Podcast appearances and mentions of geoff colvin

Hello everyone and welcome back to the Direct Instruction podcast. My name is Dr. Zach Groshell, and today I am excited to be bringing you an interview with another DI legend, Geoff Colvin. Geoff will take us through the functions of student behavior, and the intersection of a well-managed classroom and a well-designed lesson.     […]

⚡️FREE RESOURCE:

Change is inevitable in the workplace, but how it's managed can make or break your organization's culture. In this episode, we unpack the concept of “socializing change”—an approach that transforms uncertainty into opportunity by putting people at the center of the process. Here's what we cover: • The impact of rapid technological and societal changes on workplace dynamics. • Why engaging employees early in the change process fosters trust and collaboration. • Lessons from real-world examples: a salary shift that failed and a digital transformation that created resistance. • Actionable strategies for leaders, including transparent communication, empathy-driven problem-solving, and creative storytelling. We also spotlight Humans Are Underrated by Geoff Colvin, exploring the human traits—empathy, collaborative creativity, and storytelling—that are essential for shaping a positive workplace culture during times of change. Whether you're a leader navigating transformation or someone passionate about workplace culture, this episode is packed with insights to help you lead with purpose and build a stronger, more connected team. Try our free Culture Transformation Starter Kit!

Talent Is Overrated by Geoff Colvin offers new evidence that top performers in any field, from Tiger Woods and Winston Churchill to Warren Buffett and Jack Welch, are not determined by their inborn talents. Greatness doesn't come from DNA but from practice and perseverance honed over decades. The key is how you practice, how you analyze the results of your progress and learn from your mistakes, that enables you to achieve greatness. What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else "Talent Is Overrated" by Geoff Colvin - Book PReview Book of the Week - BOTW - Season 7 Book 42 Buy the book on Amazon https://amzn.to/3Uht9IY GET IT. READ :) #awareness #deliberatepractice #greatness    FIND OUT which HUMAN NEED is driving all of your behavior http://6-human-needs.sfwalker.com/ Human Needs Psychology + Emotional Intelligence + Universal Laws of Nature = MASTER OF LIFE AWARENESS https://www.sfwalker.com/master-life-awareness --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/sfwalker/support

Basically your job is toast.  There is a machine or there will soon be a machine that can do it faster, better and cheaper than you.  Our skill set didn't change much from the start of agriculture 12,000 years ago until the industrial revolution in the mid-18th century.  This last 150 years has been busy.  We have created a weapon that can destroy our race.  Who thought we would be that stupid?  Fifty years ago we didn't believe machine translation of our complex language skills would get very far.  Driving cars and trucks requires us, because it is such a delicate, detailed and difficult set of tasks. What a ridiculous idea to imagine replacing those cantankerous, aging Japanese taxi drivers and punch perm truckers here in Tokyo with a self-driving, self-navigating vehicles.  Internet of Things Komatsu tractors ploughing rice fields by themselves, nah, never happen.  Apocalypse Now style “death from the air” requires top gun pilots and gum chewing gunners, doesn't it.  Killing each other can't be delegated to drones.  Robot vacuum cleaners, programmable pets, hotty droid receptionists, nimble stair climbing machines, adult men (many with passports) waving light sticks at holograph vocalists (Hatsune Miku) – not possible right? Don't worry, moral and ethical judgments, “the buck stops here” business decisions, hiring and firing employment protocols, creative brainstorming – there is a long list of actions which will always require people to be involved.  We need the human interaction, to hear stories, to share experiences, to be motivated, to aspire together against the rival firm, to set and follow our organisation's Vision and Mission. We want empathy, collaboration, a sense of ownership, relationships.  Geoff Colvin in his book “Humans Are Underrated” references a recent Oxford Economics study asking employers which staff skills they will need the most over the next five to ten years.  The top priorities were all right brain - relationship building, teaming, co-creativity, brainstorming, cultural sensitivity and the ability to manage diverse employees.  Henry Ford complained that every time he wanted a pair of human hands on his assembly line, he got “a brain attached”.  Today, we want that brain that can feel as well as think.  We have to be good at being human and good in our interactions with other humans.  Colvin noted, “being a great performer is becoming less about what you know and more about what you're like. Here is the challenge for typical male CEO driver types, who are assertive and task, not people, oriented:  how to lead organisations where technical skill is being outsourced to bots and the value of human interaction has become more critical to the success of the organisation?.  Do you ignore it or do you decide to change?  How do you change?

Your Recipe for Success looks something like equal parts of three things. Motivation, the spark and desire. Discipline, your habits and structure. And Grit, your capacity to overcome challenges, adjust, and perservere. Mike shares some of the research that's been done on these topics and ways you can integrate them to get your closer to where ever you want to be. Links: Randy Pausch "Achieving Your Childhood Dreams" https://youtu.be/ji5_MqicxSo Atomic Habits by James Clear https://amzn.to/3LmLPSD (Excerpt here: https://jamesclear.com/marginal-gainshttps://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains) Carol Dweck TED Talk - https://youtu.be/_X0mgOOSpLU Grit by Angela Duckworth - https://amzn.to/4bHxtY2 Angela Duckworth TED Talk - https://youtu.be/H14bBuluwB8 Mindset by Carol Dweck - https://amzn.to/3LlWZHg The Art of Learning by Josh Waitzkin - https://amzn.to/466p5Qy Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin - https://amzn.to/4667I2r   Find us on social media (Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/YouTube) @TacTangents. You can join the conversation in our Facebook Discussion Group. Find all of our episodes, articles, some reading list ideas, and more on our website www.tacticaltangents.com Like what we're doing? Head over to Patreon and give us a buck for each new episode. You can also make a one-time contribution at GoFundMe. Intro music credit Bensound.com

Just like any tool, AI can be used for good - or evil. This week we are taking ideas and insights from Joel Stevenson. Joel is currently the VP of Growth at Vendasta, which acquired Yesware in 2022, where Joel was the CEO. Prior to Yesware, Joel build Wayfair's B2B business from scratch to $400 million in annual revenue. In this episode, you'll learn: The importance of sales tech for growth. The benefits of sales tech in terms of time savings and information advantage. How to use tech for effective sales conversations. What your responsibility, as a sales leader, is in analytics and understanding technology. How AI and personalization in sales tech can make a competitive advantage. And, if you think you need some help managing your Sales Tech stack, maybe it's time to give us a a call.  -=+=-=+=--=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+= Free offer for listeners of the Full Funnel Freedom Podcast. It's incredibly frustrating as sales leaders when our sellers get a deal almost across the finish line, but can't quite push it to the finish, even though they've promised us that it's coming in real soon. We are offering a Free white paper on Three ways to get those sales across the line. To get this free, insightful report, visit us at fullfunnelfreedom.com/sputter -=+=-=+=--=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+= Resources: This episode is also on YouTube:  Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else - by Geoff Colvin. Reboot: Leadership and the Art of Growing Up - by Jerry Colonna Reunion: Leadership and the Longing to Belong - by Jerry Colonna Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity - by David Allen "The Smell of the Place" - Professor Sumantra Ghoshal - Talk at the World Economic Forum on YouTube Yesware Blog The Hard Sell Podcast with Joel Stevenson Joel Stevenson on LinkedIn Full Funnel Freedom https://fullfunnelfreedom.com Sandler on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/sandler_yyc/  Sandler in Calgary - www.hamish.sandler.com/howtosandler Connect with Hamish Knox on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/hamishknox/ Sponsorship or guest inquiries - podcast@fullfunnelfreedom.com    

Rachel Siegel is a reporter for the Washington Post, where she covers the Federal Reserve and also reports on the domestic economy more broadly. Rachel joins Macro Musings to talk about the current Fed beat as well as her work on other economic issues, including how the Fed deals with physical cash, the precarious state of the commercial real estate market, the potential issues facing voters heading into the 2024 election, and a lot more.   Transcript for this week's episode.   Rachel's Twitter: @rachsieg Rachels Washington Post profile   David Beckworth's Twitter: @DavidBeckworth Follow us on Twitter: @Macro_Musings   Join the Macro Musings mailing list! Check out our new Macro Musings merch!   Related Links:   *Two Blocks from the Federal Reserve, a Growing Encampment of the Homeless Grips the Economy's Most Powerful Person* by Rachel Siegel   *The High-tech, Super-secure Government Warehouse Where Old Cash Dies* by Rachel Siegel, Joy Sharon Yi, Hannah Yoon, and Emily Wright   *How the ‘Urban Doom Loop' Could Pose the Next Economic Threat* by Rachel Siegel   *Austin's Office Market is Exploding. But No One is Moving in* by Rachel Siegel   *Remote Work Guru Nick Bloom Thinks We'll Never Go Back to the Office Full-time – But ‘Maintaining Discipline is Important'* by Geoff Colvin

