WEBVTT 00:00:02.579 --> 00:00:06.179 Matt Abrahams: One of the biggest barriers to interpersonal communication 00:00:06.339 --> 00:00:10.640 is our concern that people aren't interested in what we have to say. 00:00:11.109 --> 00:00:15.269 If we're just a little bit more social, we can dramatically change 00:00:15.269 --> 00:00:17.269 the impact of our communication. 00:00:17.939 --> 00:00:21.160 My name's Matt Abrahams, and I teach Strategic Communication at 00:00:21.160 --> 00:00:22.990 Stanford Graduate School of Business. 00:00:23.339 --> 00:00:26.790 Welcome to Think Fast Talk Smart, the podcast. 00:00:27.370 --> 00:00:29.439 Today, I look forward to learning from Nick Epley. 00:00:29.779 --> 00:00:33.779 Nick is a professor of behavioral science at the University of Chicago Booth School 00:00:33.779 --> 00:00:38.289 of Business, where he also directs the Roman Family Center for Decision Research. 00:00:38.649 --> 00:00:42.980 Nick's research focuses on how people make inferences about the minds of others and 00:00:42.980 --> 00:00:45.820 why we routinely misunderstand each other. 00:00:45.849 --> 00:00:49.930 His first book is called Mindwise: How We Understand What Others Think, 00:00:50.110 --> 00:00:54.289 Believe, Feel, and Want, and his latest book is A Little More Social: 00:00:54.550 --> 00:00:58.950 How Small Choices Create Unexpected Happiness, Health, and Connection. 00:01:00.000 --> 00:01:00.759 Welcome, Nick. 00:01:00.800 --> 00:01:02.509 I am so excited to chat with you. 00:01:02.509 --> 00:01:07.670 You have the distinction of being the person most cited by other guests, 00:01:07.859 --> 00:01:12.439 from Charles Duhigg to Katy Milkman to Laurie Santos, and I am so glad to 00:01:12.439 --> 00:01:14.109 finally get a chance to talk to you. 00:01:14.350 --> 00:01:15.130 Thanks for being here. 00:01:15.520 --> 00:01:15.730 Nick Epley: Yeah. 00:01:15.730 --> 00:01:16.069 Thank you. 00:01:16.069 --> 00:01:17.039 That is very flattering. 00:01:17.039 --> 00:01:20.100 And you should be flattered to know that one of your recent guests, Sonja 00:01:20.100 --> 00:01:23.350 Lyubomirsky, also said, who she does a lot of podcasts, said this was 00:01:23.350 --> 00:01:24.569 one of the favorite that she'd done. 00:01:24.800 --> 00:01:26.100 Matt Abrahams: Well, that's very kind of Sonja. 00:01:26.100 --> 00:01:29.160 We've known each other a long time, and we had a great conversation. 00:01:29.160 --> 00:01:30.189 So shall we get started? 00:01:30.410 --> 00:01:31.249 Nick Epley: Yes, absolutely. 00:01:31.499 --> 00:01:34.209 Matt Abrahams: So in your book Mindwise, you discuss how we are 00:01:34.209 --> 00:01:39.179 fundamentally overconfident in our ability to read other people's minds. 00:01:39.450 --> 00:01:43.749 We often rely on what you call outside perspective, things like 00:01:43.800 --> 00:01:46.859 the way people use their bodies, facial expressions, to really 00:01:46.859 --> 00:01:48.999 figure out what someone is thinking. 00:01:49.179 --> 00:01:50.679 Why is this the wrong approach? 00:01:50.679 --> 00:01:53.910 Why are we ineffective, and how can we get better using what 00:01:53.910 --> 00:01:55.709 you call the inside perspective? 00:01:56.079 --> 00:01:58.590 Nick Epley: So the thing that really makes us stand out on the 00:01:58.590 --> 00:02:02.310 planet as a species, at least from a psychologist's perspective, is our 00:02:02.310 --> 00:02:04.100 ability to think about other people. 00:02:04.100 --> 00:02:07.689 Much of our neural capacity here, this fat part of our brain up above our 00:02:07.689 --> 00:02:12.239 eyes, is dedicated to social cognition, thinking about other thinking people. 00:02:12.579 --> 00:02:16.380 The problem is that other people's minds are the most complicated things you will 00:02:16.380 --> 00:02:18.179 ever think about, and so we're imperfect. 00:02:18.449 --> 00:02:20.929 We're imperfect, though, in predictable ways. 00:02:21.299 --> 00:02:25.700 One question we can then ask is, how do we overcome these mistakes that we make? 00:02:26.039 --> 00:02:30.689 One common approach is to just try to pay attention to other people's body language. 00:02:31.049 --> 00:02:34.369 The problem we find with that, or that many psychologists find with that, 00:02:34.369 --> 00:02:35.969 is that bodies can often mislead. 00:02:36.430 --> 00:02:39.459 It's easy to lie to people or, or deceive other people in 00:02:39.459 --> 00:02:40.799 ways that are hard to detect. 00:02:40.850 --> 00:02:44.030 We're often barely above chance, for instance, at being able to 00:02:44.030 --> 00:02:47.609 detect whether somebody is telling us the truth or lying to us. 00:02:48.140 --> 00:02:51.920 So body language doesn't work actually that well, or reading body language. 00:02:52.280 --> 00:02:54.900 Sometimes we can try to put ourselves in other people's shoes. 00:02:54.929 --> 00:02:58.609 We find in our research that doesn't actually increase accuracy a whole bunch. 00:02:58.609 --> 00:03:01.550 You're still playing with things that are in your own head. 00:03:01.550 --> 00:03:02.999 You're not gaining new insight. 00:03:02.999 --> 00:03:06.859 Perspective taking isn't quite the magical elixir for 00:03:06.859 --> 00:03:08.890 understanding that we might imagine. 