Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Lead The People is your guide to unlocking your true potential as an authentic leader. Hosted by Dr. Matt Poepsel—The Godfather of Talent Optimization—this podcast dives deep into the art and science of what it takes to lead at the next level. With insightful conversations and practical strategies, each episode equips executives, strategic HR pros, and aspiring leaders with the tools it takes to boost performance, inspire teams, and drive meaningful impact. Whether exploring the latest workplace trends or tackling real-world leadership challenges, Lead The People offers an enlightened approach to leadership. Embark on a rewarding journey to become the leader your people deserve—the leader you were meant to be.
Charles Lee (00:00):
As time passes along, people begin to realize that curiosity isn't necessarily incentivized or rewarded. It's more efficient for your own career advancement to line up to process and modes of thinking, modes of lack of questioning in meetings because that gets you more efficiently to a place of advancement. I think that's where curiosity kind of dies.
Matt Poepsel (00:34):
What if the biggest obstacle to leading well isn't your workload, your boss, or the economy, but the fact that you stopped designing your life and just started surviving in it. In this episode, we're talking about why personal autonomy and curiosity are the most underrated leadership tools you have and how to use them even when everything around you feels out of control. We'll explore how leaders can reclaim their autonomy, foster curiosity within their teams and adapt to the ever-evolving landscape and technology of AI. Joining us is Charles Lee, founder and CEO of Ideation and the author of Good Idea Now What, and his new book, Design Your Good Life: The Framework for Discovering Your Purpose, Actualizing Your Vision, and Amplifying Your Impact. It brings a unique lens shaped by philosophy, strategy, consulting, and nearly two decades of helping leaders turn ideas into action. Charles, thanks so much for being here. Welcome to the show.
Charles Lee (01:20):
Thank you so much for having me, Matt. It's a real pleasure to be with you.
Matt Poepsel (01:24):
So excited to have this conversation. Two great books. We're going to talk mostly about your newest book, but I'll start with this. You've had more than 17 years, I believe, running ideation. So you helped these leaders move from idea to execution. But we know and your research shows many, many of these projects fail. Innovation is not easy, but it's usually not the idea that falls short. That's when your core discovery. So what is it? What keeps us from having the success that we might hope when we're doing innovative work?
Charles Lee (01:51):
You're absolutely right. It's almost never the idea. You and I have probably sat around tables with brilliant visionaries that can articulate compelling vision for the business and the company and yet it's usually the failure comes "failure" is really in the environment in which the idea lives. And when I think about the ideas that don't really see the light of day, it's often whether it may be a breakdown of clarity, maybe there's a lack of clarity on how to take that vision and what that means for the people who are actually executing. So there's a disconnect between the desire of a leader to lead a business a particular way. And I know a lot of your listeners might be in management, those who are kind of stuck in between that have to answer to that vision and yet don't have clear direction necessarily on how to execute that.
(02:41):
And then the other thing is just a cultural issue. Sometimes unless you are working in an environment where there's a willingness and innovation to take the risk, a lot of times it may not work, but whether consciously or not, a lot of organizations punish failure. It doesn't matter what they say upfront. So people often find themselves protecting themselves rather than diving more fully into innovation because it's not technically rewarded when things don't go well, which will tend to be the majority of the time.
Matt Poepsel (03:11):
I can't help but think of Mike Tyson, Boxer who said, everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face. That's how I feel innovation works. You got this great idea, you're so excited, you're moved by something, maybe something you struggle with in your own life, you're like, "Oh, this could be an entire business." And then as soon as you start involving a couple more people and somebody says, "Well, wait a second, is this really going to work?" You're like, "Oh no, here comes the first bit of friction. I haven't even talked to a customer yet, but are already experiencing some. " I think that's what I'm hearing a little bit and what you're talking about. Culturally, it's got to be there. Clarity has to be there. What's clear to us when it's culturally aligned for us as the ideal holder, it may not quite translate as well as soon as we start involving other people.
Charles Lee (03:48):
It's a vicious cycle because you could really dive in and try to change that cycle where someone says, "No, is it really going to work?" But that statement is probably the result of the culture over time. And so people who are in a culture where innovation is welcome, testing is encouraged, usually don't ask that question. They lead with some other question that dives into the possibilities, not all of the obstacles around an idea.
