Podcasts about Griffith University

When an organisation has lots of moving parts, coordination becomes a competitive advantage. Divisional rivalries, egos, "not invented here," and personal competition can quietly shred performance, while external shocks—regulatory changes, competitor M&A, natural disasters, and market movements—keep landing on your desk. The leader's job is to create solid alignment between what the company needs and what individuals actually do every day.  What is performance alignment and why does it matter in 2025-era organisations? Performance alignment is the tight fit between company direction and individual behaviour so the business operates like one smooth machine. Without alignment, internal friction beats you before the market does—teams compete instead of coordinate, priorities conflict, and effort gets wasted on "busy work" that looks active but doesn't move results. In post-pandemic business (2020–2025), this got harder: hybrid work increased miscommunication, supply chains became less predictable, and regulation shifts plus competitor consolidation raised complexity. In Japan, alignment can be strong once decisions land, but slower if consensus and cross-division coordination drags. In the US, execution can be fast, but priorities can splinter if each function runs its own agenda. In multinationals, the "moving parts" problem is amplified; in SMEs, a single misalignment can derail the whole plan. Do now: Write the one-line "main game" for this quarter and check every team goal against it.  How do vision and mission create alignment across divisions and teams? Vision and mission align performance by clarifying where you're going and what you will (and won't) do to get there. Vision is the window to a brighter future and the goals for where you want to be—and there's usually a macro company vision plus a unit-level vision that translates strategy into local execution. When teams can "juxtapose" their contribution to the enterprise vision, motivation rises because people can see how their work matters. Mission then adds operational clarity by defining purpose and boundaries, preventing scattergun activity. This is where big organisations often win: leaders at firms like Toyota or Unilever typically cascade strategy into unit-level execution targets; startups do it faster, but sometimes leave it implicit, which can cause drift as the company scales. Do now: Rewrite your unit vision in one sentence that shows exactly how it supports the enterprise vision.  How do shared values drive engagement and commitment (especially across cultures)? Shared values align performance because they act as the cultural glue that keeps behaviour consistent under pressure. Values aren't posters—they're the rules of the road for how decisions get made, how conflict gets handled, and what "good" looks like when nobody is watching. The hard truth is the personal value spectrum is extremely varied, so alignment doesn't happen by accident. Leaders have to make values explicit, visible, and reinforced through recognition and consequences. In Japan, values often support harmony and consistency, but can also discourage constructive challenge if not balanced. In the US, values may champion individual initiative, but can turn into silos if each team's "value" becomes their private religion. In both contexts, values determine whether people truly commit or just comply. Do now: Pick 3 values and define the observable behaviours that prove each one in meetings, customer work, and decision-making.  What is a position goal and how does it motivate teams to perform? A position goal aligns performance by giving teams a clear competitive target: where do we want to rank? That could mean market share dominance, profitability leadership, or rapid growth—inside your industry, sector, or even within your own global organisation. This is powerful because many teams feel isolated and assume their work doesn't make much difference. A visible ranking goal (top ten by revenue, number one in customer retention, highest NPS in the region) turns effort into identity and recognition. In large enterprises, position goals can be highly motivating because teams can see how they compare globally. In SMEs, position goals should be chosen carefully—too grand and they feel fake; too small and they don't inspire. Consumer sectors may chase share; B2B may prioritise margin and renewal stability. Do now: Choose one position goal for 2026 and define the single metric that proves it.  How do KRAs, standards, and activities translate strategy into daily execution? KRAs, standards, and activities align performance by turning "strategy" into measurable work that gets done consistently. Key Result Areas (KRAs) identify where results must be achieved and what matters most; constant measurement and broadcasting keeps focus. Performance standards then create objectivity—use frameworks like SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-specific) so everyone knows what "good" looks like. Finally, required activities must directly produce the desired outcomes; otherwise, you collect "barnacles" of superfluous tasks that slow the ship. In Japan, standards can be strong and consistent, but activity lists can grow bloated if nobody challenges legacy tasks. In the US, activity can be energetic, but standards can vary if not enforced. Do now: List your top 3 KRAs, define one standard for each, and delete one "busy work" activity that doesn't support them.  How do skills audits and results reviews keep alignment strong over time? Skills and results close the alignment loop by ensuring the team can perform—and learning whether the system worked. A skills audit tells you if the team has the capacity to achieve the goals, what training/coaching is required, and whether you need new talent. The article notes that changing personnel can be difficult and expensive in Japan, which makes skill-building and coaching even more critical. Results then answer the leadership questions: did we achieve what we set out to do, what was the quality, and what did we learn? Even failure can be a learning experience that makes the next cycle stronger. Startups can iterate faster with shorter review loops; multinationals may need quarterly or annual alignment reviews, but should still build in regular check-ins. Do now: Run a quarterly skills audit + results review: capability gaps, coaching plan, and 3 lessons to apply next quarter.  Conclusion Performance alignment is not "soft culture work"—it's a hard business system that prevents friction, wasted effort, and internal competition from destroying results. The eight elements—vision/mission, values, position goal, KRAs, standards, activities, skills, and results—work like a checklist leaders can use to keep the main game in sight, even when emergencies and meltdowns try to hijack attention.  Next steps for leaders and executives Re-state the unit vision and mission in execution language.  Choose one position goal and one proving metric.  Set KRAs + standards, then strip out "barnacle" activities.  Audit skills and lock in coaching or hiring actions.  Author credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動okasu" Rīdā).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

When an organisation has lots of moving parts, coordination becomes a competitive advantage. Divisional rivalries, egos, "not invented here," and personal competition can quietly shred performance, while external shocks—regulatory changes, competitor M&A, natural disasters, and market movements—keep landing on your desk. The leader's job is to create solid alignment between what the company needs and what individuals actually do every day.  What is performance alignment and why does it matter in 2025-era organisations? Performance alignment is the tight fit between company direction and individual behaviour so the business operates like one smooth machine. Without alignment, internal friction beats you before the market does—teams compete instead of coordinate, priorities conflict, and effort gets wasted on "busy work" that looks active but doesn't move results. In post-pandemic business (2020–2025), this got harder: hybrid work increased miscommunication, supply chains became less predictable, and regulation shifts plus competitor consolidation raised complexity. In Japan, alignment can be strong once decisions land, but slower if consensus and cross-division coordination drags. In the US, execution can be fast, but priorities can splinter if each function runs its own agenda. In multinationals, the "moving parts" problem is amplified; in SMEs, a single misalignment can derail the whole plan. Do now: Write the one-line "main game" for this quarter and check every team goal against it.  How do vision and mission create alignment across divisions and teams? Vision and mission align performance by clarifying where you're going and what you will (and won't) do to get there. Vision is the window to a brighter future and the goals for where you want to be—and there's usually a macro company vision plus a unit-level vision that translates strategy into local execution. When teams can "juxtapose" their contribution to the enterprise vision, motivation rises because people can see how their work matters. Mission then adds operational clarity by defining purpose and boundaries, preventing scattergun activity. This is where big organisations often win: leaders at firms like Toyota or Unilever typically cascade strategy into unit-level execution targets; startups do it faster, but sometimes leave it implicit, which can cause drift as the company scales. Do now: Rewrite your unit vision in one sentence that shows exactly how it supports the enterprise vision.  How do shared values drive engagement and commitment (especially across cultures)? Shared values align performance because they act as the cultural glue that keeps behaviour consistent under pressure. Values aren't posters—they're the rules of the road for how decisions get made, how conflict gets handled, and what "good" looks like when nobody is watching. The hard truth is the personal value spectrum is extremely varied, so alignment doesn't happen by accident. Leaders have to make values explicit, visible, and reinforced through recognition and consequences. In Japan, values often support harmony and consistency, but can also discourage constructive challenge if not balanced. In the US, values may champion individual initiative, but can turn into silos if each team's "value" becomes their private religion. In both contexts, values determine whether people truly commit or just comply. Do now: Pick 3 values and define the observable behaviours that prove each one in meetings, customer work, and decision-making.  What is a position goal and how does it motivate teams to perform? A position goal aligns performance by giving teams a clear competitive target: where do we want to rank? That could mean market share dominance, profitability leadership, or rapid growth—inside your industry, sector, or even within your own global organisation. This is powerful because many teams feel isolated and assume their work doesn't make much difference. A visible ranking goal (top ten by revenue, number one in customer retention, highest NPS in the region) turns effort into identity and recognition. In large enterprises, position goals can be highly motivating because teams can see how they compare globally. In SMEs, position goals should be chosen carefully—too grand and they feel fake; too small and they don't inspire. Consumer sectors may chase share; B2B may prioritise margin and renewal stability. Do now: Choose one position goal for 2026 and define the single metric that proves it.  How do KRAs, standards, and activities translate strategy into daily execution? KRAs, standards, and activities align performance by turning "strategy" into measurable work that gets done consistently. Key Result Areas (KRAs) identify where results must be achieved and what matters most; constant measurement and broadcasting keeps focus. Performance standards then create objectivity—use frameworks like SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-specific) so everyone knows what "good" looks like. Finally, required activities must directly produce the desired outcomes; otherwise, you collect "barnacles" of superfluous tasks that slow the ship. In Japan, standards can be strong and consistent, but activity lists can grow bloated if nobody challenges legacy tasks. In the US, activity can be energetic, but standards can vary if not enforced. Do now: List your top 3 KRAs, define one standard for each, and delete one "busy work" activity that doesn't support them.  How do skills audits and results reviews keep alignment strong over time? Skills and results close the alignment loop by ensuring the team can perform—and learning whether the system worked. A skills audit tells you if the team has the capacity to achieve the goals, what training/coaching is required, and whether you need new talent. The article notes that changing personnel can be difficult and expensive in Japan, which makes skill-building and coaching even more critical. Results then answer the leadership questions: did we achieve what we set out to do, what was the quality, and what did we learn? Even failure can be a learning experience that makes the next cycle stronger. Startups can iterate faster with shorter review loops; multinationals may need quarterly or annual alignment reviews, but should still build in regular check-ins. Do now: Run a quarterly skills audit + results review: capability gaps, coaching plan, and 3 lessons to apply next quarter.  Conclusion Performance alignment is not "soft culture work"—it's a hard business system that prevents friction, wasted effort, and internal competition from destroying results. The eight elements—vision/mission, values, position goal, KRAs, standards, activities, skills, and results—work like a checklist leaders can use to keep the main game in sight, even when emergencies and meltdowns try to hijack attention.  Next steps for leaders and executives Re-state the unit vision and mission in execution language.  Choose one position goal and one proving metric.  Set KRAs + standards, then strip out "barnacle" activities.  Audit skills and lock in coaching or hiring actions.  Author credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動okasu" Rīdā).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

Following several shark attacks off the coast of Sydney, marine biologist Dr. Olaf Meynecke from Griffith University talks about the current threat situation and possible causes. The expert, who has also intensively researched bull sharks before his current work on humpback whales, explains how such encounters occur — and which measures make sense to better protect people. - Nach mehreren Haiangriffen vor der Küste von Sydney spricht der Meeresbiologe Dr. Olaf Meynecke von der Griffith University über die aktuelle Gefahrenlage und mögliche Ursachen. Der Experte, der neben Buckelwalen auch intensiv zu Bullenhaien geforscht hat, erklärt, wie es zu solchen Begegnungen kommt – und welche Maßnahmen sinnvoll sind, um Menschen besser zu schützen.