00:03:09.080 --> 00:03:13.710 The only way that we have found for people to understand the minds of 00:03:13.710 --> 00:03:20.189 other people better is to, wait for it, ask them what they are thinking. 00:03:20.189 --> 00:03:23.399 Now, I remember when we started running these experiments, that is, I 00:03:23.399 --> 00:03:25.210 actually have to get on your inside. 00:03:25.210 --> 00:03:26.549 I have to ask you what you're thinking. 00:03:26.549 --> 00:03:28.829 To be good at understanding another person, you have to become 00:03:28.829 --> 00:03:30.540 a good journalist, it turns out. 00:03:30.540 --> 00:03:31.680 A good interrogator. 00:03:32.089 --> 00:03:35.290 When we first started running these experiments in my lab, we referred 00:03:35.290 --> 00:03:40.159 to these as the stupid studies, that obviously asking somebody what 00:03:40.159 --> 00:03:43.390 they think is gonna give you more insight into what's on their mind. 00:03:43.390 --> 00:03:47.140 But what was interesting to us was that people didn't seem to know 00:03:47.409 --> 00:03:50.780 that they were actually using a good strategy when they were using it. 00:03:50.780 --> 00:03:55.780 So we had people engaging in perspective taking, thought they were doing just 00:03:55.780 --> 00:04:00.329 as well, just as accurate understanding the mind of another person as people 00:04:00.329 --> 00:04:04.810 who were directly asking another person what they thought about something. 00:04:05.180 --> 00:04:07.060 And that was what was interesting to us. 00:04:07.060 --> 00:04:10.699 Using this most effective strategy from people's own perspectives 00:04:10.860 --> 00:04:13.250 didn't seem to be something that they are, were aware was actually 00:04:13.250 --> 00:04:14.619 helping them out as much as it was. 00:04:15.049 --> 00:04:18.310 Matt Abrahams: I want to dive deeper into this notion of, you said perspective 00:04:18.310 --> 00:04:21.119 taking doesn't really work, and I know you've done a lot of work on 00:04:21.119 --> 00:04:23.259 what you call perspective getting. 00:04:23.589 --> 00:04:26.720 Clearly, asking is one way to get another person's perspective. 00:04:27.039 --> 00:04:29.580 Can you define what you mean by perspective getting, and what are 00:04:29.580 --> 00:04:34.259 some tools that we can use, especially in high-stake situations where 00:04:34.259 --> 00:04:38.020 reading the room and understanding somebody else's likely response 00:04:38.020 --> 00:04:39.429 could be really helpful to us? 00:04:39.854 --> 00:04:42.304 Nick Epley: All we mean by perspective getting is just 00:04:42.304 --> 00:04:46.104 an analog to the psychological process of perspective taking. 00:04:46.104 --> 00:04:49.465 And we didn't mean anything magical by it when we came up with the term. 00:04:49.465 --> 00:04:52.654 In fact, it's hardly the kind of thing that even needs a term. 00:04:52.845 --> 00:04:57.215 Psychologists for decades have been studying what happens when we do this 00:04:57.215 --> 00:05:01.934 little bit of mental gymnastics to move from my perspective to yours, to try 00:05:01.934 --> 00:05:05.715 to see things from your point of view, try to understand things from your 00:05:05.715 --> 00:05:09.514 perspective, recognizing that you might see the world differently than I do. 00:05:09.905 --> 00:05:14.145 To be clear, doing that does a lot of things psychologically for us. 00:05:14.575 --> 00:05:16.915 It makes me feel more similar to you. 00:05:17.305 --> 00:05:20.014 It makes me feel more empathy towards you. 00:05:20.014 --> 00:05:23.604 It makes me feel like I understand you better when I do this. 00:05:23.795 --> 00:05:28.104 The problem is, when I actually ask people to predict what you're thinking 00:05:28.104 --> 00:05:31.784 and you write down what you're actually thinking, people, perspective taking 00:05:31.784 --> 00:05:35.764 doesn't actually make people, we found in a series of 25 experiments, doesn't 00:05:35.764 --> 00:05:38.034 actually make people more accurate. 00:05:38.354 --> 00:05:40.525 If anything, it made people a little bit worse. 00:05:40.735 --> 00:05:44.295 So by perspective getting, all we mean is simply asking other people 00:05:44.615 --> 00:05:47.005 questions directly about what they might think about something. 00:05:47.005 --> 00:05:51.515 In a negotiation, you could ask somebody directly, "Look, I really wanna understand 00:05:51.825 --> 00:05:55.284 what you want in this situation, what your position is." You might be worried that 00:05:55.284 --> 00:05:57.634 they might not tell you, but you can ask. 00:05:57.634 --> 00:06:01.234 You might wanna know, for instance, what your spouse wants for 00:06:01.395 --> 00:06:03.075 Christmas or for a birthday, right? 00:06:03.365 --> 00:06:08.225 Instead of guessing, it turns out the best way to know is to ask them, and they 00:06:08.225 --> 00:06:12.134 tend to be just as happy getting the gift that they wanted when you ask them as 00:06:12.134 --> 00:06:13.725 when you guessed and got the wrong one. 00:06:13.725 --> 00:06:15.284 They're not so happy about that. 00:06:15.715 --> 00:06:18.255 So what can you do in a high-stakes situation? 00:06:18.314 --> 00:06:21.085 I think the big thing, one thing we're finding out in recent 00:06:21.085 --> 00:06:26.115 research, is that people are often reluctant to ask direct questions. 