Matt Poepsel (04:14):
And I think your holistic view that you've taken with your clients for all these years has really brought you to this place where you see things at a different vantage point and you've experienced them in your professional work as well. And between the two books, Good Idea Now What, and now your new book, Design Your Good Life, I think it's really interesting that you're asking us to go from this type of innovation, ideation, execution, but also bigger things into purpose and legacy. What is it that led you to say, "You know what? We need to reach perhaps a little higher."
Charles Lee (04:43):
Working with high performing individuals and leaders of brands, they can be incredibly successful in even executing on something, phenomenal thinkers and leaders. And I kept noticing something is that sometimes they would end up with great success but still asks the question like, "Is this it? Is there all there is? " They reached the pinnacle of their own respective industry and really execution without some sense of purpose in my opinion is just efficient busyness. You do a lot of great things and there's value in all of those things because you may be lowering cost or increasing profit or mitigating risk, those three usual things that businesses are looking for. So the question for me shifted from just how do I execute, which is a big focus on my first book and then transferring to more personal/professional because I think when people feel personally fulfilled at work, it actually improves their ability not just to be productive, but to be mindful about what they do and why they do it.
(05:39):
And I think that's where you have multiple worlds merging together where it's not a clock in, clock out. Our world is no longer nine to five anyway. It's really going in and feeling like what I do actually matters and that I contribute based on my values and my giftings and such. That could sound very idealistic. Some listeners may say, "You don't work at the company I work at." But I think if that ceases to be our goal to really find clarity in our professional pursuits that line up with our personal values, I think you're going to less enjoy life, honestly. That's the encouragement is let's design a life that of course impacts our professional lives, but it should be meaningful to our personal lives as well.
Matt Poepsel (06:21):
I think you've really struck on this notion that we can do something in activity and it can be valuable, but that doesn't mean that it's by definition meaningful, purposeful, that it's fully intentional in terms of our doing it. And I think it's, to your point without being idealistic, there's going to be times when we have to do things that everybody's just got to do it, sending invoices. Well, if you don't get around to sending invoices, you're not going to be in business very long. It may not be the most sort of meaningful thing out there, but it's a means to an end for sure. And I feel like that's kind of what's happened sometimes right now in this environment we're in where there's so much change that we're absorbing so much, we tend to focus on what's valuable, how do we get productivity up, how do we do these things?
(07:00):
And we're losing some of that part just as a collective, much less as individuals. When we're asked to absorb these things, it kind of takes us away from that. And I feel a certain sadness that we're sort of downgrading our belief that we can get those things. When you're working with leaders today and they feel so drawn to the valuable sort of execution aspects that can be so distracting, how do you help them sort of bring back some of that balance?
Charles Lee (07:26):
I love working with people who are directly overseeing others and not always at the highest level of an organization. So if you're, say, middle management, for example, is that I think you have a unique opportunity where you have often the trust and the respect of your own team and you can kind of shape something that's meaningful, even if it doesn't necessarily always reach the top, you can do meaningful work where people feel that they're in a safe environment to do things that matter and it may feel sometimes like a siloed effort, but that work is still really important. Find some clarity around what it means to have a purposeful team and not get always kind of sucked in to the immediate things. We'll always make time for things we value. That's my belief is if I really value like I want to spend time with my kid or a friend, I make time somehow.
(08:22):
So I think there's always time in the week if we choose to make it a priority, maybe my challenge or encouragement is, look, even if it's 30 minutes, spend some time refocusing on why what you do with your team specifically really matters to not just the life of the company, but to the lives of your team members.
Matt Poepsel (08:40):
I think it's a real downward spiral we find ourselves in. When we don't experience meaning and intention at work, the work is almost extra draining. And then when we get home or it's on the weekend, we're almost in recovery mode at that point. You're like, "I just want to watch Netflix. I just want to put this out of my mind," whatever it is. And then your cycles and your ability to scratch that itch kind of go away too and then all of a sudden you're back to work and because the clock is relentless and now you're back right back in that environment that's not filling you up before long, three months, six months pass and you're like, "Why am I so tired all the time?" The answer is because we haven't sort of broken that cycle, so to speak. Does that resonate at all?
