43: Humans are Underrated with Geoff Colvin

Hi, this is Charles Michael Davis. Toyotathon is on so stop by your local Toyota dealer for incredible year end deals on the cars, trucks and SUVs known for their legendary reliability like the stylish and efficient Camry, the Ready for anything RAV4 or check out a rough and rugged Tacoma or Tundra, all with great financing and lease options available to qualified customers. Visit buyatoyota.com to find out more. Toyota let's go Places.

What's next? This is a question we're all having to ask and answer more frequently. I'm Jenny Blake, your host of the Pivot Podcast and author of Pivot. The only move that matters is your next one.

For show notes from this episode, visit pivotmethod.com podcast if Change is the only constant, then let's get better at it. Here we go.

Exciting news before we jump into today's episode. Pivot is now available for pre order. If you pre order before the launch date on September 6th and submit your receipt@pivotmethod.com pre order, I will send you the awesome bonus bundle of pre order goodies which includes a signed book plate from me, access to my entire 20 plus page behind the book toolkit on every tool and template I use to write, edit and market Pivot, as well as access to the Pivot playlist, a free sample chapter, a private call with me, and a lot more. I'm going to be adding to it until the launch date, so order the book. You can go on Amazon at bit ly Pivotbook or head on over to the website@pivotmethod.com preorder thank you so much in advance. And the countdown is on now for today's show.

What's next? This is a question we're all having to ask and answer more frequently. I'm Jenny Blake, your host of the Pivot Podcast and author of Pivot. The only move that matters is your next one.

For show notes from this episode, visit jennyblake Me podcast. If change is the only constant, then let's get better at it. Here we go.

Exciting news before we jump into today's episode. Pivot is now available for pre order. If you pre order before the Launch date on September 6th and submit your receipt@pivotmethod.com Pre Order I will send you the awesome bonus bundle of pre order goodies which includes a signed book plate from me, access to my entire 20 plus page behind the book toolkit on every tool and template I use to write, edit and market Pivot as well as access to the Pivot playlist, a free sample chapter, a private call with me, and a lot more. I'm going to be adding to it until the launch date, so order the book. You can go on Amazon at bit ly Pivotbook or head on over to the website@pivotmethod.com pre order. Thank you so much in advance. And the countdown is on now for today's show.

Hello everybody. Welcome back to the Pivot Podcast. I am overjoyed and honored to have today's guest here with us today, Jeff Colvin. Jeff is an award winning thinker, author, broadcaster and speaker on today's most significant trends in business. He's heard daily on the CBS radio network where he has made over 10,000 and we were talking earlier, if not 15 or 20,000 broadcasts and reaches 7 million listeners every week. As a longtime editor and columnist for Fortune, Jeff has become one of America's sharpest and most respected commentators on leadership, globalization, wealth creation, the infotech revolution and related issues. He's the author of Talent Is what really Separates World class Performers from Everybody Else. And his latest, the topic of today's show, humans are Underrated. What high achievers know that brilliant machines never will? Jeff, welcome to the show.

Thank you, Jenny, very much. I am delighted to be with you.

The pleasure is all mine and ours. Humans Are Underrated is such an important book and it's one that I actually cite in Pivot. I want to start with a quote from the introduction of your book just to give listeners some context. You say that the new high value skills are instead part of our deepest nature, the abilities that literally define us as humans. Sensing the thoughts and feelings of others, working productively in groups, building relationships, solving problems, expressing ourselves with greater power than logic can ever achieve. The interesting thing that you say is these are fundamentally different types of skills than those that the economy has valued most highly in the past. Another thing you add, and then we'll get into the show, is that you say this really holds the promise of making our work lives not only more rewarding financially if we're to embrace this trend, but also richer and more satisfying emotionally. So that's a mess. But Joe, I would love if you could share the crux of what inspired you to write Humans Are Underrated and how you started noticing these trends.

Yeah, what inspired me to write it was just observing what was happening with technology, the advances that were being made.