00:06:26.774 --> 00:06:30.604 They feel like it's being too nosy, it's being impolite, it's being 00:06:30.604 --> 00:06:34.575 intrusive, and so they're reluctant to ask the questions they would need 00:06:34.575 --> 00:06:36.825 to actually understand another person. 00:06:36.825 --> 00:06:41.534 In our research, we find that people think it's gonna be awkward to ask somebody a 00:06:41.534 --> 00:06:45.185 direct question about what they believe about some topic, particularly if it's a 00:06:45.505 --> 00:06:48.054 personally relevant or meaningful topic. 00:06:48.304 --> 00:06:52.974 But people who are asked those questions, even sensitive ones, so this is work 00:06:52.974 --> 00:06:57.095 by Einav Hart and Maurice Schweitzer, for instance, they find that people 00:06:57.095 --> 00:07:00.634 think it's gonna be much more awkward to ask somebody direct questions than 00:07:00.634 --> 00:07:02.575 the person actually finds it to be. 00:07:02.905 --> 00:07:06.095 When you ask somebody a direct question, they typically don't 00:07:06.095 --> 00:07:07.285 mind as much as you would guess. 00:07:07.285 --> 00:07:08.425 So I think that's the big thing. 00:07:08.425 --> 00:07:13.625 In a high-stakes situation, just ask the question you want to know the answer to. 00:07:14.140 --> 00:07:16.629 Matt Abrahams: I'm hearing a theme that asking is very important. 00:07:16.629 --> 00:07:20.480 So my question for you is, what makes for a good question? 00:07:20.480 --> 00:07:23.070 On the show, when people have said open questions better than closed 00:07:23.070 --> 00:07:28.110 questions, do you have recommendations for what are questions that can give you 00:07:28.330 --> 00:07:30.679 insight perhaps over other questions? 00:07:31.149 --> 00:07:34.089 Nick Epley: So one of the things that I'm most interested about in my work is trying 00:07:34.089 --> 00:07:40.060 to understand why we don't do the social things that are necessarily good for us, 00:07:40.099 --> 00:07:44.319 why we don't communicate in the ways that would otherwise be good for us, creating 00:07:44.319 --> 00:07:48.170 connections with other people, allowing us to understand them better, and so on. 00:07:48.170 --> 00:07:50.080 What are the barriers that keep us from doing it? 00:07:50.369 --> 00:07:54.330 And a big one is just misunderstanding how other people will respond. 00:07:54.619 --> 00:07:58.860 So for me, the best kinds of questions to ask somebody are the meaningful 00:07:58.860 --> 00:08:01.420 ones, meaningful questions, deep questions that ask about somebody's 00:08:01.420 --> 00:08:05.540 thoughts or their beliefs or their attitudes or their feelings. 00:08:05.569 --> 00:08:09.040 In conversation, these are the kinds of things we often wanna be talking 00:08:09.040 --> 00:08:12.939 about with somebody, and yet these are also the things that we're 00:08:12.939 --> 00:08:15.110 often reluctant to ask people about. 00:08:15.110 --> 00:08:18.710 And so we spend a lot of time in conversation, say, or even when 00:08:18.710 --> 00:08:22.700 communicating with other people, talking about shallow, superficial 00:08:22.700 --> 00:08:27.119 things that don't really enable understanding, don't really enable as 00:08:27.119 --> 00:08:31.149 much understanding as it could, and don't allow us to connect with other people 00:08:31.149 --> 00:08:32.810 as meaningfully as we otherwise could. 00:08:32.810 --> 00:08:37.060 So for me, the questions that are of most interest to ask are the deep 00:08:37.060 --> 00:08:41.089 ones, and the ones that we're often overly reluctant to ask people about. 00:08:41.539 --> 00:08:42.289 Matt Abrahams: Absolutely. 00:08:42.289 --> 00:08:44.700 And you can think about some of those in advance, right? 00:08:44.700 --> 00:08:46.820 You can stockpile some questions. 00:08:46.820 --> 00:08:51.479 We've talked with Alison Wood Brooks and others about how we can leverage 00:08:51.479 --> 00:08:55.829 questions to build more connection, trust, and intimacy with people. 00:08:56.109 --> 00:08:59.700 Do you have advice or guidance on how to move from those shallow 00:08:59.700 --> 00:09:03.170 conversations into more meaningful ones? 00:09:03.219 --> 00:09:06.469 I might feel very uncomfortable starting by asking you a very 00:09:06.469 --> 00:09:07.969 deep question right off the bat. 00:09:08.350 --> 00:09:12.009 How do we migrate from the more shallow to the deeper questions? 00:09:12.450 --> 00:09:13.859 Nick Epley: Much faster than you think you can. 00:09:14.149 --> 00:09:17.939 You might not ask that your first question, but I usually can 00:09:17.939 --> 00:09:21.119 get to something meaningful by question number two, if I'm trying. 00:09:21.619 --> 00:09:25.249 And I think that's a thing that people really misunderstand in conversation. 00:09:25.669 --> 00:09:31.490 Usually, that transition for me moves from talking about something or asking about 00:09:31.490 --> 00:09:36.359 something early on that's on the outside of a person, "What do you do for a living? 00:09:36.359 --> 00:09:40.249 Where do you live?" to something that's very quickly on the inside of a person. 00:09:40.570 --> 00:09:44.609 And that often involves a shift from asking about what might be happening to 00:09:44.609 --> 00:09:47.329 asking about why or some deeper meaning. 