Charles Lee (09:17):
Yeah. When it's all said and done, you have things in your life that drained you and you have other things or people in your life that fill you. If you feel at the end of the weekend you're completely dreamed, that means there aren't enough inputs throughout the week that kind of fill your sense of whether it's belonging or purpose or relationship. And it's worth taking the extra time, even if it means we take a 20-minute lunch versus a 40-minute one or an hour, whatever the case may be, to find those moments to kind of pause or if you have a unexpected cancellation of an appointment or a call instead of trying to refill it with something else, what I often do is try to keep that moment sacred, even if it's like 10, 15 extra minutes to say, "Hey, let me just refocus." Whether it's literally turning off the lights of the office and just say, "Hey, I just want to spend just a couple of minutes and think about what is priority right now." And that just adds value with these little actions throughout the week.
Matt Poepsel (10:13):
I love that. It's like it's a gift. I can't tell you how much joy I have when somebody has to postpone or get a cancellation. Somebody called me yesterday and said, "Oh, I'm sick. I have to reschedule." I'm like, "Yay." I'm like, "Oh, no, terrible for you. Sorry about that. " But yay, you feel a little torn about that. But at the same time, my tendency is to then go fill that with more of this stuff versus looking at, as you're suggesting, Charles, which is like, "Oh, it's a gift." It's like, "Hey, oh, now you've got some time you can actually restore yourself like a battery or you can be a little visionary or you could just sit there, be on nature or whatever." You don't have to just go back to shoveling more dirt into that hole, so to speak. Something else that showed up in your book, which I absolutely love is this notion of being curious.
(10:55):
You point out that a lot of times we can experience it at first when we ask a lot of questions, maybe if you're a new job, new role, new opportunity, new venture, new idea, but over time somehow there's something in us that stops us from asking those questions. Can you tell me about that tendency? Because I've certainly experienced it myself where I have to really be in the mood to ask questions and show my ignorance. I'm not sure why that is, but I feel like it's costing me something. What's going on there?
Charles Lee (11:21):
Yeah. I think what happens is when you look at all of these various drop descriptions of new opportunities for folks, the increase of the word curiosity is showing up in the application process or the interview process a lot more than before. So on the surface level, I think a lot of businesses want curious people because curiosity is linked with innovation, it's linked with a sense of proactive involvement. But what usually happens when someone joins a business is that they say statistically within six months that curiosity drops in half for most people. And the reason for that is you could, like to your point, be very curious upfront, but as time passes along, people begin to realize that curiosity isn't necessarily incentivized or rewarded. It's more efficient for your own career advancement to line up to processes and modes of thinking, modes of lack of questioning in meetings because that gets you more efficiently to a place of advancement.
(12:20):
And I think that's where curiosity kind of dies. And the more professional we've come, it is easier to say this has worked in the past. And so you tell your team what works and that really limits your ability to diverge in your thinking, really limits your ability to explore new pathways. And you think about people to remember the beginnings of social media. There's certain channels that probably people our age are committed to, but when there's a new channel that comes up, they're like, "Nah, nah, I think I'll just stick to these channels." And it doesn't mean you have to know everything, but the lack of willingness to even explore what TikTok may do or other channels may do is I think our own testament against ourselves that at some point we've kind of ceased to be curious a little bit less. And it just happens naturally with age, but curiosity also has so many mental health benefits, physical benefits, and it really helps with brain health.
(13:19):
And I feel like we're losing a part of our own humanness that could be of great value add to the innovation of any company for the sake of conforming to whatever environment we're in.
Matt Poepsel (13:32):
What came up to mind for me is when you think about children and they ask questions all the time, they're not uncomfortable showing their ignorance. They're just, "Why? Why? Why, why, why?" Incessantly. And yet when we're in the adult phase, we might do that for a couple minutes. Why, why, why? And then we're like, okay, well, now I suddenly feel uncomfortable in uncertainty or uncomfortable showing that I may not know something. Can it be trained? Can we learn to get more comfortable staying curious and not feeling like it's a pejorative? Somebody's going to be like, "Can I ask so many questi shouldn't you know this by now?" There's a difference between being curious and being incompetent, I suppose, but is that something that we can sustain?