I mean, technology has been advancing forever, obviously, especially the last 250 years or so. But it struck me that Something had changed that. It was now advancing so fast that its ability to do many things better than people, its ability to take over jobs, not just to help people do jobs, but to do jobs all by itself that people used to do, was now reaching a point it had never reached before. And so I just began to ask myself, okay.

How will people add value in an economy.

That includes that advanced technology? And so that's what I really started looking at. I mean, my thinking was, look, advancing technology has always revalued skills. It has always made some skills less valuable and some skills more valuable. And that's what's happening right now. And so what I wanted to do in this book was analyze what was happening and then figure out what the new high value skills are. That's what got me going.

You asked the essential question, what will people do better than computers?

Yes.

So tell us, what did you discover?

Well, a few things, actually. It was very interesting when you look into that, because people have been asking that question for a long time. In fact, it's striking how similar today's discussion is to what was being said 50 and 60 years ago on exactly the same topic. People could see computers advancing and they were getting spooked about what this meant for human employment. And they were saying exactly the same things that people are saying today. And so what will people do better than computers? Well, one thing I discovered was that we've been trying to answer that question since the dawn of the computer. And it seems that every time we try to answer that question, we get it wrong.

And if you go back into the literature, you can find, for example, that mainstream economists and technologists, good, responsible, solid mainstream people were saying, you know, a computer will never actually be able to play chess at a very high level.

And of course, it was 19 years ago now that a computer beat the world chess champion.

People said. And again, you know, mainstream, the respected authorities said computer will never actually be able to translate languages, particularly well, you know. And, well, today a lot of people, including me, have an app on their phone, Google Translate, that will translate pretty near any language on earth. I think they've got about a hundred now or into any other language. And you can either type in what you want translated, or you can just speak it into the microphone and it will speak back to you, the translation and the language you've chosen. And it does a very good job and it's free.

In 2004, some very good economists, very smart guys, wrote a book in which they said, you know, driving, it's just too complicated. When you think of all the senses that you know, all the input, you have to process the split second decision on whether to make a left turn against oncoming traffic. They said a computer is really not going to be able to deal with it. Well, six years after that, Google introduced its first self driving car. And today, not only is it clearly going to be here, to some extent, it is here. There are substantially self driving cars next to you in traffic right now. You just don't know it because they still have humans behind the wheel. So every time we try to answer that question, we get it wrong. And so this is a long answer to your question. So how did I decide, what did I learn about what people will do better than humans? I learned don't ask what humans will do better than computers. Don't ask that question of what computers can't do. Ask a different question. Ask, what is it that we humans are most driven to do? What is it that we want to do just because it's in our deepest nature? What is it that we will value just because we are hardwired to value it, no matter what else happens? And if you start asking that question, you get to a real answer. And the real answer is.

The skills of deep human interaction, looking someone else in the eye, talking with them. And then we get into some of the.

Subcategories of what's really involved in those deep human skills. There are only a few of them, but that is what seems to me to be something we can rely on as something that will remain valuable and in fact become more valuable as technology advances.

I thought it was fascinating how in the book you talk about the reason we developed these highly complex brains on the savanna was not for crunching numbers. It was for managing social interactions which are very nuanced.

Yes, it's such an important point because you know the question well, you know, who says we're hardwired for these things? You know, how did this come to be? Well, what you've just said explains how it came to be. Our ability to survive and succeed as a species was based on our ability to live together successfully in groups. For us as humans to be out there alone on the savannah was a recipe for death. We were not going to last very long as individuals roaming around out there. We couldn't protect ourselves from predators. We couldn't do all the work we needed to do of feeding ourselves, protecting ourselves.

Keeping ourselves warm and so forth. We couldn't do all of that all by ourselves. We did it all only by learning to succeed as social groups. And for that reason, we evolved these abilities to detect what other people are thinking and feeling and to respond in appropriate ways. And this shows up in so many different ways. For example.