More than 20 years ago, the political scientist Francis Fukuyama characterized the Information Technology revolution as "benign" but cautioned that "the most significant threat posed by contemporary biotechnology is the possibility that it will alter human nature and thereby move us into a post-human stage of history." From Twitter to CRISPR to ChatGPT, a lot has changed since then. In this episode of Faster, Please! — The Podcast, Dr. Fukuyama shares his thoughts on those developments and the recent advances in generative AI, as well as the cultural importance of science fiction.Dr. Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. His books include The End of History and the Last Man, Our Posthuman Future, and 2022's Liberalism and Its Discontents, among many others. Other writings can be found at American Purpose.In This Episode* The consequences of the IT revolution (1:37)* Can government competently regulate AI? (8:14)* AI and liberal democracy (17:29)* The cultural importance of science fiction (24:16)* Silicon Valley's life-extension efforts (31:11)Below is an edited transcript of our conversationThe consequences of the IT revolutionJames Pethokoukis: In Our Posthuman Future more than 20 years ago, you wrote, “The aim of this book is to argue that [Aldous] Huxley was right [in Brave New World], that the most significant threat posed by contemporary biotechnology is the possibility that it will alter human nature and thereby move us into a ‘posthuman' stage of history. This is important, I will argue, because human nature exists, is a meaningful concept, and has provided a stable continuity to our experience as a species.” But then you added, “It may be that, as in the case of 1984” — and, I think, parenthetically, information technology — “we will eventually find biotechnology's consequences are completely and surprisingly benign.” After 20 years, and the advent of social media, and now it seems like possibly a great leap forward in AI, would you still characterize the IT revolution as “benign”?Francis Fukuyama: That's obviously something that's changed considerably since I wrote that book because the downside of IT has been clear to everybody. When the internet was first privatized in the 1990s, most people, myself included, thought it would be good for democracy because information was power, and if you made information more widely available, that would distribute power more democratically. And it has done that, in fact. A lot of people have access to information that they can use to improve their lives, to mobilize, to agitate, to push for the protection of their rights. But I think it's also been weaponized in ways that we perhaps didn't anticipate back then.And then, there was this more insidious phenomenon where it turns out that the elimination of hierarchies that controlled information, that we celebrated back then, actually turned out to be pretty important. If you had a kind of legacy media that cared about journalistic standards, you could trust the information that was published. But the internet really undermined those legacy sources and replaced it with a world in which anyone can say anything. And they do. Therefore, we have this cognitive chaos right now where conspiracy theories of all sorts get a lot of credibility because people don't trust these hierarchies that used to be the channels for information. Clearly, we've got a big problem on our hands. That doesn't mean that the biotech is not still going to be a big problem; it's just that I think the IT part has moved ahead very rapidly. But I think the biotech will get there in time.While I think most of the concern that I've heard expressed about AI, in particular, has been about these science fiction-like existential risks or job loss, obviously your concern has more to do, as with in Our Posthuman Future, how it will affect our liberal democracy. And you point out some of the downsides of the IT revolution that weren't obvious 30 years ago but now seeing plainly obvious today.To me, the coverage of AI has been really very, very negative, and we've had calls for an AI pause. Do you worry that maybe we've overlearned that lesson? That rather than going into this with kind of a Pollyannaish attitude, we're immediately going into this AI with deep concerns. Is there a risk of overcorrecting?The short answer is, yes. I think that because of our negative experience with social media and the internet lately, we expect the worst from technology. But I think that the possibilities for AI actually making certain social problems much better are substantial. I think that the existential worries about AI are just absurd, and I really don't see scenarios under which the human species is going to face extinction. That seems to be this Terminator, killer, Skynet scenario, and I know very few serious experts in this area that think that that's ever likely to materialize. The bigger fears, I think, are more mundane ones about job loss as a result of advancing technology. And I think that's a very complicated issue. But it does seem to me that, for example, generative AI could actually end up complementing human skills and, in fact, could complement the skills of lower-skilled or lower-educated workers in a way that will actually increase economic equality.Up till now, I think most economists would blame the advance of computer technology for having vastly increased social inequality, because in order to take advantage of existing technologies, if you have a better education, you're going to have a higher income and so forth. But it's entirely possible that generative AI will actually slow that trend because it will give people with lower levels of education the ability to do useful things that they weren't able to do previously. There's actually some early empirical work that suggests that that's already been a pattern. So, yes, I think you're right that we've kind of overreacted. I just think in general, predicting where this technology is going to go in the next 50 years is a fool's errand. It's sort of like in the 1880s asking somebody, “Well, what's this newfangled thing called electricity going to do in 50 years?” Anything that was said back then I think would've been overtaken by events very, very rapidly.Can government competently regulate AI?Anyone who has sat through previous government hearings on social media has been underwhelmed at the ability of Congress to understand these issues, much less come up with a vast regulatory structure. Are you confident in the ability of government to regulate AI, whether it's to regulate deep fakes or what have you — why should I be confident in their ability to do that?I think you've got to decompose the regulatory challenge a little bit. I've been involved here at Stanford, we have a Cyber Policy Center, and we've been thinking about different forms of IT regulation. It's a particular challenge for regulators for a number of reasons. One of the questions you come up with in regulatory design is, “Is this something that actually can be undertaken by existing agencies, or do you actually need a new type of regulator with special skills and knowledge?” And I think, to me, pretty clearly the answer to that is yes. But that agency would have to be designed very differently, because the standard regulatory design, the agency has a certain amount of expertise in a particular sector and they use that expertise to write rules that then get written into law, and then things like the Administrative Procedure Act begins to apply. That's what's been going on, for example, with something like net neutrality, where the FCC put the different regulations up for notice and comment, and you go through this very involved procedure to write the new rules and so forth. I think in an area like AI, that's just not going to work, because the thing is moving so quickly. And that means that you're actually going to have to delegate more autonomy and discretionary power to the regulatory agency, because otherwise, they're simply not going to be able to keep up with the speed at which the technology advances. In normative terms, I have no problem with that. I think that governments do need to exercise social control over new technologies that are potentially very disruptive and damaging, but it has to be done in a proper way.Can you actually design a regulatory agency that would have any remote chance of keeping up with the technology? The British have done this. They have a new digital regulator that is composed of people coming out of the IT industry, and they've relaxed the civil service requirements to be able to hire people with the appropriate knowledge and backgrounds. In the United States, that's going to be very difficult because we have so many cumbersome HR requirements for hiring and promotion of people that go into the federal civil service. Pay, for one thing, is a big issue because we don't pay our bureaucrats enough. If you're going to hire some hotshot tech guy out of the tech sector and offer him a job as a GS-14, it just isn't going to work. So I don't think that you can answer the question, “Can we regulate adequately or not?” in a simple way. I think that there are certain things you would have to do if you were going to try to regulate this sector. Can the United States do that given the polarization in our politics, given all of these legacy institutions that prevent us from actually having a public sector that is up to this task? That I don't know. As you can tell, I've got certain skepticism about that.Is it a worthwhile critique of this regulatory process to think of AI as this discreet technology that you need a certain level of expertise to understand? If it is indeed a general-purpose technology that will be used by a variety of sectors, all sectors perhaps, can you really have an AI regulator that doesn't de facto become an economy regulator?No, you probably can't. This is another challenge, which is that, as you say, AI in general is so broad. It's already being used in virtually every sector of the economy, and you obviously don't want a “one size fits all” effort to govern the use of this technology. So I think that you have to be much more specific about the areas where you think potential harms could exist. There's also different approaches to this other than regulation. In 2020, I chaired a Stanford working group on platform scale, which was meant to deal with the old — at that point it was a kind of contemporary problem­ — but now it seems like an old problem of content mediation on the internet. So how do you deal with this problem that Elon Musk has now revealed to be a real problem: You don't want everything to be available on social media platforms, but how do you actually control that content in a way that serves a kind of general democratic public interest? As we thought about this in the course of this working group deliberation, we concluded that straightforward regulation is not going to work. It won't work in the United States because we're way too polarized. Just think about something like reviving the old fairness doctrine that the FCC used to apply to legacy broadcast media. How are you going to come up with something like that? What's “fair and balanced” coverage of vaccine denialism? It's just not going to happen.And what we ended up advocating was something we called “middleware,” where you would use regulation to create a competitive ecosystem of third-party media content regulators so that when you use the social media platform, you the user could buy the services or make use of the services of a content regulator that would tailor your feed or your search on Google to criteria that you specified in advance. So if you tended progressive, you could get a progressive one. If you only like right-wing media, you could get a content regulator that would deliver what you want. If you wanted to buy only American-made products, you could get a different one. The point is that you would use competition in this sphere because the real threat, as we saw it, was not actually so much this compartmentalization as the power of a single big platform. There's really only three of them. It's Google, Meta, and now X, or the formerly Twitter, that really had this kind of power. The danger to a democracy was not that you could say anything on the internet, the danger was the power of a single big platform owned by a private, for-profit company to have an outsized role over political discourse in the United States. Elon Musk and Twitter is a perfect example of that. He apparently has his own foreign policy, which is not congruent with American foreign policy, but as a private owner of this platform, he's got the power to pursue this private foreign policy. So that was our idea.In that particular case, you could use competition as an alternative to state regulation, because what you really wanted to do was to break up this concentrated power that was exercised by the platforms. So that's one approach to one aspect of digital regulation. It doesn't deal with AI. I don't know whether there's an analog in the AI sphere, but I think it's correct that what you don't want is a single regulator that then tries to write broad rules that apply to what is actually just an enormously broad technology that will apply in virtually every sector of the economy.AI and liberal democracyIn response to the call for a six-month "AI pause," critics of that idea pointed to competition with China. They suggested that given the difficulties of regulating AI, we might risk losing the "AI race" to the Chinese. Do you think that's a reasonable criticism?This is a general problem with technologies. Certain technologies distribute power and other technologies concentrate it. So the old classic 19th-century coal- and steel- and fossil fuel–based economy tended to concentrate power. And certainly nuclear weapons concentrate power because you really need to be a big entity in order to build a nuclear weapon, in order to build all the uranium processing and so forth. But other technologies, like biotech, actually do not concentrate power. Any high school student can actually now use CRISPR to do genetic engineering. And they make biotech labs that will fit in individual shipping containers. So the regulatory problem is quite different.Now, the problem with AI is that it appears that these large language models really require a lot of resources. In fact, it's interesting, because we used to think the problem was actually having big data sets. But that's actually not the problem; there's plenty of data out there. It's actually building a parallel computer system that's powerful enough to process all the words on the internet, and that's been the task that only the