In this episode, I'm coming to you live from NAPSA Congress, the National Australian Pharmacy Students' Association's week-long flagship event that brings together pharmacy students from across Australia. The Congress is packed with education sessions, workshops, social events, networking opportunities, and a vibrant trade exhibition, and this episode captures the energy of being right in the middle of it all. I spoke with Sebastian Harper from Griffith University, NAPSA's National President, Sebastian Schulke from the University of Queensland, and Mia Avram from Monash University and NAPSA's National Treasurer. We spoke about their favourite moments from Congress, what stood out most, and the key learnings they will be taking forward into their future pharmacy careers. Our conversations explored a wide range of timely and important topics, including practical insights into probiotics, the expanding role of pharmacists in harm reduction and dependency services such as naloxone take-home programs, and the skills of full-scope physical assessment. We also discussed how pharmacists can better support patients using GLP-1 agonists, from counselling to ongoing care, and what it really means to serve your community as a healthcare professional. We also touched on highlights from Pharmacy Student of the Year (PSOTY), unpacking the qualities that set leaders apart, as well as a thoughtful conversation on authenticity in pharmacy. We discussed why being yourself matters, how to avoid the "pharmacist Barbie" stereotype, and the value of showing up as a real, relatable professional. This episode was recorded live in the trade exhibition space at NAPSA Congress, so you may hear some background noise throughout. Every effort has been made to optimise the audio while keeping the authentic atmosphere of Congress intact.

In this episode, we discuss everything about men's health. We explore: Applications for diagnostic ultrasound in men's pelvic healthPhysiotherapy for post prostatectomy patientsRole of manual therapy in men's healthUpskilling in men's health physiotherapyWant to learn more about men's health? Dr David Cowley recently did a brilliant Masterclass with us called “Pelvic Health in Men: Practical Approaches for Physiotherapists” where he goes into further depth on this topic. 

Logging Off: Inside Australia's Landmark Social Media BanAustralia has become the first country to ban children under sixteen from social media, forcing platforms to block millions of young users overnight. Supporters say the move draws a long-overdue line around online harm while critics feel that it could push teens into riskier digital spaces with less oversight. As legal challenges mount and other countries watch closely, we cover what drove the country to implement this hardline policy on social media.  Guests: Susan Grantham, researcher, lecturer, communication, Griffith University; Terry Flew, professor, digital communication and culture, University of SydneyHost: Gary Price.  Producer: Grace Galante and Amirah Zaveri.   Inside The Strain On America's Animal Rescue SystemMore than six million companion animals enter U.S. shelters each year and a little over four million are adopted. Sadly, shelters still rely on euthanizing when facilities are overcrowded and an animal has been there for a while. Author Laurie Zaleski has made it her life's work to rescue hundreds of these unwanted pets and care for them on her farm. We speak with Zaleski as well Dr. Joshua Fisher, an animal expert, about the importance of approaching any pet adoption with the mentality that it's a lifelong commitment.  Guests: Laurie Zaleski, author, Funny Farm: My Unexpected Life with 600 Rescue Animals; Dr. Joshua Fisher, Director of Animal Services, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.Marty Peterson.  Producer: Polly Hansen.   Viewpoints Explained: How Nuuly Cracked The Clothing Rental BusinessFor years, clothing rental was billed as the future of fashion, but few companies could make the numbers work. We cover what sets Nuuly apart and if this model is sustainable in the long-term.  Host: Ebony McMorris.  Producer: Amirah Zaveri Culture Crash: Why Actor Ethan Hawke Isn't Slowing DownActor Ethan Hawke continues to surprise decades into his career, with a standout turn in this new crime comedy drama series that was one of our favorite shows of 2025.  Host:  Evan Rook.  Producer: Evan Rook Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Logging Off: Inside Australia's Landmark Social Media BanAustralia has become the first country to ban children under sixteen from social media, forcing platforms to block millions of young users overnight. Supporters say the move draws a long-overdue line around online harm while critics feel that it could push teens into riskier digital spaces with less oversight. As legal challenges mount and other countries watch closely, we cover what drove the country to implement this hardline policy on social media.  Guests: Susan Grantham, researcher, lecturer, communication, Griffith University; Terry Flew, professor, digital communication and culture, University of SydneyHost: Gary Price Producer: Grace Galante and Amirah Zaveri Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Discussion of things literally or figuratively unearthed in the last quarter of 2025 continues. It begins with potpourri then covers tools, Neanderthals, edibles and potables, art, shipwrecks, medical finds, and repatriations. Research: Abdallah, Hanna. “Famous Easter Island statues were created without centralized management.” PLOS. Via EurekAlert. 11/26/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106805 Abdallah, Hannah. “Early humans butchered elephants using small tools and made big tools from their bones.” PLOS. Via EurekAlert. 10/8/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1100481 Abdallah, Hannah. “Researchers uncover clues to mysterious origin of famous Hjortspring boat.” EurekAlert. 10/12/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1108323 Archaeology Magazine. “Medieval Hoard of Silver and Pearls Discovered in Sweden.” https://archaeology.org/news/2025/10/14/medieval-hoard-of-silver-and-pearls-discovered-in-sweden/ Archaeology Magazine. “Possible Trepanation Tool Unearthed in Poland.” 11/13/2025. https://archaeology.org/news/2025/11/13/possible-trepanation-tool-unearthed-in-poland/ Arkeologerna. “Rare 5,000-year-old dog burial unearthed in Sweden.” 12/15/2025. https://news.cision.com/se/arkeologerna/r/rare-5-000-year-old-dog-burial-unearthed-in-sweden,c4282014 Arnold, Paul. “Ancient ochre crayons from Crimea reveal Neanderthals engaged in symbolic behaviors.” Phys.org. 10/30/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-ancient-ochre-crayons-crimea-reveal.html Arnold, Paul. “Dating a North American rock art tradition that lasted 175 generations.” Phys.org. 11/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-11-dating-north-american-art-tradition.html Bassi, Margherita. “A Single Gene Could Have Contributed to Neanderthals’ Extinction, Study Suggests.” Smithsonian. 10/30/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-neanderthal-gene-variant-related-to-red-blood-cells-may-have-contributed-to-their-extinction-180987586/ Benjamin Pohl, Chewing over the Norman Conquest: the Bayeux Tapestry as monastic mealtime reading, Historical Research, 2025;, htaf029, https://doi.org/10.1093/hisres/htaf029 Benzine, Vittoria. “Decoded Hieroglyphics Reveal Female Ruler of Ancient Maya City.” ArtNet. 10/27/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/foundation-stone-maya-coba-woman-ruler-2704521 Berdugo, Sophie. “Easter Island statues may have 'walked' thanks to 'pendulum dynamics' and with as few as 15 people, study finds.” LiveScience. 10/19/2025. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/easter-island-statues-may-have-walked-thanks-to-pendulum-dynamics-and-with-as-few-as-15-people-study-finds Billing, Lotte. “Fingerprint of ancient seafarer found on Scandinavia’s oldest plank boat.” EurekAlert. 10/12/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1109361 Brhel, John. “Rats played major role in Easter Island’s deforestation, study reveals.” EurekAlert. 11/17/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106361 Caldwell, Elizabeth. “9 more individuals unearthed at Oaklawn could be 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre victims.” Tulsa Public Radio. 11/6/2025. https://www.publicradiotulsa.org/local-regional/2025-11-06/9-more-individuals-unearthed-at-oaklawn-could-be-1921-tulsa-race-massacre-victims Clark, Gaby. “Bayeux Tapestry could have been originally designed as mealtime reading for medieval monks.” Phys.org. 12/15/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-bayeux-tapestry-mealtime-medieval-monks.html#google_vignette Cohen, Alina. “Ancient Olive Oil Processing Complex Unearthed in Tunisia.” Artnet. 11/21/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ancient-olive-oil-complex-tunisia-2717795 Cohen, Alina. “MFA Boston Restores Ownership of Historic Works by Enslaved Artist.” ArtNet. 10/30/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/mfa-boston-david-drake-jars-restitution-2706594 Fergusson, Rachel. “First DNA evidence of Black Death in Edinburgh discovered on teeth of excavated teenage skeleton.” The Scotsman. 11/5/2025. https://www.scotsman.com/news/first-dna-evidence-black-death-edinburgh-discovered-teeth-excavated-teenage-skeleton-5387741 Folorunso, Caleb et al. “MOWAA Archaeology Project: Enhancing Understanding of Benin City’s Historic Urban Development and Heritage through Pre-Construction Archaeology.” Antiquity (2025): 1–10. Web. Griffith University. “Rare stone tool cache tells story of trade and ingenuity.” 