00:09:47.329 --> 00:09:50.840 So, you know, once I find out what you do for a living, I can ask you, "Why, why 00:09:50.840 --> 00:09:54.449 do you do that and not something else?" Or I can ask what you do for a living, 00:09:54.449 --> 00:09:58.070 and I can ask as a follow-up question, "Is that always what you wanted to do? 00:09:58.070 --> 00:09:59.480 Is this your dream job? 00:09:59.650 --> 00:10:02.710 Do you have your dream job right now?" And if they say yes, then you can now 00:10:02.710 --> 00:10:06.010 ask, "Why is that your dream job?" And if they say no, you can ask, "Well, 00:10:06.010 --> 00:10:09.430 what is your dream job?" And already there, on like the third question, 00:10:09.430 --> 00:10:10.749 I've gotten to somebody's dreams. 00:10:11.215 --> 00:10:12.824 It just doesn't take that long. 00:10:13.465 --> 00:10:17.705 Matt Abrahams: I like that distinction of going from what to why, and it's 00:10:17.705 --> 00:10:21.495 really important to put an exclamation point at the end of what you said, is 00:10:21.495 --> 00:10:26.175 that while we feel it might be awkward, in actuality it's not that awkward. 00:10:27.164 --> 00:10:31.014 Nick Epley: What we found was creating the barrier, why people didn't wanna 00:10:31.014 --> 00:10:34.694 talk, was that people didn't think that others were interested in talking to them. 00:10:35.055 --> 00:10:39.715 And that's also what keeps people from having the deep, meaningful 00:10:39.715 --> 00:10:42.774 kind of conversations we'd like to be having with each other, too. 00:10:42.774 --> 00:10:46.454 We find that people think that others aren't gonna care about the 00:10:46.454 --> 00:10:49.575 stuff that they have to share, the meaningful things that they would 00:10:49.575 --> 00:10:52.694 have to share in conversation, the sense that other people don't want to 00:10:52.694 --> 00:10:56.235 be bothered with this or wouldn't be interested in having this conversation, 00:10:56.235 --> 00:10:58.125 and turns out we're off about that. 00:10:58.654 --> 00:10:58.985 Matt Abrahams: Wow. 00:10:59.014 --> 00:11:03.785 So it's our fear that the other person just doesn't care or wanna be burdened 00:11:03.785 --> 00:11:05.584 with our stuff is what gets in the way. 00:11:06.055 --> 00:11:08.174 Nick Epley: It's not that we misunderstand ourselves. 00:11:08.244 --> 00:11:11.494 We know in our experiments people recognize that if you had a conversation 00:11:11.494 --> 00:11:14.795 with somebody, if you shared something meaningful about yourself, people would 00:11:14.795 --> 00:11:18.435 enjoy their experience more if they were in a conversation than if they 00:11:18.435 --> 00:11:20.045 were being ignored by other people. 00:11:20.295 --> 00:11:24.594 But what keeps them from doing it is a social cognition error, a mind-reading 00:11:24.594 --> 00:11:27.785 mistake, is that I think you don't wanna talk to me, and of course, 00:11:27.785 --> 00:11:31.344 if I don't think you wanna talk to me, I won't try, and I'll never 00:11:31.344 --> 00:11:33.075 find out that I'm wrong about that. 00:11:33.645 --> 00:11:35.845 Matt Abrahams: And your research shows that when you do actually 00:11:36.035 --> 00:11:38.895 initiate the conversation, there are wonderful benefits from it. 00:11:39.615 --> 00:11:40.175 People vary. 00:11:40.175 --> 00:11:43.285 A lot of the work I have done is with people who are highly anxious in 00:11:43.285 --> 00:11:45.594 communicating, introverts, extroverts. 00:11:45.884 --> 00:11:50.935 How can somebody who might be nervous, a non-native speaker, for example, or 00:11:50.935 --> 00:11:55.115 somebody who's just extremely shy or introverted, how do you encourage them to 00:11:55.115 --> 00:11:59.774 take advantage of this wonderful benefit of talking to people and reaching out? 00:12:00.225 --> 00:12:03.484 Nick Epley: So I empathize with this very much because I was one time there. 00:12:03.865 --> 00:12:07.475 That is, I now can stand up in front of 1,000 people without any trouble 00:12:07.475 --> 00:12:09.914 and give a speech, and we're academics. 00:12:09.914 --> 00:12:11.134 We do this for a living. 00:12:11.335 --> 00:12:15.935 When I was in graduate school, I was horrified by the thought of 00:12:15.935 --> 00:12:17.594 standing up and presenting in public. 00:12:18.035 --> 00:12:22.225 I was horrified about the thought of taking questions, so I very much can 00:12:22.314 --> 00:12:26.434 empathize with the challenges that come from opening up and reaching out. 00:12:27.044 --> 00:12:31.785 The long-run answer is that you overcome mistaken fears through practice. 00:12:32.294 --> 00:12:36.695 That's it, is you learn that these are mistaken by exposing yourself to them 00:12:36.975 --> 00:12:39.264 and learning the truth of the matter. 00:12:39.484 --> 00:12:43.654 In fact, cognitive behavioral therapists, psychologists who treat clinical 00:12:43.654 --> 00:12:47.294 levels of anxiety, the way they do this is through what's known as exposure 00:12:47.294 --> 00:12:51.285 therapy, where they put you in the very situation that you are anxious about. 00:12:51.285 --> 00:12:55.835 Now, exposure therapy doesn't work for everything, but if your concern is about 00:12:55.835 --> 00:13:00.234 talking to people, as social stuff, those anxieties tend to be misplaced. 00:13:00.234 --> 00:13:03.344 So putting yourself in those situations is the step that you 00:13:03.344 --> 00:13:04.605 need to calibrate your beliefs. 