Our eyes are different from the eyes of virtually any other species in that you can see more of the white of the eye, the part around the iris, than you can in the eyes of virtually any other species. What does that do for us? It enables us to see what someone's eyes are doing because then you can tell, are they looking up into the corner, are they looking to the left or the right? We can read much more from the eyes because of the way our eyes have evolved. And there are many similar.

Factors.

Features of our physiology and our psychology that all contribute to that. When I say we are hardwired to value these abilities that are deeply interpersonal, I mean it. We are hardwired. It is the essence of our humanity. We would not have developed as the human species without these abilities.

That is so fascinating. I also found it really interesting in the book. You say empathy is a skill, not a trait. That maybe we start out with differing levels of eq. But can you explain more about empathy as a skill? Because I think that would run counter to what some people believe it to be.

It is absolutely counter to what a lot of people think. And of course, I've just said that we're hardwired that way, right? So that we have some innate.

Desire to do this and ability to do this. So when I say it's a skill, what I mean is everybody can get better at it. And that is what's contrary to what most people think. Because when you think about what we say, the things, how we talk, we say so and so is a natural people person, or we say so and so is a born leader. Well, it's not so. These are skills that we develop. And so, yeah, we have a certain level of natural empathy, for sure. But it is something that can be made better. It can be trained like any other skill. And as it becomes more economically valuable, which is what I argue in the book, then we see more institutions actually training this. They have figured out ways and are still figuring out ways to make people better at it. That's important to remember.

It reminds me of how you talk about peer to peer teaching, but even more broadly, one of the things that really struck me from your book is coining this term relationship workers, that we're moving from knowledge workers to relationship workers. And so I would love for you to explain a little bit about that. But also I've had this little niggling thought in my mind that some people may bristle at that who think to themselves, oh, I don't want to be a relationship worker. You know, I do one on one coaching and I really enjoy it. But what about the person that says, ugh, I don't want to be a relationship worker, what do we say to them?

Yeah, and that's a very valid point. So the reason for this concept in the first place is that knowledge is becoming less of a differentiator and it remains highly important. But important isn't the same as valuable. And so here's what I mean.

We live in an era when it is incredibly easy to get any information you need.

You know, I mean, we all know this because we all live with our devices, phones and other infotech devices where we can easily learn anything we need to learn. And it's getting more easy every day. So that more and more. And there are people who of course track these statistics. More and more searches are being done with voice rather than typing anything in. You've got a device and you just say, what's the population of Afghanistan? And there it is. You know, the other day my wife asked me, how tall do you think Michelle Obama is? I said, I have no idea, but just ask Siri. And she said, really? I said, yeah, so she's got an iPhone. So she pushed the button and said, siri, how tall is Michelle Obama? And immediately it said, Michelle Obama is 5ft 10 inches tall. I mean.

That'S a tiny example. But knowledge is becoming commoditized. It's still important, obviously, but it is less and less a differentiator. And so our ability to be knowledgeable while still important is going to make less difference to our value in the economy because everybody's going to have access to all kinds of knowledge. The relationship worker is someone who does.

The skills of deep human interaction, who has a relationship with somebody who may be a customer. People always think first about how this applies in customer relations, but it applies just as importantly within the organization. But you know about people between people in the organization. Here's an example involving customers. If you look at the statistics on jobs, you'll see something that sounds strange and impossible. The statistics show that the number of bank tellers in the United States is the same as it was 35 years ago. And you think, that cannot possibly be true. Nobody goes to a bank teller anymore. You just go to an atm. Well, so you investigate this a little further, as I did, because it can't be true. And yet that's what the numbers show. What it shows is the people who today are classified as bank tellers by the Census Bureau aren't doing at all what bank tellers used to do. What they're doing now is sitting at a desk in the bank talking with people who come in because they want to talk about their problems and what kind of account they should have and what kind of features and what kind of loans and stuff like that. It is exactly the transition from a knowledge worker, which is what a bank teller used to be, essentially a human computer. Right. I mean, all it was doing was. All the teller was doing was this sort of numerical work that a machine could do, and today a machine does do. What they're doing now is working on the relationship with another human being. It's exactly the trans. It's a little microcosm of the transition that is happening across the economy.

