them were absolute superstars. Proactive, full of ideas, always one step ahead. Now they're just fine. They hit deadlines, they do what's asked, but that extra energy seems to have gone. Meetings are quieter, emails take longer. No one's bringing new ideas to the table. Now, nobody's resigning, and I don't think anyone plans to. So on paper, everything's fine. But to me, it just doesn't feel fine. It just, it just feels flat. How do I raise this with my team without sounding dramatic or even accusing people of quiet quitting? Which sounds exactly what they've done, isn't it, Leanne?
Leanne ElliottIt does sound a bit like that. Yeah. And I think this is gonna have to start with a little bit of reflection on your part. What's changed? Something has changed in the environment, in the organisation. That has now encouraged people to shift their behaviour to be quiet quitting, if that's what you want to call it, or less engaged. Typical things are going to be big decisions made in the organisation they've had no control over, like layoffs, for example. It could be broken promises. If you've promised a bonus and that didn't come through— by you, I mean the organisation—
Al ElliottMm-hmm.
Leanne ElliottPromised a bonus, promised promotion, Promised reduced workloads once this major project got, um, got completed. The final thing could be is if the dynamics of the group have changed. Is anybody left? Has there been any infighting, any incivility that you've, you've recognized? Has the jobs of these individuals significantly changed over the past few months? Something has changed that is environmental that has now impacted how your team is thinking and feeling about their business, and that impacts how they're behaving, and that's what you're seeing. So, you're going to have to do some thinking and investigating in terms of what those potential things could be. Then it's a case of talking to your team about them and saying, look, I've seen a bit of a shift, and that's okay, because we're still hitting deadlines and you're doing everything that I've asked.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottThat spark's gone, that enthusiasm's gone. I'm wondering if it's down to one of these 3 things that have happened over the last 12 months. Is that the case? Is there something else going on that I should be aware of? And see what people say. You could also do this in survey form if you're not quite confident enough having those, those conversations. You could use something like the HSE Management Standards. You could use the RX7 that we use at Oblong to understand how people are thinking and feeling in your business.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottReally, it's getting down to the bottom of what has changed in the environment that has now impacted the individuals in your team. So, rather than think about how to fix it and how to maybe assign blame to people for quiet quitting, figure out why, define the problem first, and then you should be able to think of a solution.
Al ElliottExcellent advice. And also, I probably would think, look at what's happened perhaps in other departments or other parts of the culture, because it sounds like if The no one's bringing new ideas, then either they're quiet quitting, they can't be asked, or they're a bit afraid. So maybe, maybe something happened where someone brought a new idea in a different department and they got shot down for it, or they got blamed for a big project disaster or something. So maybe just bear that in mind. Well, good luck with that. Last question, Lee. Do I expose my boss? Now, the temptation to say, do I expose myself to my boss, is almost too much, but— We want to— So I'm just— read it, Al. I'm part of a major project that directly impacts a big chunk of our revenue. In internal meetings, we all know it's behind. Key features aren't working. Suppliers are causing delays. It's messy. However, when my manager updates the CEO, everything is presented as on track. I sit there listening to it and feel sick. Now, if I stay quiet, I'm complicit. If I go above my manager's head, I could seriously damage my career and probably my manager's. What's the right move here, Leanne? P.S., I do like my manager and I worry this will be them getting fired, but thoughts, Lee?
Leanne ElliottHave you had a conversation with your manager about why they're doing this?
Al ElliottGreat question.
Leanne ElliottBecause you're already talking about 2 extremes, really, 2 absolutes. You either stay quiet or you go above your manager's head and potentially blow up her position in the organisation. I'd maybe start with a conversation with your manager in terms of why This might be. There could potentially be a very good reason. It could be, so this manager update is the CEO. Is there another stakeholder involved that is advising your manager not to mention this to the CEO? Maybe it's the CFO who is hoping that he's going to land another major revenue project, and then they'll tell the CEO what was, what's been going on or going wrong. There could well be factors here that are out of your manager's control, or that you don't, and/or you don't know about.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne ElliottSo, I think really the first thing is to have a conversation with your manager. In the scenario that your manager says, I just can't face telling the CEO what's happened because I worry I'm going to lose my job, then it's really a case of counselling them in a way that would be, yeah, but if they find out—
Al ElliottYou're going to lose your job anyway.
Leanne ElliottYeah. So, really it's about damage limitation here and how you can can manage that. And I think really it's then making it clear that you are, you are compromising your position through the dishonesty. And really it's, it's being clear that, you know, if you're asked a direct question on this, you're not gonna lie. And maybe give her a time frame. Say, you know, I'll give you a week to sort this, sort this all out, but if not, I just feel that morally I need to go and speak to somebody else about it.
Al ElliottYeah.
Leanne Elliottabout this because it could potentially be doing longer-term damage to the business. It's a balance, isn't it, between protecting yourself and giving your manager the chance to do the right thing? And I think that's where I'd— that's a route I'd go down. I'd have that conversation, give them the chance to fix it, and if not, it might be time to be the whistleblower.
Al ElliottOkay, if you have your own question that you'd like me to put to Leanne, then check out the show notes. There's a way to get in touch. I think that's all for now. This Thursday we have— he called himself the father at Facebook because he was about employee number 50 at Facebook and everyone else was about 19, and I think he was in his mid-40s. A guy called Tom Lenoble. Really, really interesting guy. Just honestly, I think you're gonna absolutely love this episode if you love stories, if you love drama, if you love drag, if you love Facebook. And if you want to know why, um, why— what's the name? What's the guy from Facebook called?
Leanne ElliottMark Zuckerberg.
Al ElliottWhy Zuck met him 10 years later for lunch, then you absolutely have to listen to Thursday's. Anything else to add before we go, Lee?
Leanne ElliottNope, the usual. Subscribe, LinkedIn. Yeah, see ya.
Al ElliottHave a lovely week.
Leanne ElliottBye.
Al ElliottSee you Thursday. Bye-bye.