largest companies can do. I think that it's correct that if we had told these companies not to do this, we would be facing international competitive pressures that would make that a bad decision. However, I do think that it's still a risk to allow that kind of power to be not subject to some form of democratic control. If it's true that you need these gigantic corporations to do this sort of thing, those corporations ought to be serving American national interests.And again, I hate to keep referring to Elon Musk, but we're seeing this right now with Starlink. It turns out Starlink is extremely valuable militarily, which has been demonstrated very clearly in Ukraine. Should the owner of Starlink be allowed to make important decisions as to who is going to use this technology on the battlefield and where that technology can be used? I don't think so. I don't think that one rich individual should have that kind of power. And actually, I'm not quite sure, I thought that the Defense Department had actually agreed to start paying Musk for the Ukrainian use of Starlink. I think that's the actual appropriate answer to that problem, so that it should not be up to Elon Musk where Starlink can be used. It should be up to the people that make American foreign policy: the White House and the State Department and so forth. And so, I think by analogy, if you develop this technology that requires really massive scale and big corporations to develop it, it should nonetheless be under some kind of state control such that it is not the decision of some rich individual how it's going to be applied. It should be somehow subject to some kind of democratic control.On a normative level, I think that's very clear, but the specific modalities by which you do that are complicated. For example, let's say there's a gigantic corporation that is run by some lunatic that wants to use it for all sorts of asocial reasons, proliferating deep fakes or trying to use it to undermine general social trust in institutions and so forth. Is that okay? Is that a decision that should be up to a private individual or isn't there some public interest in controlling that in some fashion? I hate speaking about this in such general terms, but I think you have to settle this normative question and then you can get into the narrower technical question of, is it possible to actually exert that kind of control and how would you do that?You've questioned in your previous writings whether liberal democracy could survive a world with both humans and posthumans and where we're manipulating human nature. Can it survive in a world where there are two different intelligences? If we had a human intelligence and we had an artificial general intelligence, would such an entity pose a challenge our civilization, to a democratic capitalist civilization?It's hard to answer that question. You can imagine scenarios where it obviously would pose a challenge. One of the big questions is whether this general intelligence somehow escapes human control, and that's a tough one. I think that the experts that I trust think that that's not going to happen. That ultimately, human beings are going to be able to control this thing and use it for their own purposes. So again, the whole Skynet scenario is really not likely to happen. But that doesn't solve the problem, because even if it's under human control, how do you make sure it's the right humans, right? Because if this falls into the wrong hands, it could be very, very destructive. And that then becomes a political question. I'm not quite sure how you're going to want to answer it.The cultural importance of science fictionYou mentioned Skynet from the Terminator franchise. Do you worry that we're too steeped in dystopian science fiction? It seems like we can only see the downside when we're presented with a new technology like a biotechnology breakthrough or an AI breakthrough. Is that how it seems to you?I actually wrote a blog post about this. I really read a lot of science fiction. I have my whole life. There's a big difference between the sorts of stories that you saw back in the 1950s and ‘60s and the stuff that has come out recently. It's hard to generalize over such a vast field, but space odysseys and space travel was very common, and a lot of that was extremely optimistic: that human beings would colonize Mars and then the distant planets and you'd have a warp drive that would take you out of the solar system and so forth. And it was kind of a paean to unlimited human possibilities. Whereas I do think that, especially with the rise of environmentalism, there was a greater consciousness of the downsides of technological advance. So you got more and more dystopian kinds of imaginings. Now, it is not a universal thing. For example, I also wrote a blog about two kind of global warming–related recent science-fiction books. One is TheMinistry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson. And that actually is a very optimistic take on global warming, because it's set in the 2050s and basically the human race has figured out how to deal with global warming. They do it, I think, through a bunch of very implausible political scenarios, but there's a ministry for the future that wisely…That book seems a little too comfortable with violence and compulsion for my taste.The other one is Neal Stephenson's Termination Shock: Basically, there's a single rich oligarch in Texas that takes it upon himself to put all this sulfur dioxide in the upper atmosphere to cool the earth, and he succeeds, and it then changes the climate in China and India. I don't know whether that's optimistic or pessimistic. But I actually do think that it's very useful to have this kind of science fiction, because you really do have to imagine to yourself what some of the both upsides and downsides will be. So it's probably the case that there's more dystopian fiction, but I do think that if you didn't have that, you wouldn't have a concrete idea of what to look for.If you think about both 1984 and Brave New World, these were the big dystopian futures that were imagined in the 1950s. And both of them came true in many ways. It gave us a vocabulary, like, “Big Brother,” the “Telescreen,” or “Epsilons,” and “Gammas,” and “Alphas,” and so forth, by which we can actually kind of interpret things in the present. I think if you didn't have that vocabulary, it would be hard to have a discussion about what is it that we're actually worried about. So yes, I do think that there is a dystopian bias to a lot of that work that's done, but I think that you've got to have it. Because you do have to try to imagine to yourself what some of these downsides are.You mentioned a couple of books. Are there any films or television shows that you've watched that you feel provide a plausible optimistic vision?I don't know whether it's optimistic. One of my favorite book series and then TV series was The Expanse, written by a couple of guys that go by a pseudonym. It's not optimistic, in the sense that it projects all of our current geopolitical rivalries forward into a future in which human beings have colonized, not just the outer planets, but also intergalactically, figured out how to move from one place to another, and they're still having these fights between rich and poor and so forth. But I guess the reason that I liked it, especially the early parts of that series, when you just had an Epstein Drive, I mean, it was just one technological change that allowed you to move. It's sort of like the early days of sailing ships, where you could get to Australia, but it would take you six months to get there. So that was the situation early on in the book, and that was actually a very attractive future. All of a sudden, human beings had the ability to mine the asteroid belt, they could create gigantic cities in space where human beings could actually live and flourish. That's one of the reasons I really liked that: because it was very human. Although there were conflicts, they were familiar conflicts. There were conflicts that we are dealing with today. But it was, in a way, hopeful because it was now done at this much larger scale that gave hope that human beings would not be confined to one single planet. And actually, one of the things that terrifies me is that the idea that in 100 years, we may discover that we actually can't colonize even Mars or the Moon. That the costs of actually allowing human beings to live anywhere but on earth just make it economically impossible. And so we're kind of stuck on planet Earth and that's the human future.I wrote a small essay about The Expanse where I talked about having a positive vision. As I saw it, this is several hundred years in the future, and we're still here. We've had climate change, but we're still here. We've expanded throughout the universe. If an asteroid should hit the earth, there's still going to be humanity. And people were angry about that essay, because this is a future but there's still problems. Yes, because we're still part of that future: human beings.Silicon Valley's life-extension effortsGetting back to biotechnology and transhumanism and living forever, these things you wrote about in Our Posthuman Future: What do you make of the efforts by folks in Silicon Valley to try to extend lifespans? From a cultural perspective, from your perspective as a political scientist, what do you make of these efforts?I think they're terrible. I actually wrote about this and have thought about this a lot, about life extension. In fact, I think human biomedicine has produced a kind of disastrous situation for us right now because by the time you get to your mid-80s, roughly half of the population that's that old has some kind of long-term, chronic, degenerative disease. And I think that it was actually a much better situation when people were dying of heart attacks and strokes and cancer when they were still in their 70s. It's one of those things where life extension is individually very desirable because no individual wants to die. But socially, I think the impact of extending life is bad. Because quite frankly, you're not going to have adaptation unless you have generational turnover. There's a lot of literature now, Neil Howe has just written a new book on this about how important generations are. There's this joke that economists say, that the field of economics progresses one funeral at a time. Because, basically, you're born into a certain age cohort, and to the end of your life, you're going to retain a lot of the views of people that were born going through the same kind of life experiences. And sometimes they're just wrong. And unless that generation dies off, you're just not going to get the kind of social movement that's necessary.We've already seen a version of this with all these dictators like Franco and Castro that refuse to die, and modern medicine keeps them alive forever. And as a result, you're stuck with their kind of authoritarian governments for way too long. And so I think that, socially, there's a good reason why under biological evolution you have population turnover and we humans don't live forever. What's the advantage of everybody being able to live 200 years as opposed to let's say 80 or 90 years? Is that world going to be better? It's going to have all sorts of problems, right? Because you're going to have all of these 170-year-old people that won't get out of the way. How are you going to get tenure if all the tenured people are 170 years old and there's no way of moving them out of the system? I think that these tech billionaires, it's a kind of selfishness that they've got the money to fund all this research so that they hope that they can keep themselves alive, because they are afraid of dying. I think it's going to be a disaster if they're ever successful in bringing about this kind of population-level life extension. And I think we're already in a kind of disastrous situation where a very large proportion of the human population is going to be of an age where they're going to be dependent on the rest of the society to keep them alive. And that's not good economically. That's going to be very, very hard to sustain.Micro Reads▶ IBM Tries to Ease Customers' Qualms About Using Generative A.I. - Steve Lohr, NYT |▶ Six Months Ago Elon Musk Called for a Pause on AI. Instead Development Sped Up - Will Knight, WIRED |▶ AI is getting better at hurricane forecasting - Gregory Barber, Ars Technica |▶ The promise — and peril — of generative AI - John Thornhill, FT |▶ Uber Freight Taps AI to Help Compete in Tough Cargo Market - Thomas Black, Bloomberg |▶ Why AI Doesn't Scare Me - Gary Hoover, Profectus |▶ A top economist who studies AI says it will double productivity in the next decade: ‘You need to embrace this technology and not resist it' - Geoff Colvin, Yahoo! Finance |▶ Meta is putting AI chatbots everywhere - Alex Heath, Verge |▶ The Big AI Risk We're Not Talking About - Brent Skorup, Discourse |▶ Mark Zuckerberg can't quit the metaverse - Laura Martins, Verge |▶ This robotic exoskeleton can help runners sprint faster - Rhiannon Williams, MIT Technology Review |▶ The bizarre new frontier for cell-cultivated meat: Lion burgers, tiger steaks, and mammoth meatballs - Jude Whiley, Vox |▶ A power grab against private equity threatens the US economy - Drew Maloney, FT |▶ Risks Are Growing of a Double-Dip ‘Vibecession' - Jonathan Levin, Bloomberg |▶ NSF partners with the Institute for Progress to test new mechanisms for funding research and innovation - NSF |▶ It's Too Easy to Block a Wind Farm in America - Robinson Meyer, Heatmap |▶ Can we finally reverse balding with these new experimental treatments? - Joshua Howgego, NewScientist | This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Kimberly Nix Berens, Ph.D., is a scientist-educator and Founder of Fit Learning.  She co-created a system of instruction based in behavioral science and the Technology of Teaching, which has transformed the learning abilities of thousands of children worldwide. Fit learning programs use virtual instruction to target areas a wide range of skills: early learning skills, basic classroom readiness, phonemic awareness, reading fluency, comprehension, inferential language, basic and advanced mathematics, logical problem solving, grammar, and expressive writing.  From her early beginnings in a broom closet at the University of Nevada – Reno, Dr. Berens has helped grow Fit Learning to an organization with more than 30 locations worldwide. She recently published her first book, Blind Spots: Why students fail and the science that can save them.Recommended Resources:Project Follow ThroughPeak by Anders EricssonTalent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin

On this episode of 3 More Questions, you'll hear David Novak's answers to: Are leaders born with natural, God-given talent or can anyone get good at anything with deliberate practice? Will humans be replaced by tech and AI? How would you advise a leader to enhance human capital within their organization? ALSO... Get coaching from David by signing up to receive his Weekly Leadership Plan. It builds on each podcast episode by offering actionable steps you can take each week to incorporate the learnings from the episode into your leadership style. It only takes about 5 minutes and is a great way to start off your week! https://howleaderslead.com/plan/ Become a better leader in 5 days with our free, 5-Day Leadership Tune Up. This five-minute-a-day program is designed for the busy leader – it cuts right to the chase and gives you the practical know-how you'll need to boost your confidence as a leader. https://howleaderslead.com/5-day-leadership-tuneup/ Subscribe to the How Leaders Lead podcast to ensure you never miss an episode! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-leaders-lead-with-david-novak/id1223803642

Have you ever wondered what it really takes to be excellent at something?  If so, you're going to love this episode with Geoff Colvin. He's the Senior Editor-at-Large for Fortune magazine and one of the most curious and articulate people I've had the pleasure of getting to know over the years. Geoff is also fascinated by excellence in human performance, especially as it pertains to business leaders. He's spent decades talking to experts, analyzing research, and asking big questions. Today, you get to benefit from his know-how. If there's ANYTHING you want to get better at – whether it's at work or at home – this conversation basically gives you a playbook for it. Plus, we get into some bigger questions around AI and the skills leaders really need to be focusing on right now. Your mind is going to be spinning with big insights – listen now! You'll also learn: Why talent is overrated (and why that's good news for you!) The key to improving performance at practically anything The 4 characteristics of practice that actually help you improve Three qualities of a top-notch coach The most important trait for us to develop as AI takes off ALSO... Get coaching from David by signing up to receive his Weekly Leadership Plan. It builds on each podcast episode by offering actionable steps you can take each week to incorporate the learnings from the episode into your leadership style. It only takes about 5 minutes and is a great way to start off your week! https://howleaderslead.com/plan/ Become a better leader in 5 days with our free, 5-Day Leadership Tune Up. This five-minute-a-day program is designed for the busy leader – it cuts right to the chase and gives you the practical know-how you'll need to boost your confidence as a leader. https://howleaderslead.com/5-day-leadership-tuneup/ Subscribe to the How Leaders Lead podcast to ensure you never miss an episode! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-leaders-lead-with-david-novak/id1223803642

Are you ready to witness a revolutionary shift in the financial landscape? Brace yourself, as this episode unpacks the historic transition from financial capital being the scarce resource to human ability taking the lead. In a world where financial institutions used to  brimming with cash, we explore how businesses navigate this abundance and the blowback from the 2007-2008 financial crisis to now seeking workers that want to improve in their abilities. Be sure to equip yourself with our recommended resources, Deep Work by Cal Newport and the Mojo Academy, that will help you ride these waves of change successfully.In todays episode we turn to a familiar guide in Geoff Colvin and his masterpiece work, Talent is Overrated:   What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else helping us to to not overlook the undeniable potency of hard work and consistent improvement.  Key Points from the Episode:Through the wisdom of Geoff Colvin, we affirm that talent is no match for diligence. So, how do you stay relevant in this rapidly evolving economy? Simple, by boosting your skills and enhancing your value at work. Don't miss out on this enlightening conversation, filled with takeaways that can potentially reshape your career trajectory. And remember, more resources await on our show page at teammojoacademy.com. Other resources: MM# 33--Talent vs Hard WorkMM#72-- Lets Rock 10,000 HoursMore goodnessGet your FREE Academy Review here!Get our top book recommendations list Get new podcast episodes dropped into your email box easilyWant to leave a review? Click here, and if we earned a five-star review from you **high five and knuckle bumps**, we appreciate it greatly, thank you so much!Because we care what you think about what we think and our website, please email David@teammojoacademy.com, or if you want to leave us a quick FREE, painless voicemail, we would appreciate that as well.