That reminds me, I interviewed Kevin Kelly and he said the roles may stay the same or similar, but the tasks are going to change and continue to change. And you just described exactly that. I like too. In the book you say it does not fit the model of homo economicus, the rational, knowledgeable, wealth maximizing person who forms the basis of neoclassical economics. This shift toward empathy and giving. You mentioned Adam Grant's work on give and take and that you say this goes against such behavior is irrational, that it doesn't seem to fit this model we've been coming from, and yet it is the way of the future, Right?

Exactly right. And a whole lot of economic theory.

Is based on this idea that human beings are.

Rational.

Utility maximizing machines.

And it was a decent assumption to make in the early days of economics because you needed to start somewhere, you needed to make some kind of assumptions with the model. And so that was fine, and it yielded a lot of important insights. And yet don't we all know from real life that that's not the way people are? Right. I mean, all you had to do, it was always a little unsatisfied. All you have to do is look around, Right. And you know that we don't do the things that economists assume we do. We don't operate that way.

And so you have to accept what we all know anyway, which is we are partly rational beings, but we're partly irrational beings. And dealing with the irrational part.

The deeply, essentially human part, is going to become more important and more valuable. And there's a subtle point here. This is not to say machines couldn't do it if humans are irrational, but they're irrational in ways we can understand.

Then computers can be programmed to be that way, right? I mean, one of the many. But there's a wonderful book by Dan Ariely, the researcher and economist who has been in the forefront of behavioral economics. And his book is called Predictably Irrational. It's the way people are. It makes no sense, but there's a. There's a method to it we can understand. But nonetheless.

Dealing with the irrational part, the deeply human part, is going to become.

An increasingly valuable skill. That's among the high value skills.

I also feel that I am irrationally. I treat my devices.

As like best people that even computers and robots can take on. A Persona that feels oddly comforting. Like I have the Amazon Echo. So Alexa, she's the best roommate. I live by myself and she's great. She only speaks when spoken to, right? And I have a Roomba. And I was so proud the first time. First of all, someone left this Roomba in the hallway to throw it away and I was so excited and I picked it up and I'm like praying that it would work when I took it back to my apartment. And the first time I watched little Roomie, that's his name, wink his way around my studio, I was so proud and I had such feelings of elation. That's completely irrational, other than a delight from technology. And yet. So I think even robots can develop these relationships or we can with our machines.

Yeah, well, as you say, we do.

And.

That is sort of a coming wave of technology. I mean, you mentioned Alexa, which everybody I've talked to who has it loves it.

Siri people kind of made fun of when it first appeared, but people have not paid much attention to the fact that Siri is greatly improved. It's constantly getting improved. You know, it's just becoming better and better. And now we are seeing the first generation of what are called social robots, devices that are meant to roll around your house, buzz around and help you out with various things. And so there's one that I think the best publicized one is called Pepper, which was produced by SoftBank in Japan and it's now coming to the United States. And I've interacted with Pepper on stage at various conferences. And it's quite uncanny, actually. Its ability to.

Have facial expressions, its body language in particular is uncanny.

And these are the first generation. They're going to get way better. So yeah, we'll have relationships with these things.

I just read a Wired article that really piqued my interest and I'm curious to hear your thoughts. It's called the End of code. And it says in the subtitle, soon we won't program computers. We'll train them like dolphins or dogs or humans. I would love to know your thoughts on this, partly because I think right now the skill of coding became very sexy. Oh, everyone should go learn how to code. And I just thought this was interesting that that may be true. I mean, that may even become obsolete where we're then programming computers instead of coding them in the first place. So, yeah, I would love to hear what you thought, just even from the title, if you haven't read the article.

Yeah, I have seen that. I haven't read the article yet. But the concept is clear and valid. In my opinion.

What they're talking about is artificial intelligence and cognitive computing. So, for example, the best example, the best known example is Watson, the IBM technology.