Charles Lee (14:06):
Yeah, I really hope that leaders start modeling it more. Unless people feel like there's some level of psychological safety to ask questions or to start meetings with why and hows versus more just what type of questions that are more dishing out what we need to do, I think it takes a cultural commitment, it takes a leadership commitment, it takes a modeling of folks to not be the traditional leader oracle person and transition into more of a mentor guide, sharing your lived experience about a scenario. That type of leader is a different kind of quote unquote servant leader. Some people classify that way or a leader that is really thinking less about their own leadership in a sense like you're upfront and more about what it means to facilitate an environment and curate a team that's going to do meaningful work.
Matt Poepsel (15:03):
It's almost like if the leader is saying, "The only certainty I have or the only thing I know is where we're going. What I don't know is everything else between here and there." And it would be so liberating to be able to say, we know what the vision is, we know what the intention is, but to be able to say, "Let's question everything. Let's not have me come in. " And I think this is something that even for senior leaders who are listening in, as soon as you make a statement, it carries a certain weight that people are like, they won't challenge it necessarily. Some feel like, well, you must know better because you've been doing this longer or you have the seat in the org chart or I'm showing my loyalty to you by just taking what you say and going and making it happen.
(15:41):
It can be almost dangerous as a senior person to make statements versus asking questions which people might be uncomfortable with at first like, "I don't want to get the answer wrong." You have to normalize that a bit and create the safety to say, "No, we're exploring this together. I'm just framing the conversation a litle bit here." And eventually when your people start to ask questions as well, then you're like, "Oh, now we're really getting somewhere."
Charles Lee (16:02):
I think you're completely right. Initially it may feel artificial. It may feel like you are forcing a culture, but that's how disciplines are formed. You do things that make you feel kind of awkward, but you know in the long run it's going to create almost like a second nature discipline. So you keep doing it until it feels like a part of who you are.
Matt Poepsel (16:23):
Right. It's like a muscle. So you work out the first time you're a little sore, but then eventually it'll come together for you. And I think that the reason this is such sage advice right now in particular is because everything's changing. And I feel like the companies that can't get out of their own way to say, "This is how we've always done it. " It's like, okay, well, guess what? Everything is different now. And so I feel like if there's ever been a time for ideas and for innovation and flexibility and adaptability, it's now. It's now. So what's kind of getting in the way of that are things that we've been talking about for sure. And I wonder when you think about now, you mentioned about intuition and you talk about these things about getting uncomfortable here, especially in the post-AI world, what's leading you to really lean into this and what tips do you have for us and how we can get it right?
Charles Lee (17:11):
Yeah, I am not anti-AI in any kind of core, it's a tool, but I think leaders should be paying attention as to what it means for machines and human beings to work together. And I think technology can automate output, but there are things that only really human beings for now can do our ability to maybe even pause before we decide. Machines are really fast and spitting out solutions, but I think there's something beautiful about human beings being able to kind of cause hesitation. This idea of hesitation is a powerful one because you don't want to just jump in and buy into whatever a machine puts out. You want to think about it or intuition, a sense that something is right or wrong and you may not even know what that is. And as a former philosophy major, intuition is sometimes we just know something without having justification for it and it ends up being actually true a lot of times.
(18:08):
And so there are things that I feel like that are in us or our lived experience or our sense of moral clarity for a business or the ethics of a company that human beings really have a unique advantage in. But all of those things like critical thinking skills take time to develop. If you have somebody on your team, they need time to wrestle and quote unquote fail, think about it for long hours, come back. And while you could put that into some type of artificial intelligence, but there's some nuances of skillset development and being someone who has really high acumen in an area that just takes hours of learning and work and testing and trying out an iteration. And so I feel like there is a role for human beings and I am concerned that sometimes we just too quickly in the name of efficiency, because I think if we create a culture where it's all about technology, then you will create a life where it is about constant automated output and you're only going to find yourself probably more burnt out and in a place where it's probably not going to be healthy because you're going to now want to produce 4X, 5X what you've been producing and it still becomes all about productivity.