Basically your job is toast.  There is a machine or there will soon be a machine that can do it faster, better and cheaper than you.  Our skill set didn't change much from the start of agriculture 12,000 years ago until the industrial revolution in the mid-18th century.  This last 150 years has been busy.  We have created a weapon that can destroy our race.  Who thought we would be that stupid?  Fifty years ago we didn't believe machine translation of our complex language skills would get very far.    Driving cars and trucks requires us, because it is such a delicate, detailed and difficult set of tasks. What a ridiculous idea to imagine replacing those cantankerous, aging Japanese taxi drivers and punch perm truckers here in Tokyo with a self-driving, self-navigating vehicles.  Internet of Things Komatsu tractors ploughing rice fields by themselves, nah, never happen.  Apocalypse Now style “death from the air” requires top gun pilots and gum chewing gunners, doesn't it.  Killing each other can't be delegated to drones.  Robot vacuum cleaners, programmable pets, hotty droid receptionists, nimble stair climbing machines, adult men (many with passports) waving light sticks at holograph vocalists (Hatsune Miku) – not possible right? Don't worry, moral and ethical judgments, “the buck stops here” business decisions, hiring and firing employment protocols, creative brainstorming – there is a long list of actions which will always require people to be involved.  We need the human interaction, to hear stories, to share experiences, to be motivated, to aspire together against the rival firm, to set and follow our organisation's Vision and Mission. We want empathy, collaboration, a sense of ownership, relationships.   Geoff Colvin in his book “Humans Are Underrated” references a recent Oxford Economics study asking employers which staff skills they will need the most over the next five to ten years.  The top priorities were all right brain - relationship building, teaming, co-creativity, brainstorming, cultural sensitivity and the ability to manage diverse employees.  Henry Ford complained that every time he wanted a pair of human hands on his assembly line, he got “a brain attached”.  Today, we want that brain that can feel as well as think.  We have to be good at being human and good in our interactions with other humans.  Colvin noted, “being a great performer is becoming less about what you know and more about what you're like. Here is the challenge for typical male CEO driver types, who are assertive and task, not people, oriented:  how to lead organisations where technical skill is being outsourced to bots and the value of human interaction has become more critical to the success of the organisation?.  Do you ignore it or do you decide to change?  How do you change?

Any given person is capable of becoming a “genius” as something - it just takes time and intelligent, deliberate practice. That is the key to Geoff Colvin's book Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Glass Performers from Everybody Else, which Dr. Chad Johnson and Regan Robertson discuss in this fun and interesting episode of Everyday Practices Podcast.

Meet Jack Welch, celebrated wrecker of real jobs and leading light of Wall Street wankers. Please share this episode with your friends and start a conversation.For an entertaining deep dive into the theme of season five (Phalse Prophets), read the definitive peer-reviewed taxonomic analysis from our very own Jason Bradford, PhD. Sources/Links/Notes:David Gelles, The Man Who Broke Capitalism: How Jack Welch Gutted the Heartland and Crushed the Soul of America—and How to Undo His Legacy (2022).David Gelles, "How Jack Welch's Reign at G.E. Gave Us Elon Musk's Twitter Feed," New York Times (2022).Malcolm Gladwell, "Was Jack Welch the Greatest C.E.O. of His Day--Or the Worst?," The New Yorker (2022).Geoff Colvin, "The Ultimate Manager," Fortune (1999).Matthew J. Belvedere, "Jack Welch says Obama's ‘wacky' climate-change agenda hurts the US economy," CNBC (2016)."Jack Welch Fast Facts," CNN (2020).Scott Tong, "This is how shareholders got to be first in line for profits," Business Insider (2016).James B. Stewart, "Did the Jack Welch Model Sow Seeds of G.E.'s Decline?," New York Times (2017). Jack & Suzy Welch Winning (2005).Geoff Gloeckler, "Jack Welch Launches Online MBA," Bloomberg Businessweek (2009).Della Bradshaw, "Jack Welch on the executive MBA he created in his own image," Financial Times (2014).Jack Welch Management Institute .Oxfam "Top 1% grab twice as much new wealth as everyone else combined".Economic Policy Institute “CEO pay has skyrocketed".  Support the show

Our most popular episode up until now was on a similar subject, so we're really happy to have this guest on to revisit it -- but with a big twist! Our guest Danny does a great job of differentiating "chat automation," "messenger marketing," and "chatGPT," and how they work through the sales funnel and beyond. The technology is important, but it's also fundamentally important that we are humanizing our brand voice through these chat automations. "Another one of my mantras that I live by is don't try to automate anything that you've been unwilling to get good at doing manually. Otherwise, you will automate failure." He talks us through why most bots are not doing their intended jobs -- because of the humans behind them -- so that's becoming more important as more people and brands are using these tools. Our guest... Danny Monzon From NYC nightclub promoter to Award-Winning agency founder, Danny specializes in chat automation, building customer retention strategies that humanize a brand's voice. He's a two-time speaker at the Midwest Digital Marketing Conference in St. Louis, at Social Media Day Jacksonville, and at multiple virtual summits. Danny's book recos: "The Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs" "Talent is Overrated" by Geoff Colvin ~._.*._.~ We are "Making a Marketer"... in all ways. Check out episode 123 - and please take a minute to follow, rate, & review us on your podcast platform of choice & get each ep. when it drops... Also, share with your friends & colleagues! https://bit.ly/mamITuneNEW ::: This episode is made possible by Powers of Marketing - emPOWERing amazing podcast experiences & online and in person events ::: **ALSO: Our editor Avri makes amazing music! Check out his music on Spotify!**

It's such an easy thing to do.  You're impressed with a great musician or other artist, and you talk about or get to compliment them, and out comes this word that seemingly everyone uses as a 1st choice...and that word is "talented".  Talent is certainly worth having, but it shouldn't be THE quality that gets the praise.  To quote the title of Geoff Colvin's wonderful book, Talent is Overrated, it's not because talent has no value, but as a tool it is VERY limited. As a first choice of compliment, especially to a student musician, there is the possibility of hugely negative consequences, as David Lane explains in this episode Has the label "talented" been a roadblock for you or someone you know?  If you'd like to share a brief account of your story, you can at https://www.speakpipe.com/MusicianToolkit If you're not comfortable leaving a voice message, you can send me a message at https://www.davidlanemusic.com/contact You can find this episode and links to this show on all podcast apps from https://musiciantoolkit.podbean.com/ You can follow David Lane AND the Musician Toolkit podcast on Facebook @DavidMLaneMusic, on Instagram and TikTok @DavidLaneMusic, and on YouTube @davidlanemusic1 This episode is sponsored by Fons, an online platform that helps private teachers of all types (music, yoga, martial arts, academic tutoring, coaches, etc) with smooth, automated assistance such as securing timely automatic payments and scheduling.  Click here for more information or to begin your free trial.

Why are mistakes a must? Jeff Krushell lets Geoff Colvin explain it in this edition of the Krush Report. Listen to the full episode here! Full episodes of the Krush Performance Podcast will return soon so make sure to stay subscribed and follow Jeff on Twitter for updates! Thank you for your listenership and loyalty […] The post Krush Report: Geoff Colvin Explains Why Mistakes Are A Must appeared first on Radio Influence.

Why are mistakes a must? Jeff Krushell lets Geoff Colvin explain it in this edition of the Krush Report. Listen to the full episode here! Full episodes of the Krush Performance Podcast will return soon so make sure to stay subscribed and follow Jeff on Twitter for updates! Thank you for your listenership and loyalty […] The post Krush Report: Geoff Colvin Explains Why Mistakes Are A Must appeared first on Radio Influence.