00:13:04.605 --> 00:13:05.364 Now, how do you do that? 00:13:05.704 --> 00:13:09.165 What I recommend to people is doing a choice audit of your day. 00:13:09.165 --> 00:13:11.474 Just think over the course of your day, like your day tomorrow. 00:13:11.835 --> 00:13:14.825 And, you know, you might think about a moment where you 00:13:14.825 --> 00:13:15.814 could engage with somebody. 00:13:15.814 --> 00:13:16.384 It'd be easy. 00:13:16.384 --> 00:13:17.695 It wouldn't be hard, right? 00:13:18.175 --> 00:13:19.985 Where you could reach out and engage with somebody. 00:13:19.985 --> 00:13:22.675 It wouldn't take a lot of time, wouldn't take a lot of effort, wouldn't take 00:13:22.675 --> 00:13:24.395 a lot of energy, and start there. 00:13:24.765 --> 00:13:29.414 Sometimes these can be really simple things, like when I enter the University 00:13:29.414 --> 00:13:32.344 of Chicago Business School where I work, the Harper Center here, I've got about 00:13:32.344 --> 00:13:37.405 a 200-yard walk up to my office where I'm standing right now, and I have taken 00:13:37.405 --> 00:13:40.274 on as a habit making that a hello walk. 00:13:40.625 --> 00:13:42.105 So I've done this very deliberately. 00:13:42.105 --> 00:13:45.355 Like, I had this realization one morning that I kind of walk into the 00:13:45.355 --> 00:13:50.794 office, head down, on my way, not wanting to bother anybody, and I decided 00:13:50.794 --> 00:13:51.915 to do something different, right? 00:13:51.915 --> 00:13:55.294 There was a moment where I was choosing to ignore people, and 00:13:55.294 --> 00:13:56.455 I could do something different. 00:13:56.455 --> 00:13:59.205 So now when I come in, I have my head up, I'm smiling. 00:13:59.515 --> 00:14:01.294 Now, that seems small. 00:14:01.375 --> 00:14:02.044 It is small. 00:14:02.385 --> 00:14:03.815 A lot of these things are small. 00:14:04.065 --> 00:14:06.214 Saying hello to somebody on the train one morning. 00:14:06.214 --> 00:14:06.714 You're there. 00:14:06.714 --> 00:14:08.254 You're not doing anything anyway. 00:14:08.534 --> 00:14:10.534 It's easy, relatively speaking. 00:14:10.854 --> 00:14:12.324 It's not particularly hard. 00:14:12.324 --> 00:14:15.144 It's not risky, and that's the place to start. 00:14:15.385 --> 00:14:18.195 What we're talking about here is a behavior change. 00:14:18.474 --> 00:14:23.095 The way you change behavior over the long run is you don't do it all at once. 00:14:23.095 --> 00:14:26.085 You're not gonna overcome anxiety all at once. 00:14:26.085 --> 00:14:29.034 It's, you don't move a mountain by pushing the whole thing at one time. 00:14:29.494 --> 00:14:32.385 You move a mountain shovel by shovel, bit by bit. 00:14:32.714 --> 00:14:35.375 And so my advice to folks who are nervous about this is 00:14:35.644 --> 00:14:36.784 you don't have to believe me. 00:14:37.085 --> 00:14:38.085 You don't have to believe our data. 00:14:38.474 --> 00:14:42.294 You can go out and test this yourself, and my suggestion is to start small. 00:14:42.534 --> 00:14:45.224 Pick a little thing you can do that's pretty easy. 00:14:45.655 --> 00:14:46.864 Give somebody a compliment. 00:14:47.114 --> 00:14:48.415 Say hello to somebody in the morning. 00:14:48.894 --> 00:14:51.864 Do it multiple times so you get some data, and that's where you start. 00:14:52.544 --> 00:14:55.875 Matt Abrahams: So many things there that you said are so valuable and insightful. 00:14:55.875 --> 00:15:00.044 One, I would never have believed that you were shy and nervous about speaking. 00:15:00.044 --> 00:15:02.875 You come off as quite the extrovert and very comfortable. 00:15:03.225 --> 00:15:07.785 This idea of doing a choice audit to think about where those opportunities 00:15:07.785 --> 00:15:11.434 are for those little experiments that you're talking about, and I am 00:15:11.434 --> 00:15:14.645 certainly going to try, and I encourage everybody listening to try, a hello 00:15:14.645 --> 00:15:16.794 walk and see what happens as we go. 00:15:17.655 --> 00:15:20.535 Your new book is called A Little More Social. 00:15:20.535 --> 00:15:22.115 It's not be social. 00:15:22.115 --> 00:15:24.675 It's not jump into the deep end of social. 00:15:25.074 --> 00:15:28.834 Talk to me about the thesis of A Little More Social. 00:15:29.134 --> 00:15:31.895 Tell me a little bit more about why you used a little 00:15:31.895 --> 00:15:32.955 bit more and what it's about. 00:15:33.475 --> 00:15:37.285 Nick Epley: The book is trying to reconcile what seems like a fundamental 00:15:37.285 --> 00:15:39.994 paradox that sits right at the core of human life to me, which is 00:15:39.994 --> 00:15:41.395 that we're highly social animals. 00:15:41.395 --> 00:15:44.030 We're made happier and healthier by reaching out and 00:15:44.030 --> 00:15:45.080 connecting with other people. 00:15:45.080 --> 00:15:49.340 And yet that choice to reach out and engage with somebody, to approach them, or 00:15:49.340 --> 00:15:55.259 to hold back and avoid them, that dynamic shows up, that choice shows up in so 00:15:55.259 --> 00:15:57.360 many different parts of our lives, right? 00:15:57.360 --> 00:15:59.230 So do I talk with a stranger? 00:15:59.720 --> 00:16:02.710 Do I type to them or pick up the phone and call them, right? 