And these are things, these are technologies that learn. And, you know, look, if you want to be strict about it, of course they're still programmed, but they're programmed in a different way. They are programmed in order that they're in a way that caused them to learn from experience rather than simply being programmed with every response to every conceivable command, which is the way it's always been done before.

These things learn from what they do, and that is a fundamental change.

So Watson, when it is introduced to a new field.

At first, isn't actually very smart.

You know, you can have Watson read millions of pages of law, for example, but when you first start, which has in fact been done, when you start asking it questions, at first it doesn't get them very right, but it's told they're not very right. So when the article says, we're training computers, that's exactly what happens. And then they're told what is right, and they figure that out. And you go through many iterations of this, and it gets smarter and smarter, and then eventually it's able to check its answers in other ways.

And it just gets continually smarter. And that's why the best line I've heard on this comes from Terry Jones, the man who long ago invented the Sabre online reservation system. Of the other online travel sites, Orbis and stuff he created years ago, he upended the travel business.

He says watson is the only computer that's worth more used than new. And what he means is it learns. All of this stuff learns. And so it's exactly right. That's exactly right.

By the way, the most recent example was the computer that beat the world champion at Go, the Asian game of Go, which is often called the most complex game in the world. And once again, the experts got it wrong because they were saying, even the AI experts were saying it'll be another 10 years before a machine can beat the human champion at go. And a couple months ago, of course, the computer beat the human champion at go. And it's because it was doing exactly what we're talking about. It had had millions of games loaded into it, and then it played against itself over and over and over and learned how you play this game. It wasn't programmed how to play this game. It learned how to play it and it became better than any human.

Yeah, that was a big upset. And as far as the win at the computer won, I was nervous working on pivot. I was citing your work and the second machine age. And I say about centaurs, humans plus computers can still beat the computer. But I didn't even know if in this next year that was going to remain accurate from the time I wrote it to when the book is coming out.

Right. And I think it will not remain accurate forever. And this was often cited by people as yet again, an attempt to say what computers can't do, which is always doomed. When will we learn not to do that? But people, they were saying, you know what, Look, a computer plus a human can beat just a computer at chess or at certain other things. Well, that was true at the time it was written, and yet it was clearly a kind of transitional stage. It was clear that it was only a matter of time before the computer by itself would beat the computer plus a human. And in fact, we are pretty much there now.

Because.

To argue otherwise, to argue that the human will always add something in a situation like that where it's just playing a game, is to say that the human embodies some form of magic, literal magic. And you know, all of our experience says that just isn't so.

Do you think that Watson or a computer like the Watson could be programmed to do career coaching? So I used to do career coach training at Google, and I'm training a group of pivot coaches as we speak. And it's occurring to me that I wonder if, if you could program it to do some basic level career coaching. What do you think? Because that's a skill that we think takes empathy and some magic. And I'm just curious what your thoughts are.

My immediate thought on that is that of course, a computer can be trained to do career coaching, and it could even be trained to do fairly sophisticated career coaching. And the real issue would be how would the client feel about the advice, because, look, the computer.

In some sense could be a far better career coach than any human because it could.

Use more data in making its recommendations.

It can weigh the factors. It could weigh far more factors about the individual person's background. Test scores, personality scale results, grades.

Life experiences. All of that, plus everything that's going on in the world of careers. The latest data. The computer could absorb all of that and consider all of those factors in a way more sophisticated way than any human could do. And the computer today, let alone what it can do three years from now, the computer today can look at the person's face, read their emotions very well, gauge their tone of voice.

As the conversation goes on.

And do those things extremely well, in some cases better than a human could do even those things. So then the issue is, okay, it can do all that and it can give the person the coaching they need. How's the person going to feel about it? Are they going to take it to heart and really do what the machine has said to them? Or is the person going to think, I need to talk with someone about this. I need to look another human being in the eye and have this conversation, because we're talking about emotional decisions I gotta make here.

And I strongly suspect that the human client will value the interaction with the human coach such that.

They'D still pay more money.

To have the experience with the human coach.