In this episode of The Mental Performance Daily Podcast, Brian continues his Book Battalion in which he breaks down his book of the week. Today he breaks down Talent Is Overrated by Geoff Colvin. You can follow along with Brian's 2022 reading schedule by clicking here. Join Brian Cain and his friends at Optimize/Heroic by getting their great 20 minute audio book summaries so you can follow along with Brian's reading list and be a proud member of The Book Battalion. FREE when you join here as a member of the Mental Performance Daily Community Brian Cain, MPM, the World's leader in Mental Performance Coaching brings you practical tips, techniques, stories, strategies, meditations and motivations every day that you can use to close the gap from where you are to where you want to be with The Mental Performance Daily Podcast.   Have a question you'd like Brian to answer on a future Mental Performance Daily episode? Click here to submit your question. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast and leave us a review for a chance to win a FREE 1-1 coaching session with Brian each month and engage with Brian on social media @BrianCainPeak  Be sure to join Brian's email list at BrianCain.com/join so that you can stay updated and in the know when it comes to mental performance training and opportunities to work with Brian. If you are a coach looking to master mental performance coaching, the missing link in your clients and athletes performance, join Brian's MPM Coaches Insiders List and receive his best strategies for coaching mental performance and save $200 off his MPM Certification Course when it opens in May and November. Are you a coach? Join Brian's FREE 3 Day Mini Course on Coaching Mental Performance Are you an athlete? Join Brian's  FREE 3 Day Mini Course on Mental Performance for Athletes Are you a golfer or golf coach? Join Brian's  FREE Golf Masterclass Are you a baseball player or coach? join Brian's FREE Baseball Masterclass

On today's episode of The Edge of Excellence, our guest host Sean Phelps chats with Tom Ackmann, president of Platinum Decking and an incredible leader who set the record for the largest team ever led by a rookie District Manager at CollegeWorks. Tom wanted to be an engineer, coming from a family of engineers, but he soon realized that was not for him and ventured into business. He now leads a company with eight-figure sales. Tom talks about his journey from engineering to entrepreneurship. You'll learn more about Tom's background, how he found out about CollegeWorks, and why he was so eager to join.  He talks about the key lessons he took away from College Works and the impact it had on his career. You will learn why management is the most difficult skill to master. Tom will reveal the most important lesson he learned in venture capitalism. Join Sean and Tom as they dive into a fascinating conversation about mastering your craft and deliberate practice. Enjoy! What You Will Learn In This Show: Tom's definition of excellence. Why a career in engineering was not the right fit for Tom. The importance of combining business with engineering. What Tom considers one of the most consequential decisions he's ever made. And so much more... Resources: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-edge-of-excellence-podcast/id1554338077 (The Edge of Excellence) https://www.amazon.com/Talent-Overrated-Separates-World-Class-Performers/dp/1591842948 (Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin) https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-ackmann-bb8587a (Tom Ackmann LinkedIn)

It's easy to find yourself thrust into a position where others regard you as an ”expert”, but what really constitutes expertise? Do you have it? Can it be acquired? When will you feel like you have it? (And why feeling like an expert should be a warning sign…) What makes an expert? Are you one? Do your friends or your employer consider you one? How does one go about seeking expertise? Relatedly, it's a big and confusing internet out there and every day you are confronted with people who claim to be experts. Jim and Mike have some tips for separating the expert wheat from the poser chaff, especially when that purported expert is in the mirror.   Links: Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin  The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle The Culture Code: The Secrets of Highly Successful Groups by Daniel Coyle The Art of Learning: An Inner Journey to Optimal Performance by Josh Waitzkin  Research study How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer The Invisible Gorilla: How our Intuitions Deceive Us by Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simmons  From Beginner to Expert by Patricia Benner    Like what we're doing? Head over to Patreon and give us a buck for each new episode. You can also make a one-time contribution at GoFundMe.  Intro music credit Bensound.com

"Every single day in our role as leaders, we encounter situations where empathy would serve us and others well." Peter Margaritis There are dozens of remarkable leaders and scholars singing the praises of empathy in the workplace. For example, in his book, Geoff Colvin, the Fortune Magazine Senior Editor, argues that as workplaces evolve and leadership models change, the most important skill that leaders must possess is empathy. Similarly, an article published in the Harvard Business Review after a survey of 6000 leaders, Jack Singer and Joseph Folkman, revealed that women leaders were more decisive as compared to their male counterparts when it came to empathy. People use the terms sympathy and empathy in overlapping and interchangeable ways, but there's a distinct difference. Empathy is the ability to put yourself in someone else's shoes and feel what they feel, not what you think they feel. It involves grief and pain when and because someone else is feeling it. Every single day in our role as leaders, we encounter situations where empathy would serve us and others well. Sympathy, on the other hand, means understanding someone else's suffering. It is more cognitive and keeps a certain distance. Even if it is hard to show empathy, you must be vulnerable and authentic and put your ego aside. It's about making a human connection and not just pushing the conversation to a conclusion so you can get on with your day and get back to work. Being vulnerable is putting yourself out there for others to see. It takes courage, and it takes time. Being vulnerable is a sign of being human, authentic, genuine, and honest, and by being vulnerable, you create a stronger human connection.  To learn more and for the complete show notes, visit: petermargaritis.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this MOJO Minute, we revisit Martin Seligman and his book, Flourish:   A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being  for some Deeper Flourishing!Key Points from the Episode:Check out MM#100 for our introduction to Seligman and his monumental workAnd, Geoff Colvin in MM's 33 & 72Also, Angela Duckworth's Grit in MM's 60 & 61On behalf of Team MOJO, we offer you a *heartfelt thank you* for supporting the show and listening! ❤️

For some, purpose's integral role in business is a newer conversation topic. But others have seen the power of purpose for decades, including company founders like Ray Anderson, pioneers like host Carol Cone, and business journalists like Alan Murray.Alan Murray has a unique perspective of the purpose movement. While Ray strategically aligned Interface with environmental commitments and Carol advises and supports companies in establishing purpose-based commitments, Alan followed CEOs from nescience to enlightenment to implementation. In his new book, Tomorrow's Capitalist: My Search for the Soul of Business, Alan reveals how he observed corporate CEOs recognize the significance of human-centered sustainability – not just so their companies could continue to operate, but so they would thrive.We invited Alan Murray, CEO of Fortune Media, to discuss Tomorrow's Capitalist, his experience with the widespread cynicism of the broader public when it comes to businesses and purpose, and how companies can have both a soul and a future.Listen for Alan's insights on:How leadership must change for there to be strategic, long-term success in human-centered business.What should guide CEOs when deciding whether and how to advocate for an issue or defend an action.How to effectively amplify communications in today's snackable, hard-to-get-anybody's-attention media landscape.The three areas all CEOs and leaders need to think about when looking to the future of human-centered business.Links & NotesAlan Murray's LinkedInTomorrow's CapitalistFortune: “Why I wrote ‘Tomorrow's Capitalist,' my upcoming book on the stakeholder capitalism movement”Leadership NextHumans Are Underrated by Geoff Colvin

For some, purpose's integral role in business is a newer conversation topic. But others have seen the power of purpose for decades, including company founders like Ray Anderson, pioneers like host Carol Cone, and business journalists like Alan Murray.Alan Murray has a unique perspective of the purpose movement. While Ray strategically aligned Interface with environmental commitments and Carol advises and supports companies in establishing purpose-based commitments, Alan followed CEOs from nescience to enlightenment to implementation. In his new book, Tomorrow's Capitalist: My Search for the Soul of Business, Alan reveals how he observed corporate CEOs recognize the significance of human-centered sustainability – not just so their companies could continue to operate, but so they would thrive.We invited Alan Murray, CEO of Fortune Media, to discuss Tomorrow's Capitalist, his experience with the widespread cynicism of the broader public when it comes to businesses and purpose, and how companies can have both a soul and a future.Listen for Alan's insights on:How leadership must change for there to be strategic, long-term success in human-centered business.What should guide CEOs when deciding whether and how to advocate for an issue or defend an action.How to effectively amplify communications in today's snackable, hard-to-get-anybody's-attention media landscape.The three areas all CEOs and leaders need to think about when looking to the future of human-centered business.Links & NotesAlan Murray's LinkedInTomorrow's CapitalistFortune: “Why I wrote ‘Tomorrow's Capitalist,' my upcoming book on the stakeholder capitalism movement”Leadership NextHumans Are Underrated by Geoff Colvinß