12/2/2025. https://news.griffith.edu.au/2025/12/02/rare-stone-tool-cache-tells-story-of-trade-and-ingenuity/ Han, Yu et al. “The late arrival of domestic cats in China via the Silk Road after 3,500 years of human-leopard cat commensalism.” Cell Genomics, Volume 0, Issue 0, 101099. https://www.cell.com/cell-genomics/fulltext/S2666-979X(25)00355-6 Hashemi, Sara. “A Volcanic Eruption in 1345 May Have Triggered a Chain of Events That Brought the Black Death to Europe.” Smithsonian. 12/8/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-volcanic-eruption-in-1345-may-have-triggered-a-chain-of-events-taht-brought-the-black-death-to-europe-180987803/ Hjortkjær, Simon Thinggaard. “Mysterious signs on Teotihuacan murals may reveal an early form of Uto-Aztecan language.” PhysOrg. 10/6/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-mysterious-teotihuacan-murals-reveal-early.html Institut Pasteur. “Study suggests two unsuspected pathogens struck Napoleon's army during the retreat from Russia in 1812.” Via EurekAlert. 10/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1102613 Jones, Sam. “Shells found in Spain could be among oldest known musical instruments.” The Guardian. 12/2/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/dec/02/neolithic-conch-like-shell-spain-catalonia-discovery-musical-instruments Kasal, Krystal. “Pahon Cave provides a look into 5,000 years of surprisingly stable Stone Age tool use.” Phys.org. 12/16/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-pahon-cave-years-stable-stone.html Kristiansen, Nina. “Eight pages bound in furry seal skin may be Norway's oldest book.” Science Norway. 11/3/2025. https://www.sciencenorway.no/cultural-history-culture-history/eight-pages-bound-in-furry-seal-skin-may-be-norways-oldest-book/2571496 Kuta, Sarah. “109-Year-Old Messages in a Bottle Written by Soldiers Heading to Fight in World War I Discovered on Australian Beach.” Smithsonian. 11/6/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/109-year-old-messages-in-a-bottle-written-by-soldiers-heading-to-fight-in-world-war-i-discovered-on-australian-beach-180987649/ Kuta, Sarah. “A Storm Battered Western Alaska, Scattering Thousands of Indigenous Artifacts Across the Sand.” Smithsonian. 10/31/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-storm-battered-western-alaska-scattering-thousands-of-indigenous-artifacts-across-the-sand-180987606/ Kuta, Sarah. “Archaeologists Unearth More Than 100 Projectiles From an Iconic Battlefield in Scotland.” Smithsonian. 11/5/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/archaeologists-unearth-more-than-100-projectiles-from-an-iconic-battlefield-in-scotland-180987641/ Kuta, Sarah. “Hundreds of Mysterious Victorian-Era Shoes Are Washing Up on a Beach in Wales. Nobody Knows Where They Came From.” Smithsonian. 1/5/2026. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/hundreds-of-mysterious-victorian-era-shoes-are-washing-up-on-a-beach-in-wales-nobody-knows-where-they-came-from-180987943/ Lawson-Tancred, Jo. “Golden ‘Tudor Heart’ Necklace Sheds New Light on Henry VIII’s First Marriage.” Artnet. 10/14/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/tudor-heart-pendant-british-museum-fundraiser-2699544 Lawson-Tancred, Jo. “Long-Overlooked Black Veteran Identified in Rare 19th-Century Portrait.” ArtNet. 10/27/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/black-veteran-thomas-phillips-portrait-identified-2704721 Lipo CP, Hunt TL, Pakarati G, Pingel T, Simmons N, Heard K, et al. (2025) Megalithic statue (moai) production on Rapa Nui (Easter Island, Chile). PLoS One 20(11): e0336251. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336251 Lipo, Carl P. and Terry L. Hunt. “The walking moai hypothesis: Archaeological evidence, experimental validation, and response to critics.” Journal of Archaeological Science. Volume 183, November 2025, 106383. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305440325002328 Lock, Lisa. “Pre-construction archaeology reveals Benin City's historic urban development and heritage.” 10/29/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-pre-archaeology-reveals-benin-city.html#google_vignette Lock, Lisa. “Pre-construction archaeology reveals Benin City's historic urban development and heritage.” Antiquity. Via PhysOrg. 10/29/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-pre-archaeology-reveals-benin-city.html#google_vignette Lynley A. Wallis et al, An exceptional assemblage of archaeological plant fibres from Windmill Way, southeast Cape York Peninsula, Australian Archaeology (2025). DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2025.2574127 Lyon, Devyn. “Oaklawn Cemetery excavation brings investigators closer to identifying Tulsa Race Massacre victims.” Fox 23. 11/6/2025. https://www.fox23.com/news/oaklawn-cemetery-excavation-brings-investigators-closer-to-identifying-tulsa-race-massacre-victims/article_67c3a6b7-2acc-44cb-93ce-3d3d0c288eca.html Marquard, Bryan. “Bob Shumway, last known survivor of the deadly Cocoanut Grove nightclub fire, dies at 101.” 11/12/2025. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/11/12/metro/bob-shumway-101-dies-was-last-known-cocoanut-grove-fire-survivor/?event=event12 Marta Osypińska et al, A centurion's monkey? Companion animals for the social elite in an Egyptian port on the fringes of the Roman Empire in the 1st and 2nd c. CE, Journal of Roman Archaeology (2025). DOI: 10.1017/s1047759425100445 Merrington, Andrew. “Extensive dog diversity millennia before modern breeding practices.” University of Exeter. 11/13/2025. https://news.exeter.ac.uk/faculty-of-humanities-arts-and-social-sciences/archaeology-and-history/extensive-dog-diversity-millennia-before-modern-breeding-practices/ Morris, Steven. “Linguists start compiling first ever complete dictionary of ancient Celtic.” The Guardian. 12/8/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/dec/08/linguists-start-compiling-first-ever-complete-dictionary-of-ancient-celtic Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. “Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Resolves Ownership of Works by Enslaved Artist David Drake.” 10/29/2025. https://www.mfa.org/press-release/david-drake-ownership-resolution Narcity. “Niagara has a 107-year-old shipwreck lodged above the Falls and it just moved.” https://www.narcity.com/niagara-falls-shipwreck-iron-scow-moved-closer-to-the-falls Newcomb, Tim. “A 76-Year-Old Man Went On a Hike—and Stumbled Upon a 1,500-Year Old Trap.” Popular Mechanics. 11/21/2025. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a69441460/reindeer-trap/ Nordin, Gunilla. “Ancient wolves on remote Baltic Sea island reveal link to prehistoric humans.” Stockholm University. Via EurekAlert. 11/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106807 Oster, Sandee. “DNA confirms modern Bo people are descendants of ancient Hanging Coffin culture.” Phys.org. 12/6/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-dna-modern-bo-people-descendants.html Oster, Sandee. “Rare disease possibly identified in 12th century child's skeletal remains.” PhysOrg. 10/10/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-rare-disease-possibly-12th-century.html Osuh, Chris and Geneva Abdul. “Lost grave of daughter of Black abolitionist Olaudah Equiano found by A-level student.” The Guardian. 11/1/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/01/lost-grave-daughter-black-abolitionist-olaudah-equiano-found-by-a-level-student Silvia Albizuri et al, The oldest mule in the western Mediterranean. The case of the Early Iron Age in Hort d'en Grimau (Penedès, Barcelona, Spain), Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2025.105506 Skok, Phoebe. “Ancient shipwrecks rewrite the story of Iron Age trade.” PhysOrg. 10/14/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-ancient-shipwrecks-rewrite-story-iron.html The History Blog. “600-year-old Joseon ship recovered from seabed.” 11/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74652 The History Blog. “Ancient pleasure barge found off Alexandria coast.” 12/9/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74860 The History Blog. “Charred Byzantine bread loves stamped with Christian imagery found in Turkey.” 10/13/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74352 The History Blog. “Early medieval silver treasure found in Stockholm.” 10/12/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74343 The History Blog. “Roman amphora with sardines found in Switzerland.” 12/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74904 The Straits Times. “Wreck of ancient Malay vessel discovered on Pulau Melaka.” 10/31/2025. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/wreck-of-ancient-malay-vessel-discovered-on-pulau-melaka Thompson, Sarah. “The forgotten daughter: Eliza Monroe Hay’s story revealed in her last letters.” W&M News. 9/30/2025. https://news.wm.edu/2025/09/30/the-forgotten-daughter-eliza-monroes-story-revealed-in-her-last-letters/ Tuhkuri, Jukka. “Why Did Endurance Sink?” Polar Record 61 (2025): e23. Web. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/polar-record/article/why-did-endurance-sink/6CC2C2D56087035A94DEB50930B81980 Universitat de Valencia. “The victims of the Pompeii eruption wore heavy wool cloaks and tunics, suggesting different environmental conditions in summer.” 12/3/2025. https://www.uv.es/uvweb/uv-news/en/news/victims-pompeii-eruption-wore-heavy-wool-cloaks-tunics-suggesting-different-environmental-conditions-summer-1285973304159/Novetat.html?id=1286464337848&plantilla=UV_Noticies/Page/TPGDetaillNews University of Glasgow. “Archaeologists recover hundreds of Jacobite projectiles in unexplored area of Culloden.” 10/30/2025. https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_1222736_en.html University of Vienna. “Neanderthal DNA reveals ancient long-distance migrations.” 