00:16:02.939 --> 00:16:06.339 Once I'm talking, do I go deep or do I stay in the shallow end of the pool? 00:16:06.339 --> 00:16:07.980 I've got a kind thought, do I share it? 00:16:08.480 --> 00:16:10.540 I feel grateful to somebody, do I express it? 00:16:10.900 --> 00:16:12.739 I need help, do I ask for it? 00:16:13.239 --> 00:16:17.159 I've got this thing about myself that I'd like to share with my partner, 00:16:17.159 --> 00:16:21.080 but I'm a little nervous about being honest, so I keep my true self to myself. 00:16:21.190 --> 00:16:24.639 Over and over again, there are these opportunities we have to reach out 00:16:24.639 --> 00:16:28.159 and engage with others in positive, meaningful ways that make our lives better 00:16:28.409 --> 00:16:29.940 that we're often nervous about doing. 00:16:29.940 --> 00:16:33.409 And what we find just over and over and over and over again is that 00:16:33.409 --> 00:16:36.799 avoidance voice, that, that voice we have on our shoulder that's telling 00:16:36.799 --> 00:16:40.080 us, "They're not gonna like that. This is gonna be bad. I shouldn't 00:16:40.080 --> 00:16:42.190 do this," is a little too strong. 00:16:42.499 --> 00:16:47.089 And people consistently underestimate how positively these interactions 00:16:47.089 --> 00:16:50.870 are going to go, and as a result, I think, are overly reluctant to reach 00:16:50.870 --> 00:16:51.900 out and engage with other people. 00:16:51.900 --> 00:16:52.989 Now, we're not idiots. 00:16:53.389 --> 00:16:58.870 Nobody is confused that reaching out and expressing gratitude to your old 00:16:58.870 --> 00:17:03.239 high school band director, which I did not long ago, Craig Aune is his name, 00:17:03.370 --> 00:17:06.410 one of the best teachers that I've ever seen in my life, nobody's confused that 00:17:06.410 --> 00:17:08.989 doing that is gonna be negative, right? 00:17:09.230 --> 00:17:12.340 We can distinguish between a pat on the back and a punch in the face. 00:17:12.340 --> 00:17:13.910 This, we're not confused about this, right? 00:17:14.529 --> 00:17:19.499 But what we do find is that even when we think it's gonna be a little good, 00:17:19.529 --> 00:17:22.989 we still underestimate how positive these things are likely to be. 00:17:22.989 --> 00:17:23.730 We're a little bit off. 00:17:23.730 --> 00:17:27.980 So our data don't suggest you should go out to talk to everybody all the time. 00:17:27.980 --> 00:17:29.220 You got things to do, right? 00:17:29.540 --> 00:17:32.879 They don't suggest you should dive into the deep end of the conversation pool 00:17:33.059 --> 00:17:36.699 with everybody all the time or spend your life writing gratitude letters. 00:17:36.989 --> 00:17:38.029 That's not what it suggests. 00:17:38.029 --> 00:17:43.720 It suggests that your estimate, your belief about how this social interaction, 00:17:43.720 --> 00:17:47.220 this attempt to reach out and engage with somebody's gonna go, is off a bit. 00:17:47.760 --> 00:17:49.160 And all of life is a gamble. 00:17:49.160 --> 00:17:53.229 All of life's a gamble on the outcomes our, of our decisions and 00:17:53.229 --> 00:17:56.649 our choices, and our data suggests that we're a little off about that. 00:17:56.649 --> 00:18:00.080 And as a result, there are probably lots of social interactions 00:18:00.440 --> 00:18:03.639 that you could have, but you're mistakenly choosing not to have. 00:18:04.300 --> 00:18:08.880 And finding those decision points where, you know, that avoidance voice 00:18:08.880 --> 00:18:12.080 is just a little too strong in your life, that's the margin you have for 00:18:12.080 --> 00:18:13.789 improving it, for making your life better. 00:18:14.119 --> 00:18:19.089 And again, the title of the book comes from what I think is the real implication 00:18:19.089 --> 00:18:23.699 of our work, not that you should be a nonstop extrovert talking to other people 00:18:23.699 --> 00:18:27.850 all the time, but that there are choices you're making to avoid people that are 00:18:27.850 --> 00:18:31.669 often mistaken, and that you could be a little bit more social and it would make 00:18:31.669 --> 00:18:33.930 your life probably considerably better. 00:18:34.610 --> 00:18:36.529 Matt Abrahams: I am absolutely convinced, and as somebody who's 00:18:36.529 --> 00:18:40.619 read the book, you do a great job of helping articulate that point of view. 00:18:41.774 --> 00:18:45.124 You know, Nick, I knew this was gonna be wonderful because everybody, your resume 00:18:45.124 --> 00:18:48.874 came to me as, "Oh, my goodness, it's gonna be a great conversation." I don't 00:18:48.874 --> 00:18:50.544 wanna bring it to an end, but we will. 00:18:50.664 --> 00:18:54.014 Before we end, I ask three questions, two questions I ask everybody, 00:18:54.014 --> 00:18:55.504 one I come up with just for you. 00:18:55.504 --> 00:18:56.964 Are you ready for these? 00:18:57.145 --> 00:18:57.784 Nick Epley: I'm ready. 00:18:58.114 --> 00:19:01.665 Matt Abrahams: You teach an MBA course called Designing a Good Life. 00:19:02.065 --> 00:19:06.235 What is one communication-based design flaw you see most 00:19:06.235 --> 00:19:11.005 high-achieving people make, and how can we change it to be better? 00:19:11.794 --> 00:19:14.335 Nick Epley: I think a big design flaw is people focus too much on their 00:19:14.335 --> 00:19:16.324 competency and too little on their warmth. 00:19:16.704 --> 00:19:19.835 What other people care about when they interact with us, 00:19:20.074 --> 00:19:21.254 is this person trustworthy? 