(19:19):
And I think very few human beings, if they're honest with themselves, want to work in that environment. And this is where you're going to start to see pushback from not just young talent. We've seen it across the country in graduations where people are booing AI. And I think it's not at the core AI, but I think how we're leveraging AI may actually do a lot of harm in a lot of spaces and prevent the development of human beings.
Matt Poepsel (19:43):
I think it comes back to where you had us at the top, which is around that intentionality, that meaning, that purpose. I don't think any of the people who got booed were arguing that AI is going to make our lives more meaningful and more purposeful. Instead, when it comes to the productivity, the reality, the efficiency, all that stuff, you're like, okay, and now you're back to, is that really all there is? Is that why we're doing these things? And that's a dissatisfactory state for so many of these graduates who at this time in their life, they know they have to leave this sort of artificial learning environment that they've been in and protected from the real world and they're like, "That's the real world you want me to step into is the one that's basically taking away my agency and my creativity and my curiosity.
(20:24):
And it's just driving us toward productivity at all costs." You're like, "That doesn't sound all that appealing."
Charles Lee (20:30):
Not at all. Yeah, not at all.
Matt Poepsel (20:33):
But you do believe that AI can help create a space for us to do these things. Tell me about what that looks like. How might that work? How can we use these tools appropriately to really increase our opportunities to do the things that we're uniquely, I don't know, built to do but certainly can do
Charles Lee (20:50):
I think AI and other technologies could be great ways and great tools for which we create space, not just fill it. Is it a space creator or is it simply filling us with more activity that we can automate and do? I've heard for years from leaders for decades, if I had more time, I would do X, Y, and Z for people develop. And I think this tool can give us more time. It can give us meaningful time back. The question is, what are you going to do with that time? Are you going to spend time really figuring out maybe getting to know your team members better and really thinking in terms of how can I multiply their strengths? How can I multiply their sense of purpose? How can I invest in the things that matter to them so that when they're at work working together, it feels a litle bit more meaningful.
(21:37):
And I think technology like AI gives us some of our time back actually. But as a leader, we got to think, does that mean then we just 2X, 3X, 4X what we're doing from a productivity standpoint? Or does that mean for the long run, not just short-term results is, what can I do to create the type of culture I've always wanted to create, invest in people in the way that I've always wanted to invest in? And so that's my challenge for leaders is use technology to create space, not just fill it and then leverage that space you have. And even if you don't take all of that extra space you have, be sure to invest back into your team and the people that really ultimately at the end of the day make your company what it is today.
Matt Poepsel (22:21):
Yeah. I think we're bridging over to the third aspect in your framework, which is around influence. And you have this phrase I love, which is not just being the best in the world, but being best for the world. Everything hinges on that one slight word change. I think as you're describing, saying like, how can I make my team better? How can I use AI to free up time, not so I can just do more AI stuff, but to actually show up differently and change the trajectory of somebody's life, give them just the time to listen to them, to hear them out, to provide them with the hard coaching, whatever's needed in the moment, I suppose. Are those examples of being best for the world as opposed to being the best in the world?
Charles Lee (23:00):
Yeah. I respect managers who really fight for things like psychological safety to do important work or to test new ideas to really engage these principles of innovation. They model it if you are a mentor to some of your direct reports and walking with them through a difficult stretch of professional or personal life, not just for the sake of efficiency, but because it's right to really understand. I often ask leaders, "Do you know what your team's going through?" There's always a fine line. You can't just ask people just personal questions all the time, but there are plenty that we could remember. We can remember birthdays, but do you remember when they lost loved ones? Are there things that we can remember that shows them that our relationships matter, our knowledge of who they are matters? However, large or small, and it's really this idea of like, can we steward our environment and our people in a way that adds value to their life?
(23:57):
Because if you keep doing that, they're going to trust you more. I think they're going to lean on your wisdom. They're going to respect you. They're going to be more willing to do something that benefits some of your vision and your dreams because they feel like they actually belong and matter in the workplace.