10/29/2025. https://www.univie.ac.at/en/news/detail/neanderthal-dna-reveals-ancient-long-distance-migrations Zhou, H., Tao, L., Zhao, Y. et al. Exploration of hanging coffin customs and the bo people in China through comparative genomics. Nat Commun 16, 10230 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-65264-3 Zinin, Andrew. “Ancient humans mastered fire-making 400,000 years ago, study shows.” Phys.org. 10/10/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-ancient-humans-mastered-years.html See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Doing more, faster, better with less has become the permanent setting in modern business. Post-pandemic, with tighter budgets, higher customer expectations, and AI speeding up competitors, leaders can't rely on "the boss with the whiteboard marker" to magically produce genius ideas on demand. You need a repeatable innovation system that draws out creativity from the whole organisation—especially the people closest to customers. Below is a practical nine-step innovation process leaders can run again and again, so innovation becomes a habit—not a lucky accident.  How do leaders define "success" before trying to innovate? Innovation gets messy fast unless everyone is crystal clear on what "good" looks like. Step One is Visualisation: define the goal, the "should be" case, and what success looks like in concrete terms—customer outcomes, cost, quality, time, risk, or growth. In practice, this is where executives at firms like Toyota or Unilever would translate strategy into a shared target: "Reduce onboarding time from 14 days to 3," or "Increase repeat purchase by 10% in APAC by Q4." Compare that with many SMEs where the goal is vague ("be more innovative") and the team sprints hard in random directions. Do now (mini-summary): Write a one-sentence "should be" target and 3 measurable success indicators (KPI, timeline, customer impact). Align the team before you chase ideas. What's the fastest way to gather the right facts without killing creativity? Great ideas come from great inputs, and Step Two is Fact Finding—collect data before opinions. Leaders should separate "facts" from "feelings" by digging into who/what/when/where/why/how. This is where many organisations discover their measurement systems are weak—or worse, wrong. In the US, you might lean on product analytics, A/B testing, and voice-of-customer tools. In Japan, you'll often combine frontline observation (genba thinking) with structured reporting—useful, but sometimes filtered by hierarchy. Either way, don't judge yet. Just get the evidence: customer complaints, churn reasons, sales cycle delays, defect rates, staff turnover, and time wasted in approvals. Do now (mini-summary): Collect 10 hard facts (numbers, patterns, examples) and 10 "customer voice" quotes. No solutions yet—just reality. How do you frame the real problem so you don't solve the wrong thing? The way you state the problem determines the quality of the ideas you'll get. Step Three is Problem (or Opportunity) Finding: clarify what's actually holding you back, where resources leak, and what success constraints exist. This is harder than it sounds. Ask five people the main problem and you'll get eight opinions—especially in matrixed multinationals or fast-moving startups. Use smart problem framing techniques: "How might we…?", "What's the bottleneck?", "If we fixed one thing this quarter, what would move the needle?" Compare Japan vs the US here: US teams may jump to action quickly; Japan teams may seek consensus early. Both can miss the root cause if the framing is sloppy. Do now (mini-summary): Rewrite your problem three ways: customer-impact, process-bottleneck, and cost-leakage. Pick the clearest, most actionable version. How do you run ideation so the loud people don't crush the good ideas? Step Four is Idea Finding, and the golden rule is: no judgement, chase volume, and do it in silence. This is where most leaders accidentally sabotage innovation—someone blurts an idea, the "bolshie" confident voices start critiquing, and the timid thinkers shut down. Silent idea generation (think brainwriting rather than brainstorming) helps deeper thinkers contribute and reduces status bias—critical in hierarchical cultures and in teams where junior staff defer to seniority. If you want better ideas, ask the people closest to the coal face: new hires, customer support, frontline sales, and the group that best matches your buyers' profile. Often they see problems the C-suite never touches. Do now (mini-summary): Run 10 minutes of silent brainwriting: each person writes 10 ideas. No talking. Then collect and cluster ideas by theme. How do leaders choose the best ideas without politics or "rank wins"? Step Five is Solution Finding—now you're allowed to judge, but you must judge fairly. The risk here is predictable: seniority dominates, juniors defer, and the "easy consensus" becomes a polite rubber stamp. Use a structured selection method: score ideas against agreed criteria (impact, effort, speed, risk, customer value). Borrow from frameworks like Stage-Gate, Lean Startup (testable hypotheses), and even RICE scoring (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort). Compare sectors: in B2B, feasibility and implementation risk often weigh more; in consumer markets, speed and customer delight can dominate. The point is to remove the "who said it" factor. Do now (mini-summary): Build a simple 4-criteria scorecard and rank the top 10 ideas. Make scoring anonymous if hierarchy is distorting decisions. How do you get buy-in and actually execute innovation in the real world? Ideas don't win—execution wins, and Steps Six to Nine turn creativity into results. Step Six is Acceptance Finding: sell the idea internally for time, money, and people. Step Seven is Implementation: define who does what by when, with budget and resources. Step Eight is Follow Up: check progress early so you don't discover the team is zigging when you needed zagging. Step Nine is Evaluation: did it work, was it worth it, and what did we learn? In 2025-era organisations, this is also where AI can help: drafting business cases, mapping risks, creating implementation plans, and summarising learnings—without replacing leadership accountability. Startups might run faster experiments; conglomerates might need governance and change management. Either way, the process keeps you moving. Do now (mini-summary): Assign an owner, set a 30-day milestone, and define the success metric. Review weekly. Capture learnings as you go. Final wrap-up A surprising number of companies still have no shared system for generating ideas—so innovation depends on mood, meetings, or the loudest voice in the room. A repeatable nine-step process creates better ideation, stronger decision-making, and cleaner execution. Run it consistently, and innovation becomes part of your organisational DNA—not a once-a-year workshop. Quick next steps for leaders Pick one business pain point and run Steps 1–4 in a 60-minute session this week. Use silent idea generation to protect the deeper thinkers. Score ideas with a simple rubric to avoid politics. Pilot one idea in 30 days, then evaluate and repeat. FAQs Is brainstorming or brainwriting better for innovation? Brainwriting usually beats brainstorming because it reduces groupthink and status bias. Silent idea generation produces more ideas and more diverse ideas in most teams. How long does the nine-step innovation process take? You can run Steps 1–5 in a half-day and Steps 6–9 over 30–90 days. The timeline depends on complexity, risk, and resources. What if leadership won't support the idea? Treat Step Six like a sales process—build a business case and show trade-offs. If you can't win resources, scale the idea down into a testable pilot.   Author credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

The show's coverage of things literally or figuratively unearthed in the last quarter of 2025 begins with updates, books and letters, animals, and just one exhumation. Research: Abdallah, Hanna. “Famous Easter Island statues were created without centralized management.” PLOS. Via EurekAlert. 11/26/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106805 Abdallah, Hannah. “Early humans butchered elephants using small tools and made big tools from their bones.” PLOS. Via EurekAlert. 10/8/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1100481 Abdallah, Hannah. “Researchers uncover clues to mysterious origin of famous Hjortspring boat.” EurekAlert. 10/12/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1108323 Archaeology Magazine. “Medieval Hoard of Silver and Pearls Discovered in Sweden.” https://archaeology.org/news/2025/10/14/medieval-hoard-of-silver-and-pearls-discovered-in-sweden/ Archaeology Magazine. “Possible Trepanation Tool Unearthed in Poland.” 11/13/2025. https://archaeology.org/news/2025/11/13/possible-trepanation-tool-unearthed-in-poland/ “Rare 5,000-year-old dog burial unearthed in Sweden.” 12/15/2025. https://news.cision.com/se/arkeologerna/r/rare-5-000-year-old-dog-burial-unearthed-in-sweden,c4282014 Arnold, Paul. “Ancient ochre crayons from Crimea reveal Neanderthals engaged in symbolic behaviors.” Phys.org. 10/30/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-ancient-ochre-crayons-crimea-reveal.html Arnold, Paul. “Dating a North American rock art tradition that lasted 175 generations.” Phys.org. 11/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-11-dating-north-american-art-tradition.html Bassi, Margherita. “A Single Gene Could Have Contributed to Neanderthals’ Extinction, Study Suggests.” Smithsonian. 10/30/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-neanderthal-gene-variant-related-to-red-blood-cells-may-have-contributed-to-their-extinction-180987586/ Benjamin Pohl, Chewing over the Norman Conquest: the Bayeux Tapestry as monastic mealtime reading, Historical Research, 2025;, htaf029, https://doi.org/10.1093/hisres/htaf029 Benzine, Vittoria. “Decoded Hieroglyphics Reveal Female Ruler of Ancient Maya City.” ArtNet. 10/27/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/foundation-stone-maya-coba-woman-ruler-2704521 Berdugo, Sophie. “Easter Island statues may have 'walked' thanks to 'pendulum dynamics' and with as few as 15 people, study finds.” LiveScience. 