For some, purpose's integral role in business is a newer conversation topic. But others have seen the power of purpose for decades, including company founders like Ray Anderson, pioneers like host Carol Cone, and business journalists like Alan Murray. Alan Murray has a unique perspective of the purpose movement. While Ray strategically aligned Interface with environmental commitments and Carol advises and supports companies in establishing purpose-based commitments, Alan followed CEOs from nescience to enlightenment to implementation. In his new book, Tomorrow's Capitalist: My Search for the Soul of Business, Alan reveals how he observed corporate CEOs recognize the significance of human-centered sustainability – not just so their companies could continue to operate, but so they would thrive. We invited Alan Murray, CEO of Fortune Media, to discuss Tomorrow's Capitalist, his experience with the widespread cynicism of the broader public when it comes to businesses and purpose, and how companies can have both a soul and a future. Listen for Alan's insights on: How leadership must change for there to be strategic, long-term success in human-centered business. What should guide CEOs when deciding whether and how to advocate for an issue or defend an action. How to effectively amplify communications in today's snackable, hard-to-get-anybody's-attention media landscape. The three areas all CEOs and leaders need to think about when looking to the future of human-centered business. Links & Notes Alan Murray's LinkedIn Tomorrow's Capitalist Fortune: “Why I wrote ‘Tomorrow's Capitalist,' my upcoming book on the stakeholder capitalism movement” Leadership Next Humans Are Underrated by Geoff Colvin

Geoff's story of his commitment to act on his childhood memories of playing along the Missouri River in South Dakota starts off interesting, then turns exciting, thrilling, and ultimately life-changing. One of the things we most fear happened to him and he loved it.I think our conversation then grew more interesting. He's a storyteller and educator. He learned from the experience beyond what reading a book or reading a graph on carbon levels could reveal. We explored what nature brings to us, and what its absence deprives us of.Geoff is an experienced and brilliant thinker and speaker. He explores and shares the interplay between nature and humanity, its loss, and what that loss means to us.This episode will make you think. I bet it will make you want to go outside too. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Geoff Colvin is the Senior Editor at Large for Fortune Magazine and the keynote speaker for the NAED South Central Region Conference.

My first week's assignment to my leadership classes at NYU for years has been to watch Geoff's conversation with Charlie Rose. Geoff got his MBA at NYU, but somehow I took years to connect with him. He was delighted to be a guest.I assign Geoff's work because he communicates a message that you can become an expert and how to do it better than anyone. He speaks simply, eloquently, citing research, telling stories, and encouraging. In our conversation he explains and clarifies the meaning of deliberate practice. It's exactly what I want my students to learn before my class since it shows what will help them learn to lead in practice (not just reading and writing).In our conversation, Geoff shares his work, clarifying for me some parts I needed clarifying, motivating me more. He also sounded intrigued by the Spodek Method motivating sharing his environmental values and acting on them. You'll hear two people who act and write on leadership discussing the method and how it works. I can't wait to hear his results.Geoff's home page, with links to his books, many videos, audio recordings, and written pieces See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Why are certain people so incredibly great at what they do? Most of us think we know the answer—but we're almost always wrong. That's important, because if we're wrong on this crucial question, then we have zero chance of getting significantly better at anything we care about. Happily, the real source of great performance is no longer a mystery. Bringing together extensive scientific research, bestselling author Geoff Colvin shows where we go wrong and what actually makes world-class performers so remarkable. It isn't specific, innate talent, nor is it plain old hard work. It's a very specific type of work that anyone can do—but most people don't. What's more, the principles of great performance apply to virtually any activity that matters to you. Readers worldwide have been inspired by this book's liberating message: You don't need a one-in-a-million natural gift. Better performance, and maybe even world-class performance, is closer than you think.

In this MOJO minute, we explore how much hard work is required for success and Geoff Colvin in Talent is Overrated  (affiliate link) is the book we turn too.Key Points from the Episode:What do Michael Jordan and Wolfgang Mozart have in common?What myth can we put to bed after this MM?Are you willing to put in the deliberate practice for success?Other resources:Want to leave a review? Click here, and if we earned a five-star review from you **high five and knuckle bumps**, we appreciate it greatly, thank you so much!Because we care what you think about what we think and our website, please email David@teammojoacademy.com, or if you want to leave us a quick FREE, painless voicemail, we would appreciate that as well.Also, we love to hear book recommendations and other nuggets of wisdom that you care to share.Be sure to check out our very affordable Academy Review membership program at http:www.teammojoacademy.com/support

Zoom has been a vital part of our daily lives over the past two years. We've used it to meet with co-workers, celebrate family events, and to attend concerts and yoga classes while the world shut down around us. But now that the world is opening back up, people are returning to the office and to life in person. Can Zoom stay relevant in our evolving hybrid world? And can it compete with similar services from bigger companies like Microsoft and Google?   In this episode of Reinvent, hosts Beth Kowitt and Geoff Colvin speak to Zoom's Chief Product Officer Oded Gal about how Zoom will adapt its product to meet the needs of our changing world.  Geoff and Beth also talk to Debbie Lovich, leader of Boston Consulting Group's People Strategy Research, about the future of work and what it will demand of technologies like Zoom. Mike Fasciani, Research Director of Digital Workplace Applications at Gartner, shares how Zoom stacks up against its biggest competitors.  

Walgreens is transforming its pharmacies and retail stores into one-stop primary health care providers, with CEO Roz Brewer and her team planning to roll out 600 full-service clinics nationwide by 2025. It has invested $5.2 billion in primary care provider VillageMD as a partner in this transformation, a big and risky move. What can we expect from these clinics? Why is Walgreens doing this now? And can it compete with CVS which has a similar plan?  In this episode of Reinvent, hosts Beth Kowitt and Geoff Colvin speak to Walgreens Boots Alliance Chief Integration and Transformation Officer, Anita Allemand about how Walgreens plans to pull this off. Geoff and Beth ask Brian Tanquilut, Health Care Services Analyst at Jeffries, if Walgreens can compete with CVS and Walmart. And Dr. Deidra Candace Crews, of Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity, speaks to how these clinics could address America's profound health care inequities.  

If you've shopped for kids toys or clothing lately, you may have noticed a growing number of gender-inclusive offerings. Apparel giant Abercrombie & Fitch and Mattel Inc.'s iconic toy brand Barbie have made it a priority to produce products that go beyond the gender binary. What's their motivation? Are these items selling? And does California Bill 1084 have anything to do with it?  In this episode of Reinvent, hosts Beth Kowitt and Geoff Colvin speak to Mattel's Global Head of Design for Barbie and Fashion Dolls Kim Culmone and to Kim Dolder, General Manager of Abercrombie's Gilly Hicks line, about how their brands are evolving to appeal to all genders.. Geoff and Beth also talk to Juli Lennett, Vice President and Industry Advisor for NPD Group's Toy's Division, about how gender inclusive toys perform in the market. Rob Smith, founder of the Phluid Project, shares how California Bill 1084 - legislation requiring retailers to sell trucks right next to dolls - came to be, and its potential impact.  

Although 24 hour operations at West Coast Ports have put a dent in the backlog of containers waiting to be unloaded and shipped across the country; the ongoing supply chain disruption is having a serious impact on Northeast Ohio manufacturing. Find out more about how that disruption, plus a microchip shortage, is affecting consumers nationwide with reports from CBS White House Correspondent, Nancy Cordes, and Geoff Colvin from Fortune Magazine. Then, hear about how that is hurting local business, with Ethan Karp. He is the President and CEO of MAGNET; a non-profit consulting group that helps manufacturers succeed in Northeast Ohio.

Although 24 hour operations at West Coast Ports have put a dent in the backlog of containers waiting to be unloaded and shipped across the country; the ongoing supply chain disruption is having a serious impact on Northeast Ohio manufacturing. Find out more about how that disruption, plus a microchip shortage, is affecting consumers nationwide with reports from CBS White House Correspondent, Nancy Cordes, and Geoff Colvin from Fortune Magazine. Then, hear about how that is hurting local business, with Ethan Karp. He is the President and CEO of MAGNET; a non-profit consulting group that helps manufacturers succeed in Northeast Ohio.