Matt Poepsel (24:15):
And I think that eventually I hope management systems shift away from things we used to value and pay for around status updates and metrics and all these things. The machines do that so much better than we do. But what it opens up is this opportunity for us to do the things that you just suggested, Charles, which is all around being human with one another, remembering, holding space with people. I think that's really going to be the basis of competitive differentiation moving forward, creating environments where people feel like they can be human and use the tools. Yes, we're going to use the heck out of these tools, but that's not what's going to make us more competitive. It's can we create environments where people stay, where they're willing to give more of their psychological energy and their discretionary effort to our causes and see themselves in those causes?
(25:03):
I don't know if the management systems will evolve quickly enough in the near term, but I'm optimistic to think that they will.
Charles Lee (25:09):
To your point, let's leverage the tech to give us space to do what matters. And if we could do that, technology's going to be wonderful and it'll still produce better results than we have right now. And so I think as a leader, you're kind of discerning now you're leading teams of people, you're leading probably AI agents and then depending on the industry, you're also leading robots. And so really thinking about the tiers of leadership that you have and seeing how each tier of leadership serves the other too. It's a new kind of exciting day and may be scary at one level or you may feel cautious, but if you can embrace it and think in terms of at the end of the day, our team's going to be happier. Of course, the byproduct might be is you're going to increase retention, you're going to attract talent.
(25:50):
So those are all business elements that are still helpful that you can really leverage, but that's the goal. The goal is to really improve the people and invest in the people that you already have. And I think if you could do that, it's going to create a wonderful work environment for folks.
Matt Poepsel (26:07):
And I think that you also are not just so holistic when you think about your philosophy and your idea of combining strategy and ideation, but you also recognize the fact that we're not just only in work mode all the time. And your core framework, which is around spark, actualization and influence, you say can also help us with our families as parents, as complete people, not even just work people, your clients and the conversations you've been having. Is that something people are receptive to or are they still in this mode where, "No, I got to compartmentalize here. There's a huge wall between what I do at home and what I do at work and Never the Twain shall meet." Where are people today?
Charles Lee (26:44):
Yeah, I think people are thinking more holistically and a lot of them are motivated because of their relationship with their loved ones. They want to have a great career because it adds value to their home. And so I intentionally wrote the book that it doesn't just touch upon professional aspiration, but also maybe at home. If you have a teenage child that you want to grow in relationship with, it starts in the spark face with curiosity, just like you would do with any idea at work is really centering the questioning, not around yourself, the narrative of your own kid. And so instead of pulling away, drawing in and asking really good questions and about what they're wrestling with and then actualizing that to consistent connection and action that really shows them that you deeply and genuinely care. It may take months, it may take years, but you do that and then thinking in terms of what's their influence going to be like?
(27:37):
Are there things that I can model or give them access and resources to that helps them chase whatever it is that really makes them feel like there's a sense of purpose? So I intentionally wrote the book that you could take the framework and actually apply it to your personal life as much as you want to apply to your professional life.
Matt Poepsel (27:55):
Well, I think that's the ultimate and leading by example. The people around us, whether it's spouses, partners, kids, parents, everybody's watching all the time and I think they take clues. And if we seem like we're confident and content and having a positive experience, people are like, "How are you doing that? " Because not everybody's having that average experience, but I think when you're using the techniques and you're using the framework that way, boy, you're almost sending a message to society as to how it can be. I wish we had more of those. Those aren't the people who get booed at college graduations. They're the ones who are not nearly as famous, but who are giving us a better roadmap to follow and that's one that uses the framework that you've shared in the book.
Charles Lee (28:38):
Yep, absolutely.
Matt Poepsel (28:39):
Well, one thing I want to do is I'm going to give us a hard shift. I love to end my interviews with a nonsensical, completely ridiculous trivia question. And so I always try to find something in my guest background that I can sort of riff off of here. And I saw that you've got a couple of certificates from Harvard Business School. I had the good fortune to go there for a couple as well. And so I thought that was something new and I have in common, so I thought we'd use that as the basis of our question about HBS. And so here's our trivia question. We're going to have AI generated question here, so I don't know the question. It's coming up. In what city is the physical campus of Harvard Business School located? Is it A, Cambridge, Massachusetts, B, Boston, Massachusetts, or C, New Haven, Connecticut A, B or C?
(29:19):
Come on, we've been there. This is pretty straightforward. What do you think, man?
Charles Lee (29:22):
Yeah. Well, it's definitely Massachusetts. I know that.