10/19/2025. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/easter-island-statues-may-have-walked-thanks-to-pendulum-dynamics-and-with-as-few-as-15-people-study-finds Billing, Lotte. “Fingerprint of ancient seafarer found on Scandinavia’s oldest plank boat.” EurekAlert. 10/12/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1109361 Brhel, John. “Rats played major role in Easter Island’s deforestation, study reveals.” EurekAlert. 11/17/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106361 Caldwell, Elizabeth. “9 more individuals unearthed at Oaklawn could be 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre victims.” Tulsa Public Radio. 11/6/2025. https://www.publicradiotulsa.org/local-regional/2025-11-06/9-more-individuals-unearthed-at-oaklawn-could-be-1921-tulsa-race-massacre-victims Clark, Gaby. “Bayeux Tapestry could have been originally designed as mealtime reading for medieval monks.” Phys.org. 12/15/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-bayeux-tapestry-mealtime-medieval-monks.html#google_vignette Cohen, Alina. “Ancient Olive Oil Processing Complex Unearthed in Tunisia.” Artnet. 11/21/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ancient-olive-oil-complex-tunisia-2717795 Cohen, Alina. “MFA Boston Restores Ownership of Historic Works by Enslaved Artist.” ArtNet. 10/30/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/mfa-boston-david-drake-jars-restitution-2706594 Fergusson, Rachel. “First DNA evidence of Black Death in Edinburgh discovered on teeth of excavated teenage skeleton.” The Scotsman. 11/5/2025. https://www.scotsman.com/news/first-dna-evidence-black-death-edinburgh-discovered-teeth-excavated-teenage-skeleton-5387741 Folorunso, Caleb et al. “MOWAA Archaeology Project: Enhancing Understanding of Benin City’s Historic Urban Development and Heritage through Pre-Construction Archaeology.” Antiquity (2025): 1–10. Web. Griffith University. “Rare stone tool cache tells story of trade and ingenuity.” 12/2/2025. https://news.griffith.edu.au/2025/12/02/rare-stone-tool-cache-tells-story-of-trade-and-ingenuity/ Han, Yu et al. “The late arrival of domestic cats in China via the Silk Road after 3,500 years of human-leopard cat commensalism.” Cell Genomics, Volume 0, Issue 0, 101099. https://www.cell.com/cell-genomics/fulltext/S2666-979X(25)00355-6 Hashemi, Sara. “A Volcanic Eruption in 1345 May Have Triggered a Chain of Events That Brought the Black Death to Europe.” Smithsonian. 12/8/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-volcanic-eruption-in-1345-may-have-triggered-a-chain-of-events-taht-brought-the-black-death-to-europe-180987803/ Hjortkjær, Simon Thinggaard. “Mysterious signs on Teotihuacan murals may reveal an early form of Uto-Aztecan language.” PhysOrg. 10/6/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-mysterious-teotihuacan-murals-reveal-early.html Institut Pasteur. “Study suggests two unsuspected pathogens struck Napoleon's army during the retreat from Russia in 1812.” Via EurekAlert. 10/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1102613 Jones, Sam. “Shells found in Spain could be among oldest known musical instruments.” The Guardian. 12/2/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/dec/02/neolithic-conch-like-shell-spain-catalonia-discovery-musical-instruments Kasal, Krystal. “Pahon Cave provides a look into 5,000 years of surprisingly stable Stone Age tool use.” Phys.org. 12/16/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-pahon-cave-years-stable-stone.html Kristiansen, Nina. “Eight pages bound in furry seal skin may be Norway's oldest book.” Science Norway. 11/3/2025. https://www.sciencenorway.no/cultural-history-culture-history/eight-pages-bound-in-furry-seal-skin-may-be-norways-oldest-book/2571496 Kuta, Sarah. “109-Year-Old Messages in a Bottle Written by Soldiers Heading to Fight in World War I Discovered on Australian Beach.” Smithsonian. 11/6/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/109-year-old-messages-in-a-bottle-written-by-soldiers-heading-to-fight-in-world-war-i-discovered-on-australian-beach-180987649/ Kuta, Sarah. “A Storm Battered Western Alaska, Scattering Thousands of Indigenous Artifacts Across the Sand.” Smithsonian. 10/31/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-storm-battered-western-alaska-scattering-thousands-of-indigenous-artifacts-across-the-sand-180987606/ Kuta, Sarah. “Archaeologists Unearth More Than 100 Projectiles From an Iconic Battlefield in Scotland.” Smithsonian. 11/5/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/archaeologists-unearth-more-than-100-projectiles-from-an-iconic-battlefield-in-scotland-180987641/ Kuta, Sarah. “Hundreds of Mysterious Victorian-Era Shoes Are Washing Up on a Beach in Wales. Nobody Knows Where They Came From.” Smithsonian. 1/5/2026. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/hundreds-of-mysterious-victorian-era-shoes-are-washing-up-on-a-beach-in-wales-nobody-knows-where-they-came-from-180987943/ Lawson-Tancred, Jo. “Golden ‘Tudor Heart’ Necklace Sheds New Light on Henry VIII’s First Marriage.” Artnet. 10/14/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/tudor-heart-pendant-british-museum-fundraiser-2699544 Lawson-Tancred, Jo. “Long-Overlooked Black Veteran Identified in Rare 19th-Century Portrait.” ArtNet. 10/27/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/black-veteran-thomas-phillips-portrait-identified-2704721 Lipo CP, Hunt TL, Pakarati G, Pingel T, Simmons N, Heard K, et al. (2025) Megalithic statue (moai) production on Rapa Nui (Easter Island, Chile). PLoS One 20(11): e0336251. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0336251 Lipo, Carl P. and Terry L. Hunt. “The walking moai hypothesis: Archaeological evidence, experimental validation, and response to critics.” Journal of Archaeological Science. Volume 183, November 2025, 106383. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305440325002328 Lock, Lisa. “Pre-construction archaeology reveals Benin City's historic urban development and heritage.” 10/29/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-pre-archaeology-reveals-benin-city.html#google_vignette Lock, Lisa. “Pre-construction archaeology reveals Benin City's historic urban development and heritage.” Antiquity. Via PhysOrg. 10/29/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-pre-archaeology-reveals-benin-city.html#google_vignette Lynley A. Wallis et al, An exceptional assemblage of archaeological plant fibres from Windmill Way, southeast Cape York Peninsula, Australian Archaeology (2025). DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2025.2574127 Lyon, Devyn. “Oaklawn Cemetery excavation brings investigators closer to identifying Tulsa Race Massacre victims.” Fox 23. 11/6/2025. https://www.fox23.com/news/oaklawn-cemetery-excavation-brings-investigators-closer-to-identifying-tulsa-race-massacre-victims/article_67c3a6b7-2acc-44cb-93ce-3d3d0c288eca.html Marquard, Bryan. “Bob Shumway, last known survivor of the deadly Cocoanut Grove nightclub fire, dies at 101.” 11/12/2025. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/11/12/metro/bob-shumway-101-dies-was-last-known-cocoanut-grove-fire-survivor/?event=event12 Marta Osypińska et al, A centurion's monkey? Companion animals for the social elite in an Egyptian port on the fringes of the Roman Empire in the 1st and 2nd c. CE, Journal of Roman Archaeology (2025). DOI: 10.1017/s1047759425100445 Merrington, Andrew. “Extensive dog diversity millennia before modern breeding practices.” University of Exeter. 11/13/2025. https://news.exeter.ac.uk/faculty-of-humanities-arts-and-social-sciences/archaeology-and-history/extensive-dog-diversity-millennia-before-modern-breeding-practices/ Morris, Steven. “Linguists start compiling first ever complete dictionary of ancient Celtic.” The Guardian. 12/8/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/dec/08/linguists-start-compiling-first-ever-complete-dictionary-of-ancient-celtic Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. “Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Resolves Ownership of Works by Enslaved Artist David Drake.” 10/29/2025. https://www.mfa.org/press-release/david-drake-ownership-resolution “Niagara has a 107-year-old shipwreck lodged above the Falls and it just moved.” https://www.narcity.com/niagara-falls-shipwreck-iron-scow-moved-closer-to-the-falls Newcomb, Tim. “A 76-Year-Old Man Went On a Hike—and Stumbled Upon a 1,500-Year Old Trap.” Popular Mechanics. 11/21/2025. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a69441460/reindeer-trap/ Nordin, Gunilla. “Ancient wolves on remote Baltic Sea island reveal link to prehistoric humans.” Stockholm University. Via EurekAlert. 11/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1106807 Oster, Sandee. “DNA confirms modern Bo people are descendants of ancient Hanging Coffin culture.” Phys.org. 12/6/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-dna-modern-bo-people-descendants.html Oster, Sandee. “Rare disease possibly identified in 12th century child's skeletal remains.” PhysOrg. 10/10/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-rare-disease-possibly-12th-century.html Osuh, Chris and Geneva Abdul. “Lost grave of daughter of Black abolitionist Olaudah Equiano found by A-level student.” The Guardian. 11/1/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/01/lost-grave-daughter-black-abolitionist-olaudah-equiano-found-by-a-level-student Silvia Albizuri et al, The oldest mule in the western Mediterranean. The case of the Early Iron Age in Hort d'en Grimau (Penedès, Barcelona, Spain), Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2025.105506 Skok, Phoebe. “Ancient shipwrecks rewrite the story of Iron Age trade.” PhysOrg. 10/14/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-ancient-shipwrecks-rewrite-story-iron.html The History Blog. “600-year-old Joseon ship recovered from seabed.” 