Seguindo a série que conversa sobre observabilidade com diferentes players do mercado, o Kubicast traz nesse programa o  Adilson Somensari F., Senior Solutions Engineer da Splunk. Apesar de ser sinônimo de log, a Splunk vem, de dois anos para cá, expandindo seu business, e hoje tem como solução sua plataforma de observabilidade. Para o Adilson, a melhor maneira de convencer Devs e gestores(as) a adotar observabilidade e OpenTelemetry é mostrar que com eles é possível ter controle, acesso a dados, inclusive customizados, e relatórios. É trabalhar às claras! Quanto à feature mais wow da plataforma, ele considera que é o end to end para 100% dos usuários; isso é tem para todo mundo! Como dica matadora, para realmente aproveitar o valor da solução de observabilidade, ele diz: “planeje a gestão de incidentes para receber alertas antes do problema acontecer”! CONTATO - Para falar com o Adilson, escreva para: asomensari@splunk.com.O LINK para acessar a talk do Adilson no evento da Splunk, segue aqui. As RECOMENDAÇÕES do programa são:Adilson:Desafiando o Talento do Geoff Colvin  (livro) Ted Lasso (Apple Tv)Mythic Quest (Apple Tv)João: Cry Macho: O Caminho para Redenção (Estava nos cinemas e agora está na HBO Max) CFP do #KCDBrasil - O prazo para inscrever sua palestra no #KCDBrasil  termina na sexta (29). Não se intimide, sugira a sua ideia e vamos espalhar a palavra no maior e melhor evento de Kubernetes do Brasil. Acesse aqui! O Kubicast é uma produção da Getup, especialista em Kubernetes e apoiadora do projeto UnDistro, uma distribuição para gerenciar múltiplos clusters Kubernetes. #o11y #Observability #OpenTelemetry #DevOps #Kubernetes #Containers #docker 

In this Sunday Brunch Buffet; Brian Banmiller tells us how the U.K. is handling its gas shortage. College athletes are getting closer to getting paid, Fortune Magazine's Geoff Colvin has the latest. Are Covid boosters the way to stop the pandemic? Elizabeth Tracey of John Hopkins University has the answer. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Geoff Colvin is the Senior Editor-at-Large for Fortune Magazine and a regular contributor for CBS News Radio.

On this episode's Podcast we shall be hearing about how guest psychologist Susanne Bargmann used the idea of Deliberate Practice to transform her into a professional singer, songwriter and recording artist with the help of Danish industry vocal coach Ulrik Elholm; who has also kindly agreed to join us and share his experience. We shall be learning more behind the techniques associated with Deliberate practice and how they can help us as singers whilst hearing about Susanne and Ulrik's fascinating journey. A very inspiring example for all of us looking to achieve our artistic goals. To make it easier for you to revisit your favourite sections, we've time-coded some of the key themes Charlie covers. There are so many gems here, we're sure you'll want to listen again!   00:00 - 8:47           - Deliberate practice explained and Susanne and Ulrik's background. 08:47 -17:21         - Advice on effective practice routine for singers and maintaining motivation. 17:21 - 22:25       - Differences in preparing for studio sessions and performing live.                               - Method of breaking it down   22:25-29:19         - Advice on dealing with performance anxiety 29:19–36:45         - Deliberate practice for artistry and expression 36:45- End            - Future plans,                               - External and internal motivation debate   Links: Susanne Bargmann and Ulrik Elholm, ACE Keynote 2018 : Getting better with Deliberate Practice - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xclRoSTXpr4 Susanne Bargmann: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/peak/ Artist Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Susbmusic/ Spotify link:  https://open.spotify.com/artist/6o4R3mwoilRDEAjq9bYU6f?si=6KZfOMt9T_uaxNYP2oapYg   Ulrike Elholm: Music - https://open.spotify.com/artist/7ENqf6ZZMGdKvr2uSekhh5 https://open.spotify.com/album/4WvaiAKNXMiIBOa8mahxZz Website - http://www.ulrikelholm.dk   Bastion (Ulrik's Band): Music - https://open.spotify.com/album/77wIkIh8PBpR6weIkUrl7F   Ulrik and Susanne Danish Links: http://www.pplearn.com Article: https://bog.dk/bliv-bedre-til-det-du-gerne-vil/   Buy the Book: Danish https://www.bog-ide.dk/produkt/612754/susanne-bargmann-bliv-bedre-med-fokuseret-traening-ebog/2259856?gclid=CjwKCAjw5Ij2BRBdEiwA0Frc9dhJcSHmUEJk6ffjKz4733ZFq0qKdAwQ7qt8_6GA_WE-iyKj314YaBoCZXUQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds https://www.saxo.com/dk/bliv-bedre-med-fokuseret-traening_susanne-bargmann-ulrik-elholm_haeftet_9788750045762  https://www.adlibris.com/se/bok/bliv-bedre-med-fokuseret-traning-9788750045762 German https://www.amazon.com/Kein-Talent-Problem-Entfaltung-Potenzials/dp/B09BGLZZ8G/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3NACZZPO5VDT5&dchild=1&keywords=kein+talent+kein+problem&qid=1630396485&sprefix=kein+ta%2Caps%2C260&sr=8-1   Other Resources: The Complete Vocal Technique – Catherine Sadolin Compete Vocal Institute https://completevocal.institute/ Books: Peak by K Anders Ericsson Mindset by Carol S Dweck Talent is overrated by Geoff Colvin

In this MOJO Minute, we dive deep into the hard work theme again and explore the overlap of talent vs hard work.   Along the way, we are helped greatly by Geoff Colvin's suburb book, Talent Is Overrated:  What Really Separates World-Class Performers From Everybody Else (affiliate link)  Key points:Talent vs Hard WorkWhat is deliberate practicewhat are the three zones of deliberate practice and in what zone do we grow most?Other resources:Want to leave a review? Click here and if we earned a five star review from you **high fives and knuckle bumps**, we appreciate it greatly, thank you so much!Because we care what you think about what we think and our website, please email David@teammojoacademy.com Also, we love to hear book recommendations and other nuggets of wisdom that you care to share.powered by https://www.teammojoacademy.comBe sure to check out our very affordable Academy Review membership program at http:www.teammojoacademy.com/support

We interview Geoff Colvin, Fortune's senior editor-at-large, about the myth of being born with talent and how Deliberate Practice separates progress from time wasted on mediocrity.00:35 Insights & Takeaways 12:00 Interview Links: Book on Amazon: here Author website: here Twitter: @geoffcolvinEmail: geoff@geoffcolvin.comFor speaking engagements: info@damelionetwork.com The Wicked Podcast: Support us on Patreon: here The Wicked Podcast website: here 'The Wicked Company' book on Amazon.co.uk: Buy The Wicked Company website: visit Music: 'Inspired' by Kevin MacLeod Song: here Creative Commons License 

Time is an uber valuable resource and once it has passed there is no more of it. In this episode I talk about different things I have done to increase my time efficiency. I also reference three books that were immensely helpful in getting me to this point! Each one of these books in their own write is enough to get you motivated and get you one the track to time domination. Stick them all together and you have the blueprint to get more time in each day and start moving towards your goals or success. Talent is Overrated; What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else by Geoff Colvin https://amzn.to/36XUGag The 10x Rule The only difference between success and failure by Grant Cardon https://amzn.to/3oyOgUJ Less doing, More living make everything in life easier by Ari Meisel https://amzn.to/36Zs2VW Like I mentioned in the episode each book alone was a huge help and I highly recommend them each. They will equip you with the knowledge to set yourself up to change your life and start to win the day everyday!

Esteemed guest, Geoff Colvin, takes center stage on the Kestra OutLoud podcast! Geoff offers his unique perspective in this 27-minute episode and unleashes actionable insights on the economic and technological forces driving emotional challenges for clients.  Geoff's columns stories in Fortune Magazine have earned him millions of loyal fans, many of whom also listen to him on the CBS Radio Network, where he reaches seven million listeners every week. Geoff Colvin is author of several books including the groundbreaking international bestseller "Talent Is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else."   

Geoff Colvin (@geoffcolvin) is FortuneMagazine's Senior Editor-at-Large, an award-winning thinker, author, broadcaster, and speaker on the most significant trends and issues impacting business, politics and the economy. [spreaker type=player resource="episode_id=20239267" width="100%" height="80px" theme="light" playlist="false" playlist-continuous="false" autoplay="false" live-autoplay="false" chapters-image="true" episode-image-position="right" hide-logo="true" hide-likes="false" hide-comments="false" hide-sharing="false" hide-download="true"]

Originally aired 1-7-12: As a longtime editor and columnist for FORTUNE, Geoff Colvin has become one of America's sharpest and most respected commentators on leadership, globalization, wealth creation, the infotech revolution, and related issues. He wrote the groundbreaking bestseller Talent Is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers From Everybody Else. His insights are worth serious consideration for any wholesaler wishing to improve their craft.

On this week's episode of the Intelligentsia Report, we interview Geoff Colvin, the Senior Editor at large for Fortune Magazine and a daily commentator on CBS Radio network. Geoff is one of the most respected voices in business journalism and helps companies worldwide by providing valuable insight on the issues driving change in business and the economy today.

Moe and Fortune Magazine's Geoff Colvin discuss why empathy, creativity, social sensitivity, storytelling, humor, and building relationships will distinguish tomorrow's highest achievers.