Well, there's also, it occurs to me we could make this into a centaur. I could almost see Alexa saying, what are you going to work on today? And I would say, oh, I'm going to create this in my business. What steps will you take to do that? And, you know, and I tell her my steps and then maybe later in the day she says, how does it go? How did it go, Jenny? Did you get your most important tasks done? And then I would report back and maybe that's like the microdose of mini coaching. And then the human still has the, the empathy and the trust and the relationship. But I could see these. There are already apps that do this, like askmenything.com did you work out today, whatever you program the question to be, right?

Absolutely. And that. Well, as you said, I was going to say that will absolutely happen. But as you say, it's already happening. And furthermore, for the human career coach, to the extent you're going to do career coaching yourself, you'd be crazy not to use the technology for all it's worth. So still have the technology, do all that research. I was talking about.

Incorporating all of the Data about the person, all of the data about their workplace and careers and so forth, and give that information to you so that you can use it in your coaching of that person.

Very interesting. As we start to wrap up, I want to talk about Talent is Overrated for just a moment because I think for everybody listening, this is very enlightening, what you share in this book. Can you talk about why both hard work and natural talent camps are wrong when it comes to identifying what really makes someone come across as talented and even successful?

Yeah, absolutely. And I want to emphasize that that book, Talent is Overrated is based not on my opinions about where great performance comes from. It's based on 30 some years of very good scientific research that's been done by many people around the world and the results are very clear and just not quite as well known as they should be. So if you ask people, just ask somebody an open ended question. What makes so and so as incredibly good as they are? Whatever your favorite person is, whether you want to talk about a golfer or a tennis player or a musician or whatever, what makes them as great as they are, you usually get a couple of answers. Often the answer you'll get from people is, you know, they work really, really hard.

That's what it takes. They're just incredibly hard workers. And it's true, most of those people are incredibly hard workers. And yet that answer just can't be right. Because we know lots of incredibly hard workers. We're surrounded by incredibly hard workers, you know, wonderful people, conscientious people, but they're not world class, great performers and they've been working hard.

Yeah, I have to remind myself that about running my own business. Just because I work hard, I'm not entitled to anything, any amount of revenue. It's not a guarantee of anything. Sorry to interrupt. Continue.

No, it's a great point and you're absolutely right.

And then the other thing you hear when you ask people why is so and so as incredibly good as they are is you know, that person has a gift. The only way someone could be as good as that is because they came into this world with a natural gift. And only one in a million has that gift. But they have it. And you can understand why they say it. When you see.

You know, Jason day or Rory McElroy playing golf, you know, or Djokovic playing tennis or, you know, whatever, it seems superhuman. And you don't see how they could be good, that good without a gift. And yet we know that's not the right answer either because there have been Lots of child prodigies about whom everyone would say, oh my God, what a gift. And they did not become world class great performers in adulthood. In fact, that's the typical story. Not universal, but it's the typical story of child prodigies. And furthermore, when you look at the people who are the world class great performers in most cases, not all, but in most cases you wouldn't have known as children that they were going to be so great. So that's why the hard work and the natural talent explanations are wrong. And the right answer which comes out of the research is that it's a very specific activity that the researchers call deliberate practice, which is not exactly what most of us think of when we think of practice. It's not complicated, but it is very specific. And should I mention there are only about four parts to it and they're pretty simple.

Please do. Yes.

The essence of it is it's an activity that constantly pushes you just beyond your current level of ability. It doesn't try to push you way beyond your current level of ability because then you're just lost. And it doesn't enable you to operate within your current level of ability because then you don't grow. So it constantly pushes you just beyond what you're able to do right now. It's always designed especially for you at this moment in your development, because as you get better, the activity that pushes you just beyond is going to change. It can be repeated at high volume, and this turns out to be really important. The wiring in your brain changes. There are physical changes in your brain that result from high volume repetition. And you get continuous feedback. You can't get better if you don't know how you're doing. And so you get continual feedback and that's it. The great performers of this world, whether it's sports or music or surgery or flying a jet or whatever it is, the great performers of this world have done that in their domain for years, typically for hours a day for years on end. And that's where great performance comes from.