11/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74652 The History Blog. “Ancient pleasure barge found off Alexandria coast.” 12/9/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74860 The History Blog. “Charred Byzantine bread loves stamped with Christian imagery found in Turkey.” 10/13/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74352 The History Blog. “Early medieval silver treasure found in Stockholm.” 10/12/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74343 The History Blog. “Roman amphora with sardines found in Switzerland.” 12/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/74904 The Straits Times. “Wreck of ancient Malay vessel discovered on Pulau Melaka.” 10/31/2025. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/wreck-of-ancient-malay-vessel-discovered-on-pulau-melaka Thompson, Sarah. “The forgotten daughter: Eliza Monroe Hay’s story revealed in her last letters.” W&M News. 9/30/2025. https://news.wm.edu/2025/09/30/the-forgotten-daughter-eliza-monroes-story-revealed-in-her-last-letters/ Tuhkuri, Jukka. “Why Did Endurance Sink?” Polar Record 61 (2025): e23. Web. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/polar-record/article/why-did-endurance-sink/6CC2C2D56087035A94DEB50930B81980 Universitat de Valencia. “The victims of the Pompeii eruption wore heavy wool cloaks and tunics, suggesting different environmental conditions in summer.” 12/3/2025. https://www.uv.es/uvweb/uv-news/en/news/victims-pompeii-eruption-wore-heavy-wool-cloaks-tunics-suggesting-different-environmental-conditions-summer-1285973304159/Novetat.html?id=1286464337848&plantilla=UV_Noticies/Page/TPGDetaillNews University of Glasgow. “Archaeologists recover hundreds of Jacobite projectiles in unexplored area of Culloden.” 10/30/2025. https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_1222736_en.html University of Vienna. “Neanderthal DNA reveals ancient long-distance migrations.” 10/29/2025. https://www.univie.ac.at/en/news/detail/neanderthal-dna-reveals-ancient-long-distance-migrations Zhou, H., Tao, L., Zhao, Y. et al. Exploration of hanging coffin customs and the bo people in China through comparative genomics. Nat Commun 16, 10230 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-65264-3 Zinin, Andrew. “Ancient humans mastered fire-making 400,000 years ago, study shows.” Phys.org. 10/10/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-12-ancient-humans-mastered-years.html See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Leaders today are stuck in a constant three-way tug-of-war: time, quality, and cost. In the post-pandemic, hybrid-work era (2020–2025), the pressure doesn't ease—tech just lets us do more, faster, and the clock keeps yelling. This is a practical, leader-grade guide to getting control of your calendar without killing your standards or your people. Why does leadership time management feel harder now, even with better technology? It feels harder because technology increases speed and volume, so your workload expands to fill the space. Email, chat, dashboards, CRMs, and "quick calls" create the illusion of efficiency while quietly multiplying decisions and interruptions. In startups, that looks like context-switching between selling, hiring, and shipping. In large organisations—think Japan-based multinationals versus US tech firms—it becomes meetings, approvals, and stakeholder alignment. Either way, the result is the same: you're busy all day, but the important work stays parked. Answer card / Do now: Audit your week for "speed traps" (messages, meetings, micro-requests). Eliminate or cap the top two. What is the "Tyranny of the Urgent," and how does it wreck leader performance? The Tyranny of the Urgent is when urgent tasks bully important tasks off your schedule—until you're permanently firefighting. You end up reacting all day: chasing escalations, answering pings, and rescuing problems that should have been prevented. This is where burnout risk climbs and productivity drops—especially in people-heavy roles like sales leadership, operations, and client service. Leaders often say, "I don't have time to plan," but that's exactly how the urgent wins. The urgent will always show up; your job is to stop it running the company. Answer card / Do now: Name today's "urgent bully." Decide: delete, delegate, defer, or do—then move one important task back onto the calendar. How do I prioritise like a serious leader (not just make a chaotic to-do list)? Prioritising means ranking tasks by impact, not emotion—then doing them in that order. A scribbled list isn't a system. Leaders need a repeatable method for capture, ranking, and execution. Use simple impact questions: Will this protect revenue? Reduce risk? Improve customer outcomes? Build capability? In Japan, where consensus and quality are prized, leaders can over-invest in perfection; in the US, speed can dominate. The sweet spot is clarity: define "done," define the deadline, and define the owner. Answer card / Do now: Write your top 5 for tomorrow, rank them 1–5, and commit to finishing 1–2 before opening email/chat. What is the 4-box matrix and which quadrant should leaders live in? The best quadrant for leaders is "important but not urgent"—because that's where planning, thinking, and prevention happen. This is the Eisenhower/Covey style matrix in plain clothes: Important + Urgent: crises, deadlines, major issues (live here too long = stress + burnout) Important + Not urgent: strategy, coaching, planning, process improvement (your success engine) Not important + Urgent: interruptions, low-value requests (minimise and delegate) Not important + Not urgent: digital junk time (limit ruthlessly) Big firms (Toyota-style operational excellence) and fast movers (Rakuten-style pace) both win when leaders protect Quadrant 2 time. Answer card / Do now: Block 60–90 minutes this week for "Important/Not Urgent" work—and guard it like a client meeting. How do I stop low-priority work and social media from stealing my day? You stop it by making "wasted time" visible and socially awkward—then replacing it with intentional breaks.Leaders often underestimate the drag of "just checking" feeds, news, or random videos. It's not the minutes; it's the mental fragmentation. If you need a break, take a break that restores you: a 30-minute walk, a short workout, a proper lunch, or a reset chat with someone who energises you. In high-output cultures across Asia-Pacific and Europe, the smartest leaders build recovery into the week because it protects decision quality. Answer card / Do now: Put friction on distractions (log out, remove apps, notifications off). Replace with one "recovery break" you actually schedule. What tactical system works: daily task lists, time blocking, delegation, or batching? It's all four—stacked into one simple operating rhythm: list, block, protect, batch, delegate. Start the day with a written, prioritised list, then time-block the top items by making an appointment with yourself. Protect that time as aggressively as you would protect a client meeting. Next: delegate "not important but urgent" tasks where possible, and batch similar work to stay in flow—calls together, approvals together, email twice a day, admin in one chunk. This reduces ramp-up time and context switching, which is a silent killer in leadership roles. Answer card / Do now: Choose one batching rule for next week (e.g., email at 11:30 and 16:30 only). Tell your team so expectations reset. Conclusion: the leader's real edge is intentional time investment Time management for leaders isn't about being "busy." It's about choosing where your time goes so you get better outcomes with less chaos. The urgent will always knock. Your job is to build a system that keeps the important work moving—planning, coaching, prevention, and decisions—so your team isn't living in crisis mode. Quick next steps for leaders (this week) Block one Quadrant 2 session (strategy/planning) and defend it. Create a daily top-5 list and finish 1–2 items before messages. Delegate one "urgent but not important" task permanently. Implement one batching rule for communications. Track your time for 3 days and delete your biggest "time thief". Optional FAQs Yes—time tracking is worth it, because it shows you the truth, not your intentions. Even three days of tracking can reveal where meetings, messages, and busywork are leaking value. Yes—delegation can reduce quality short term, but it increases capability long term. Use clear "definition of done," checklists, and feedback loops to lift standards while distributing load. No—planning doesn't slow you down; it prevents rework and constant firefighting. A small investment in planning typically saves hours of avoidable churn. Author Bio Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including best-sellers Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery, along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, hosts six weekly podcasts, and produces YouTube shows including The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan.

Have you ever wondered what humpback whales do when no one is watching? With the help of temporary, non-invasive cameras, Dr. Olaf Meynecke and his team from Griffith University were able to gain new insights into whale research. In the images, the research team came across another species, the so-called remoras. The relationship between these suckerfish and whales raised questions that could reshape what we know about whales. - Was tun Buckelwale, wenn niemand zuschaut? Mithilfe von nicht-invasiven Kameras konnte der Wissenschaftler Dr. Olaf Meynecke und sein Team von der Griffith University neue Erkenntnisse in der Walforschung gewinnen. In den Aufnahmen stieß das Forschungsteam auf eine andere Spezies, den sogenannten Schiffshaltern. Das Verhältnis zwischen diesen Saugfischen und den Walen warf Fragen auf, die die Meereswissenschaft grundlegend beeinflussen könnten.