00:19:21.664 --> 00:19:22.794 Is this person honest? 00:19:23.195 --> 00:19:24.114 Are they kind? 00:19:24.195 --> 00:19:26.544 Are they a friend, or are they somebody I should avoid? 00:19:26.544 --> 00:19:30.105 We spend a lot of time thinking about, what exactly should I say 00:19:30.144 --> 00:19:32.134 to communicate to this person? 00:19:32.504 --> 00:19:34.815 That's a good second thing to pay attention to because that's what 00:19:34.815 --> 00:19:36.344 they're paying attention to second. 00:19:36.614 --> 00:19:41.454 But the first thing they're paying attention to is, is this person warm? 00:19:41.555 --> 00:19:42.405 Are they a friend? 00:19:42.725 --> 00:19:43.805 And I think that's a mistake. 00:19:43.855 --> 00:19:48.125 We overestimate the importance of competency, exactly what we're 00:19:48.125 --> 00:19:52.805 communicating when we're communicating, when really what matters a lot, first 00:19:52.805 --> 00:19:55.445 and foremost, is, is this person warm? 00:19:55.525 --> 00:19:56.515 Is this person trustworthy? 00:19:56.665 --> 00:19:57.485 That's the thing to start with. 00:19:57.835 --> 00:19:59.455 Matt Abrahams: Thank you for echoing that. 00:19:59.455 --> 00:20:03.305 In the strategic communication class I teach, that is the very first topic 00:20:03.305 --> 00:20:06.955 we discuss, and we talk about lead with warmth, follow with competence, 00:20:07.044 --> 00:20:08.214 and that can make a big difference. 00:20:08.214 --> 00:20:09.074 Thank you for sharing. 00:20:09.574 --> 00:20:12.515 Who's a communicator that you admire, and why? 00:20:13.055 --> 00:20:15.595 Nick Epley: The person who popped into my mind, and it's possible that 00:20:15.665 --> 00:20:20.034 it's 'cause I was just listening to a podcast from him, is Michael Lewis. 00:20:20.385 --> 00:20:24.485 And I think Michael Lewis is amazing as a communicator because 00:20:24.485 --> 00:20:28.294 he has this stroke of genius that makes him seem not like a genius. 00:20:28.644 --> 00:20:30.415 And I think that's where true genius sits. 00:20:30.415 --> 00:20:34.064 So a really good communicator, and I think this is true in academia as 00:20:34.064 --> 00:20:38.635 well, is somebody who can take really complicated topics, like the financial 00:20:38.635 --> 00:20:42.254 sector or Kahneman and Tversky's research in the behavioral sciences, 00:20:42.725 --> 00:20:46.725 and make it so simple that it feels like you understood it already. 00:20:47.265 --> 00:20:49.064 Like, not very hard, okay? 00:20:49.514 --> 00:20:55.495 And Lewis is just a master, both in writing as well as in speaking, 00:20:55.495 --> 00:20:58.915 so he's just as good on his podcast as he is with his books. 00:20:58.915 --> 00:21:02.734 The other thing that Lewis does which is great as a communicator, he's 00:21:02.734 --> 00:21:04.734 extremely good at asking questions. 00:21:05.174 --> 00:21:11.204 He's really good about not imposing what he thinks on somebody else, but rather 00:21:11.204 --> 00:21:15.415 letting the other person share their wisdom and pulling that out of them. 00:21:15.415 --> 00:21:16.894 He's a good perspective getter. 00:21:17.275 --> 00:21:18.745 Really good perspective getter. 00:21:19.174 --> 00:21:21.325 And that's why he gets the nod from me today. 00:21:21.864 --> 00:21:23.404 Matt Abrahams: Not surprising that you would pick somebody 00:21:23.404 --> 00:21:26.105 who asks good questions, given what you do in your research. 00:21:26.105 --> 00:21:29.835 And the other notion that you started with, I call accessibility, how you make 00:21:30.124 --> 00:21:32.075 complex ideas accessible to somebody. 00:21:32.465 --> 00:21:36.174 And I like that you added, "So that they feel like they already knew it." I know 00:21:36.174 --> 00:21:39.734 exactly what you're talking about, and really effective communicators do that. 00:21:40.309 --> 00:21:42.570 All right, Nick, final question, question three. 00:21:42.629 --> 00:21:47.720 What are the first three ingredients that go into a successful communication recipe? 00:21:48.110 --> 00:21:51.239 Nick Epley: So I think the first big one is to take an interest. 00:21:51.550 --> 00:21:55.720 A lot of good communication is about the mindset you take to it. 00:21:55.960 --> 00:21:58.919 In a conversation, this is particularly true, I think, if you're 00:21:58.919 --> 00:22:02.309 communicating in conversation, is you gotta take an interest in the other 00:22:02.309 --> 00:22:04.270 person, in getting to know them. 00:22:04.749 --> 00:22:07.760 People spend a lot of time focusing on specific words to use 00:22:07.760 --> 00:22:09.430 or specific sentences or phrases. 00:22:09.530 --> 00:22:12.479 I think that will get you potentially over the hump to start something. 00:22:12.930 --> 00:22:15.150 But what makes for a really good conversation is for you 00:22:15.150 --> 00:22:16.520 to be flexible in the moment. 00:22:16.520 --> 00:22:19.869 If I take an interest in getting to know you, the stuff to talk 00:22:19.869 --> 00:22:21.319 about is just gonna come up. 00:22:21.700 --> 00:22:24.349 I'm gonna think about it often if I start with that. 00:22:24.349 --> 00:22:27.549 So I think being in the right mindset, taking an interest in, 00:22:27.580 --> 00:22:29.909 understand somebody, getting to know them, making sure they 00:22:29.909 --> 00:22:32.049 understand you, I think is critical. 