Charles Lee (29:26):
Yeah.
Matt Poepsel (29:26):
And it's not Boston as some people might think. It's a little more specific than that. We'll go with A Cambridge on that one. So audience you're playing along at home, that's going to be ours. Is it Cambridge, Boston or New Haven? Classic trap actually it says.
(29:38):
Oh, really? Harvard University campus is in Cambridge, but HBS has its own dedicated campus across the Charles River in Boston, Massachusetts.
Charles Lee (29:45):
I actually drove by it during last summer.
Matt Poepsel (29:47):
Specifically the neighborhood of Allston. Is that true? Okay. Now I'm shocked. Now I'm curious. Now I'm curious. I'm going to go check that out. But it was a fabulous time. I had a great time over there as well. I saw you You had a couple different certificates and I did. You have one in negotiation, for example, which I think would be fascinating. Was that a good program?
Charles Lee (30:06):
That was wonderful. I think just really breaking down how to negotiate, how to think clearly. And what I loved about the negotiation course was finding value, really thinking about the value the other person would gain as much as you would. I think it really increased my empathy when it came to negotiation and the outcome is not to get the better deal. The outcome is to get a deal that is really at some level fair and becomes a win-win for both parties. And I think just kind of framing that and reminding all the little nuanced mechanics behind that was super helpful.
Matt Poepsel (30:38):
Yeah, they do a nice job. I ended up doing one in strategy and product or something, but awesome stuff. But I got a better question for you than that terrible trivia question that I'm now really upset that we didn't get right, which is where can my listeners go to learn more about you and about your new book?
Charles Lee (30:54):
Yeah, listeners can find me in most channels under Charles T. Lee. And in regards to the book, you can go to designyourgoodlife.com, the title of the book or any book distributor, or it's also in places like Target and Walmart. It's distributed pretty widely, so I hope people find time to pick it up.
Matt Poepsel (31:13):
Love that. So listeners, I'm going to have those links for you in the show notes. You're only one click away from getting connected with Charles and his excellent new book. Charles, thanks so much for being with us today. I've really, really enjoyed this elevated conversation we had.
Charles Lee (31:24):
Likewise, Matt, you're a great thinker. Thanks so much for having me on your podcast and thanks for teaching me along the way.
Matt Poepsel (31:36):
Here are my top three takeaways from the conversation I just had with Charles. The first was when he was talking about ideas and what puts ideas at risk. It could be the execution, it could be the culture. That really resonated with me. We need innovation, we need ideation. We have to recognize that some of us are wired differently. Some of us love the ambiguity. We have this driving force behind us to try to bring things into the world. Others of us might be more wired for making sure that things are right, that things are accurate and in control and that's a great quality to have as well. But when those two forces or those two almost weather fronts collide, it can be a little bit more challenged. We see some friction. So some of the ideas that are great ideas, as Charles mentioned, can really struggle when they hit the face of execution or of cultural challenges or differences.
(32:26):
The second thing I wanted to point out was this notion of curiosity. What is it about our expertise that prevents us from remaining curious? Why do we feel such discomfort not having all the answers, for example? I think in a world that we're headed into where there's so little known because of so much change, it's really dangerous to try to lean on our old expertise and try to pretend like we have all the answers. If we can get to the point where we can be reasonably vulnerable with our teams to say, "I don't know, that's a great question. Let's go figure that out together." Or, "Here's what I've been thinking about and I'm not really sure. How can we find an answer to this? " I think it's going to serve us better in the long run. And then finally, Charles talked a lot about work and Charles and I spent a lot of time talking about it, but I think that also we ended off in the end talking about home life as well and our personal life and how this framework that he's created really does apply to our holistic sense as well.
(33:19):
And I think that that's really, really important right now because there's so much bleed over between work and life and the lines are super blurry and I think that's okay if we make it okay. So I think using frameworks that might have been designed in one domain and applying them to others, I've always found great success with that. So I was really glad that Charles pointed out that he designed a framework in one space but really recognizes that it can be applied in others as well. So I really enjoyed the conversation with Charles. I hope you did too and that's it for this week. So until next time, don't just manage the business when you can Lead the People.