Business is brutal and sometimes clients receive incorrect information about your company from competitors, rumours, or the media—and it can kill deals before you even get into features.  Why do misperceptions about a company derail sales so fast? Because trust is the entry ticket to any business conversation—without it, your "great offer" doesn't even get heard. If a buyer suspects your firm is unstable, unethical, or incompetent, they'll filter everything you say as "sales spin" and you'll feel resistance no matter how good the solution is. This is especially sharp in relationship-heavy markets like Japan, where reputation risk is taken seriously, but it happens everywhere—Australia, the US, Europe—because buyers fear being blamed for a bad vendor choice. The worst part is misperceptions are often hidden: in strong relationships a client might tell you what they've heard, but in new relationships they may never mention it while silently disengaging. Do now: Treat "reputation risk" as a normal obstacle, not a rare exception—assume misperceptions may exist and plan to surface them early.  What's a real example of reputation damage caused by misinformation? A single error can wipe out trust at scale, and recovery can take years. A famous case involved a Japanese TV news report in 1985 that linked a wine adulteration scandal to "Australia," when the scandal actually involved "Austria"—a mix-up made easier because the country names sound similar in Japanese. The result was devastating: Australian wine sales in Japan collapsed and took a long time to recover. That story is a reminder that "fake news" doesn't need to be malicious to be damaging; sometimes it's a linguistic slip, a competitor's whisper campaign, or a lazy assumption repeated as "fact." In modern terms (as of 2025), misinformation spreads faster via social media and industry chat groups, so the impact can be immediate. Do now: Collect 2–3 "reassurance proof points" (stability, client results, certifications) you can deploy if a rumour appears.  How do you uncover negative perceptions the buyer isn't saying out loud? Ask directly, gently—and then shut up. The simplest line is: "So what are your perceptions about our organisation?" Then don't add a single extra word. Silence is the tool. If you soften it with excuses or explanations, you reduce the chance they'll tell you the truth. This matters because you can't fix what you can't see. Many salespeople are far too optimistic and assume the buyer starts neutral-to-positive. In reality, the buyer may have heard something ugly from a rival, read something outdated online, or had a bad past experience with someone "like you." Your job is to draw it out early, before you waste time presenting to a sceptic. Do now: Add the "perceptions question" to your first-meeting checklist and practise staying silent for 5–10 seconds after asking it.  What should you say when the buyer shares a negative belief (without getting defensive)? Don't argue—use a neutral "cushion" to buy thinking time. When a buyer says something negative, your instinct is to correct them fast. That's dangerous: defensive reactions make your mouth outrun your brain and you can say the wrong thing. A cushion is a neutral statement that neither agrees nor disagrees, and it lets you stay calm and professional. Think: "I see," "That's helpful to know," or "Thanks for sharing that." Then you choose your pathway based on what they said. This works across cultures: in Japan it protects harmony and face; in Australia and the US it signals maturity and confidence. Do now: Write 3 cushion phrases you can say naturally, and ban yourself from instant "No, that's wrong…" reactions.  What are the three best ways to respond: agree, dissociate, or correct? Pick the response that matches the type of misperception—partial truth, social proof gap, or factual error. Agree (with clarification): If it was true in the past, acknowledge it and update the reality (e.g., systems upgraded, issue eliminated). Dissociate (social proof): Show that other credible clients worked with you and got results—implying the fear didn't stop them. Correct (evidence): If it's factually wrong, provide hard proof to remove the concern. The skill is not choosing "the nicest" option—it's choosing the right option. If you try to "correct" something that's emotional or reputation-based without rapport, you can make them dig in harder. Do now: Build a mini playbook: one Agree line, one Dissociate line, and one Correct-with-evidence pattern you can reuse.  After you neutralise the misperception, how do you rebuild credibility and move forward? Shift into positive territory by highlighting your most relevant USP and expanding their view of your strengths—without turning it into a pitch. Once the concern is handled, you reinforce why you're the best partner by selecting the USP that fits their situation (not your favourite USP). This forces you to do your research: you may have many differentiators, but you have limited "face time," so bring the big guns. Then widen their understanding of what you can do—buyers often pigeonhole you into a narrow category based on outdated impressions. Expand the scope carefully: more capability, more depth, more proof—still conversational, not a monologue. Do now: Choose one "best-fit USP" for the buyer and prepare a 30-second credibility expansion that feels informative, not salesy.  Quick checklist: Dealing with misperceptions (copy/paste) Ask: "What are your perceptions about our organisation?" (and stay silent)  Use a cushion (neutral pause phrase)  Choose the right route: Agree / Dissociate / Correct  Present proof (not opinions) when correcting  Reinforce: best-fit USP + expand strengths (no hard sell)  Conclusion: what salespeople should do now Misperceptions are part of the rough-and-tumble of business. The naïve approach is hoping the buyer "probably thinks well of us." The professional approach is drawing it out early, handling it calmly, and then rebuilding trust with relevant proof. When you do this well, you don't just save deals—you protect your reputation and stop competitors (or random misinformation) from writing your story for you.  FAQs How do I stop getting defensive when buyers criticise my company? Use a neutral cushion first, then choose agree, dissociate, or correct. It buys time and prevents reactive arguments.  What if the buyer won't tell me what they've heard? Ask gently and then stay silent. The silence is what often prompts honesty.  When should I correct misinformation with evidence? When it's factually wrong and you can provide hard proof.Otherwise, clarify or use social proof first.  Author Bio Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダā). 

Stroke etanercept injection 18 months on: what lasted, what changed, and what Andrew learned after the PESTO trial Some stroke survivors are told a version of the same sentence in hospital: “After three months, what you have is what you'll have.” Andrew Stops didn't buy it, not because he was naïve, but because he needed a reason to keep showing up for rehab when nobody could give him a straight answer about what “recovery” would look like. Four years after his ischemic stroke, and 18 months after a stroke etanercept injection, Andrew is back to share what improved quickly, what continued to evolve, and how he made peace with research results that didn't match his lived experience. The question so many survivors are really asking When people reach out about perispinal etanercept (often discussed as “etanercept after stroke”), they're rarely asking for a science lecture. They're asking: Will this help me get my life back? Will I be the person it works for… or the person it doesn't? How do I decide without being misled by hype, fear, or my own desperation? Those questions are valid. They're also heavy, because the stakes are high: the treatment is expensive, travel can be intense, and the emotional cost of hoping—then not getting results—can be brutal. Andrew's baseline: what his stroke took at the start Andrew's stroke most impacted his right side. Early on, he had: No use of his right arm or hand A weaker right leg Right foot drop A slight speech impediment He worked hard to walk again quickly, using practical supports early (including an elastic extension on his shoe to help keep his foot up). But his bigger mission was clear: find ways to complement rehab—because medical staff couldn't give him a timeline, and he felt a “lack of hope” from their perspective. That's a common moment for survivors: you're doing the work, but you also want a map. The “complement” phase: why hyperbaric helped, even without perfect measurement Before etanercept entered the picture, Andrew leaned on what had helped him before: hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). He had a history of a brain tumor and had used hyperbaric previously for healing, so he rented a soft-shell chamber at home for three months and went in daily for 90 minutes. Andrew was careful with his claims: he couldn't measure physiological changes in real time at home. But he could measure something important, his ability to cope. HBOT became a daily “warm cocoon” where he could breathe oxygen-rich air and calm his nervous system. For him, that mental-health benefit wasn't a side note. It was fuel. And when you're rebuilding your life after stroke, fuel matters. The etanercept decision: hope, uncertainty, and the reality of the “roll the dice” problem Andrew discovered perispinal etanercept through a media story about Dr. Tobinick's clinic, and after about a year, decided he needed to know he'd tried everything he reasonably could. He crowdfunded to afford the trip and treatment. That detail matters because it introduces the single biggest ethical challenge around treatments like this: Even if you try to stay balanced, it's hard not to hang hope on something that costs time, money, energy, and pride. Andrew doesn't tell people to go. In fact, when people contact him now (he's spoken to more than 50), he's careful: He explains it worked for him, but might not work for them He encourages going without expectation He frames it as “knowing you tried everything,” not a guaranteed fix That's responsible guidance from someone who understands how fragile hope can become when it's under financial pressure. What changed fast (and what stayed improved 18 months later) Andrew's report of early changes is striking not because it proves causality, but because it describes specific, functional shifts: Cognitive fatigue and sensory overload He noticed cognitive fatigue dial down immediately. He still experiences it, but it takes far more to trigger now. The most vivid example: on the way to the clinic, he used an eye mask, noise-cancelling headphones, and had medication ready for overload. On the return flight 24 hours later, he didn't need any of it. He stood in the airport like any other traveler. Pain and cramping A persistent cramp in his right calf eased significantly. Emotional regulation He noticed improvement in emotional control, something many stroke survivors quietly struggle with and often feel ashamed about. Hand function and fine motor control His right hand went from feeling like it moved “in molasses” to loosening up. And here's where the “18 months on” part becomes powerful: Andrew recently discovered he could play scales on his clarinet again, covering holes with independent finger movement, something he hadn't been able to do since the stroke. That's not framed as: “etanercept did this.” It's framed as: recovery kept unfolding. “Your stroke recovery doesn't stop. There's no end date.” The PESTO trial: when research challenges your story Then came the PESTO trial results, which (as discussed in your episode) reported that etanercept was not more effective than placebo in the studied group. This is where Andrew's story gets even more human. He didn't just shrug it off. He described feeling guilt, even fraudulence, because he couldn't reconcile the research headline with his lived experience. That response is deeply relatable: when something helps you, and others don't get the same outcome, it can feel like survivor's guilt, especially when people have spent enormous money and emotional energy. A careful theory: the blood–brain barrier question In your conversation, Bill raises a hypothesis, not a proven conclusion that deserves careful attention: If etanercept struggles to cross the blood–brain barrier in general, could certain people have a more permeable barrier due to factors like stroke, surgery, or radiation therapy (which Andrew had)? Andrew himself wonders if radiation could be part of his “why.” This isn't a sales pitch. It's a research direction, a possible explanation for why outcomes might vary so dramatically between people. If that line of thinking ever becomes clinically actionable, it could change the whole decision-making process for survivors, because the question would shift from “roll the dice” to “are you likely to be a candidate?” What a stroke survivor can take from this without being sold to If you're reading this because you're considering a stroke etanercept injection, here are the grounded takeaways from Andrew's 18-month update: Recovery can continue for years. Don't let a timeline kill your momentum. Treatments don't have to be “proven” to feel meaningful, but meaning isn't the same as certainty. Hope needs guardrails. Don't stake your whole future on one intervention. If you pursue something controversial, protect your mindset. Go in informed, realistic, and supported. You deserve respect, not ridicule, for wanting your