00:22:32.700 --> 00:22:35.279 If you're not interested, you're not gonna teach them, you're not gonna reach them. 00:22:35.689 --> 00:22:37.080 Second one is warmth. 00:22:37.080 --> 00:22:38.529 We already talked about this a little bit. 00:22:38.529 --> 00:22:43.240 Again, I think this is one thing that people under-emphasize, and this is 00:22:43.240 --> 00:22:46.399 suggested by the research, that what we tend to think about when we think about 00:22:46.399 --> 00:22:48.189 ourselves is our competency, right? 00:22:48.219 --> 00:22:50.310 I'm gonna stand up and I'm gonna give a speech, right? 00:22:50.310 --> 00:22:53.570 I'm gonna, or I'm gonna speak in class, or I'm gonna have a conversation with you, or 00:22:53.570 --> 00:22:55.240 I'm gonna write a gratitude letter, right? 00:22:55.740 --> 00:22:59.179 What I'm worried about, I'm not concerned about whether I'm trustworthy or not. 00:22:59.210 --> 00:23:00.700 I take that for granted with myself. 00:23:01.030 --> 00:23:03.329 What I'm worried about is, what the heck am I gonna say, right? 00:23:03.329 --> 00:23:04.700 That's what I'm really focused on. 00:23:05.210 --> 00:23:10.039 But what other people focus on when they see us is, is this somebody trustworthy? 00:23:10.359 --> 00:23:11.969 So warmth is a big one. 00:23:12.490 --> 00:23:13.320 I think that's the second. 00:23:13.780 --> 00:23:15.810 And then the third one, I think, is openness. 00:23:16.369 --> 00:23:20.219 Really good communicators are open about themselves. 00:23:20.399 --> 00:23:23.329 People who are willing to share things about themselves, be 00:23:23.390 --> 00:23:26.729 open about themselves, that builds trust very quickly. 00:23:26.729 --> 00:23:30.570 So a good way to really have a deep, meaningful conversation 00:23:30.649 --> 00:23:34.189 with somebody isn't just about asking them meaningful questions. 00:23:34.460 --> 00:23:37.810 It's also about being willing to be open and share meaningful 00:23:37.810 --> 00:23:38.880 things about yourself, right? 00:23:38.880 --> 00:23:42.460 The fact that 20 years or so ago, when I started my career, was 00:23:42.460 --> 00:23:45.619 a terrified introvert, at least when it came to standing up and 00:23:45.619 --> 00:23:47.060 speaking, sharing that story. 00:23:47.060 --> 00:23:49.840 I lost 20 pounds before my first job interview. 00:23:49.869 --> 00:23:50.590 I was so nervous. 00:23:50.590 --> 00:23:52.629 I didn't sleep, I didn't eat for weeks. 00:23:52.629 --> 00:23:54.030 I was terrified by this. 00:23:54.379 --> 00:23:57.830 Being willing to be open and share those meaningful stories allows other 00:23:57.830 --> 00:24:00.489 people to open up with you, too, and that's what makes for a really 00:24:00.489 --> 00:24:01.940 good conversation and communication. 00:24:02.500 --> 00:24:05.619 Matt Abrahams: That reciprocity there is really important in building trust. 00:24:05.940 --> 00:24:10.629 So the three I hear you talk about are mindset, which drives interest and the 00:24:10.629 --> 00:24:16.250 flexibility needed to engage, and then that warmth rather than over-indexing 00:24:16.250 --> 00:24:21.200 on competency, and then finally, being open and divulge and share information. 00:24:21.679 --> 00:24:23.080 Nick, this was fantastic. 00:24:23.250 --> 00:24:28.269 You were so helpful in illuminating the good work that you're doing and 00:24:28.269 --> 00:24:33.290 helping all of us to feel better In our communication and the challenge that you 00:24:33.290 --> 00:24:39.120 bring to us, which is to take that step, initiate the conversation, be a little bit 00:24:39.170 --> 00:24:41.309 more social, and you can see the benefits. 00:24:41.309 --> 00:24:42.080 Thank you for your time. 00:24:42.339 --> 00:24:43.219 Nick Epley: Thank you so much, Matt. 00:24:45.110 --> 00:24:46.900 Matt Abrahams: Thank you for joining us for another episode of 00:24:46.900 --> 00:24:49.020 Think Fast Talk Smart, the podcast. 00:24:49.389 --> 00:24:51.830 To learn more about how to leverage communication for deeper 00:24:51.830 --> 00:24:55.420 relationships, listen to episode one thirty-three with Charles Duhigg. 00:24:55.449 --> 00:25:00.820 This episode was produced by Katherine Reed, Ryan Campos, and me, Matt Abrahams. 00:25:01.090 --> 00:25:03.679 Our music is from Floyd Wonder, with special thanks 00:25:03.679 --> 00:25:05.420 to the Podium Podcast Company. 00:25:05.890 --> 00:25:08.990 Please find us on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. 00:25:09.219 --> 00:25:11.300 Be sure to subscribe and rate us. 00:25:11.690 --> 00:25:14.769 Also, follow us on LinkedIn, TikTok, and Instagram. 00:25:15.280 --> 00:25:19.240 And check out fastersmarter.io for deep dive videos, English language 00:25:19.240 --> 00:25:21.170 learning content, and our newsletter. 00:25:21.640 --> 00:25:24.850 Please consider joining our Think Fast Talk Smart Learning Community 00:25:24.850 --> 00:25:27.490 at fastersmarter.io/learning. 00:25:27.980 --> 00:25:31.980 You'll find video lessons, learning quests, discussion boards, my AI 00:25:31.980 --> 00:25:33.969 coach, and book club opportunities. 00:25:34.489 --> 00:25:39.279 Again, that's fastersmarter.io/learning to become part of our Think Fast 00:25:39.469 --> 00:25:40.900 Talk Smart Learning Community.