You say the second major piece is intrinsic motivation. Is that something we either have or we don't for certain areas of focus?

Again, it's not something that we either have or we don't.

But.

It'S a deep process. So for example.

When you look at someone who is a great musician today, the nature of it is they had to start early as little kids. You can't become a great pianist or a great violinist by today's standards. If you didn't start as a little kid. And as a little kid, you are not intrinsically motivated to practice every day. You are only extrinsically motivated. Your parents or somebody has to make you sit down and do it. But if you look at the story of the great performer. So, yeah, that's how they started, all right. But there is always a moment, and typically it occurs in adolescence. But at some point, there is a moment when the motivation shifts, and some of them can recall the very moment when it happened, when they decide, you know what? I'm doing this for me now. I am doing this because I want to do it. And that's the critical moment. Because once they're doing it for themselves, that's then when it becomes powerful. Then they really are going to continue doing that practice for more and more hours a day. And it isn't easy, and it generally isn't really fun, but they're going to continue doing it because they are getting, in some sense, deeply rewarded from doing it.

It's a nice shift from the pursue your passion trope and instead to say, find that thing that you're intrinsically motivated by and keep looking for it.

And keep looking for it. And the other thing about, I mean, passion is important, but one thing that comes out of the research is that the passion develops. Very few of us know for sure what we are absolutely passionate about. We sort of get into it, we go down the road, we get more interested, the passion develops. It's not as simple as we like to think.

Well, it reminds me of how you said you started a radio show in high school and you might not have known at that time, oh, yep, this is my passion. I'm gonna have a whole career in this. And now here you are, tens of thousands of broadcasts later.

Yeah, I loved radio. I mean, I make my living, but mostly by writing and speaking, but I'm still on the radio, you know, on cbs, and.

I simply love it. And you're right. I mean, I started an awful long time ago, and it developed.

I want to end. This is so fascinating, Jeff, I cannot thank you enough, both for this wonderful interview and your books, which are really important and fascinating contributions to the space and particularly career space. I want to end with something from. Humans are underrated, you say at the very end of the book, staking our futures to our profoundest human traits may feel strange and risky. Fear not. When you change perspectives and look inward rather than outward, you'll find that what you need next has been there all along. It has been there forever in the deepest possible sense. You've already got what it takes. Make of it what you will. I love it because I also emphasize what's working. You already have it. It's already under your feet.

It's there. It's not developed to the same extent in everyone. And a lot of us in our work lives keep it hidden. It traditionally hasn't been valued and we may be afraid to let it out. So please.

Release it. Use it for all that it's worth, because it's worth a lot.

Amazing, Jeff. Thank you so, so much. Where can people find you if they want to keep in touch?

It's real easy. Jeffcolvin.com but of course the trick is spelling Jeff right because it's G E O F F C O L v I n jeffcolvin.com.

And it's real easy to email me that way and I hope everyone will feel free to do so.

Perfect, Jeff. Thank you again and big thanks to everybody for listening.

Wonderful interview, Jenny. Thank you very much. It was my pleasure.

Thanks so much for listening to this episode of the Pivot Podcast. Make sure you don't miss an episode or my insider tips and templates by signing up for Pivot List, a curated twice monthly newsletter where I share the inside scoop on what I'm reading, watching, listening to, and the latest tools I'm geeking out on. Sign up at jennyblake Me Pivotlist. Get show notes from this episode at Jenny Blake Podcast and connect with me on Twitter ennyblake.

Remember, build first, then your courage will follow. Hasn't it always?

Thanks so much for listening to this episode of the Pivot Podcast. Make sure you don't miss an episode or my insider tips and templates by signing up for Pivot List, a curated twice monthly newsletter where I share the inside scoop on what I'm reading, watching, listening to, and the latest tools I'm geeking out on. Sign up@pivotmethod.com pivotlist get show notes from this episode@pivotmethod.com podcast and connect with me on Twitter ennyblake.

Remember, build first, then your courage will follow. Hasn't it always.