life back. If you want ongoing encouragement and tools to navigate recovery (and the emotional complexity that comes with it), Bill's work is built for that: Book: recoveryafterstroke.com/book Patreon: patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Please consult your doctor before making any changes to your health or recovery plan. Andrew's 18-Month Etanercept Update: Fatigue, Function, and What the Research Says 18 months later, Andrew shares what improved after etanercept fatigue, function, and the tough questions raised by the PESTO trial. Highlights: 00:00 Introduction and Background 06:15 Exploring Treatment Options 08:59 Stroke Etanercept Injection And It’s Impact 12:14 Research Findings and Controversies 17:59 Conversations with Other Survivors 23:26 Reflections on Treatment and Guilt Transcript: Stroke Etanercept Injection – Introduction and Background Bill Gasiamis (00:00) Hey again there everyone. Welcome back to the Recovery After Stroke podcast. Before we get started, a quick thank you to everyone who supports this podcast on Patreon. Your support helps cover hosting costs and after more than 10 years of doing this largely solo, it’s what helps me keep showing up for stroke survivors who need hope and real conversations. A huge shout out to everyone who comments on YouTube, leaves reviews on Spotify and Apple podcasts. has bought my book, The Unexpected Way That a Stroke Became the Best Thing That Happened, and even the folks who don’t skip the ads, thank you. All of it helps this podcast reach the people who are searching for answers late at night when recovery feels heavy. Now today’s episode is a follow-up many of you have asked for. Andrew Stopps is back, and we’re talking about stroke and etanusept injections 18 months on. We’ll unpack what changed for him, what’s continued to improve and how he processed the PESTO trial results that found Etanercapt wasn’t more effective than the placebo. If you’re considering this treatment or you’re trying to make sense of conflicting stories and research, this conversation will help you think more clearly without hype and without fear. All right, let’s get into it. Bill Gasiamis (01:17) Andrew stops. Welcome back. Andrew (01:20) Thank you for having me. It’s good to back. Bill Gasiamis (01:22) It is so good to have you back. The last time we spoke, was March 26, 2024. At least that’s the date that I uploaded the podcast Andrew (01:30) it would have been before that even, probably a couple of weeks before that. Bill Gasiamis (01:34) Yeah, something like that. So a good 18 months since we last spoke. And the original reason why you reached out and kind of we connected was I think because you had found my podcast, I had maybe had a couple of conversations about Etanercept like, and I had no idea what it was, how it worked, if it worked. And then you reached out and said, hey, I’ve had this injection. I’ve tried it. Why don’t connect about it? Andrew (01:36) So a good 18 months. Bill Gasiamis (02:03) And then we connected and we had a really great conversation and that interview has had like 19 and a half thousand views since then. And then what’s been happening a lot about that interview is heaps of people have reached out to me to say, can I speak with Andrew? Can you connect me with Andrew? Andrew (02:23) And he’s people reached out to me because of that. And also they found me on the interwebs somehow and contacted me that way. So I’ve probably been spoken now, well over 50 people. Bill Gasiamis (02:40) Wow, man, that is fascinating. So and what I love about it is that we put out information. What we hope is we hope people make a more informed decision. Right. That’s kind of the idea is like, how do I help people make people make a more informed decision, especially when I haven’t experienced something and I’m trying to get across the benefits or the pitfalls or, you know, what to avoid on a product. It’s just impossible. But You were very gracious as well as you. I’ve interviewed, by the way, a bunch of other about Etanercept. And one of them was Dwayne Simple. Dwayne also gets a few people who I sent to him that are in Canada because Dwayne is in Canada. He’s had Etanercept and it worked out for And then I’ve spoken to another lady from Australia, Karen. who also a shot or two of Etanercept and had positive results. But of course, Etanercept is extremely controversial. And one of the challenges with it is that it doesn’t work for everybody. And there’s only one way of knowing if it’s going to work is to go and get the injection to pay the money and then to kind of roll the dice and see what happens. Now, that’s what we’re going to talk about today. But before we talk about the new Andrew (03:37) Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Bill Gasiamis (03:58) research that has come out, the PESTO trial research. Before we talk about that, we’ll briefly talk about your condition, where you started. We’ll have a real short version of that, where you started, what happened, and then how you ended up overseas experiencing Dr. Tobinick’s procedure, and then update us on what happened in the last 18 months. Andrew (04:17) Okay, so I had my stroke exactly four years ago last Thursday. So I’m a four year old stroke survivor now. And my most damage was done to my right side. So I had no use of my right arm or hand at all. My right leg was weak, but it was okay. But my right foot just fell. I had a slight speech impediment. But otherwise physically that was really it for the stroke. And I worked really hard to get myself walking again as quickly as I could. And so when I got home I could walk but I’d had an elastic extension on my shoe to help keep my foot up. And I… From that moment, I was looking for ways to complement my rehab to help me recover fully from the stroke because the doctors and people in the hospital, no one could say to me like how long, how I was going to be, how much recovery, what I could expect, like anything. was just everyone’s unique. And I understand that, but there was a ⁓ lack of like hope from their perspective. So the first thing we did when we got me home was I’d heard, well, I knew that hyperbaric chambers helped healing. And I knew that because I had a, previously had a brain tumor and I used hyperbaric to help me heal from that. It was really, really good. So we hired one, we rented one for three months and had a soft shell chamber at home, which I went in every day. for 90 minutes and it was fantastic. I can’t say how, if that physiologically helped because I don’t have access to an MRI at home or anything. Yeah, I can’t measure it, but it did wonders for my mental health. Like it was brilliant because for an hour and half every day, I got to sit in this nice warm cocoon shell, they do not over me. Bill Gasiamis (06:01) You can’t measure it. Exploring Treatment Options Andrew (06:15) and listen to really nice music and breathe in almost, you know, pure, very heavily oxygenated air. And so it was like meditation for an hour and half. And the hour and a half went just like that. It was so quick. And I was really sad to have to, you know, give it up after three months. But yeah, it very much helped with my mental health during that time. And I mean, It’s hard to say if it helped me physically, but I certainly got back my ability to move my foot. My arm was another beast though, and that took a long time. That took about two months before it even moved slightly before I could just, you know, move it up and down. So getting back the function of my arm was a longer process. So I kept researching online and finding, you know, other ways that I could help myself to recover. That’s when came across the 60 minutes interview with Dr. Tobinick and the clinic and the lady from Australia. Bill Gasiamis (07:17) Which by the way, 60 minutes has taken down. You can only find that on Dr. Tobinick’s YouTube channel now. Yeah, right. So that’s interesting just as a thing that I observed that people might find interesting as well to hear. It doesn’t mean anything perhaps. Andrew (07:24) really? Interesting. Yeah, I mean, yeah, can be anything anyway, so I found that I watched it. I was really really inspired and I thought well I’ve got to know that I have tried everything like if this is how I’m going to be and this was After one year and I was told that you know after three months or That pretty much what I had after three months was was how I was going to be so I figured after one year, I’ve got to try everything. And so I crowdfunded and had about 30 or 1000. Bill Gasiamis (08:13) You raised how much? US, New Zealand dollars. Andrew (08:22) Yes, so that was to that was to fly that was for the flights accommodation the shots like the whole the whole package And yeah, and we flew out in in February Last last year 2025 Was it last year? can’t remember Bill Gasiamis (08:37) I did 20, 24, 18 months ago. Stroke Etanercept Injection And It’s Impact Andrew (08:40) 2024. And yeah, had the shot and it was it was amazing how fast I found things start to to wake up and recover. By then I had had more movement in my arm, but my hand was very sluggish. And I really didn’t have any fine motor control at all. ⁓ So yeah, that was the 32nd story of Andrew’s stroke recovery. Bill Gasiamis (09:04) Yeah, that’s a cool story. So we did a full deeper dive interview for Andrew’s story, an hour and 18 minutes worth of conversation. And the link to the original interview with Andrew about Etanercept will be available in the show notes, right, and in the YouTube description of this video. So anyone who wants to go back and watch that can do that as well. Now, like I said, it’s had 19,000 views. It’s 521 likes and it has just a ton of comments, just a ton, a ton of comments. Now, one other thing that has happened since then is I haven’t been able to find people who are willing to talk about Etanercept who did not have positive results when they went to Dr. Tobinick’s clinic. just, people don’t want to be interviewed if it’s about that. It seems as though it’s been really hard, right? So. I can’t give this balanced view of here’s somebody who has had good results, here’s somebody who hasn’t had results. They comment on the YouTube comments and they send me emails about it, but they don’t really tell me whether or not they will join me on the podcast to discuss it properly. recently the Griffith University study came out about Perispinal Etanercept and it had some positive results. It didn’t find that it was able to help restore certain functions, et cetera, but it did have an impact on pain relief for some people. Now, after that, the highly anticipated study was the one from the Flory Institute here in Australia called the PESTO trial. I’ll share my screen and I’ll put it on the screen while we chat about it, right? We’re gonna chat about what if. what it found, Andrew, just so that we can bring people up to speed so they can just hear a conversation about it. Bill Gasiamis (10:50) We’ll be back with more of Andrew’s story in just a moment, but if you’re listening right now and you feel stuck, want you to hear this clearly. Recovery isn’t a three month window. It’s not even a one year window. Your brain can keep adapting for a long time. And the real challenge is learning how to keep hope without putting all your hope in one thing. In the second half of this episode, Andrew shares what actually lasted 18 months on. What still improved over the time. And we’ll talk about the biggest question. If the PESTO trial says the Etanercept shouldn’t work better than the placebo, then why do some people still report a night and day difference? Bill Gasiamis (11:30) OK, so this is the PESO trial. Now, I interviewed recently ⁓ Vincent Thijs the doctor who headed the study. but the Flory Institute is basically reporting on his findings. He has presented these findings at stroke conferences around the world. And what was interesting was that this study started in, I think, 2018. And then because of COVID had to be paused, amongst other things. And then finally, all the research was reviewed and it became available at the beginning of 2025. And then it’s been out probably for about seven or eight months now. Stroke Etanercept Injection Research Findings and Controversies And what they found was that the, and they’re being a little bit provocative here calling it a miracle cure, but what they found was that a perispinal etanusept, the arthritis drug, ⁓ was not effective in treating people that were experiencing symptoms because of a stroke anymore. than the placebo. So what they found was that the people on the placebo who ⁓ received the placebo, 56 % of them had a positive result from the placebo as opposed to less than 56 % of people who were actually using the Etanusept. And the reason being, they say, is because the drug doesn’t have the capability of crossing the blood-brain barrier to get to where the ⁓ inflammation is and to actually ⁓ decrease the inflammation. In arthritis, for example, the inflammation is in the joints, which are not part of the brain. There is no blood-brain barrier or some barrier that stops the atanasip from going there. And therefore, when people get injected to experience relief from ⁓ the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, they do experience that relief sometimes almost immediately, et cetera. And ⁓ as a result of that, the guys published the study and basically concluded that it is not effective and more research needs to be done to understand why or why not it works for some people and why it doesn’t for others. And I’ve had a couple of kind of ideas since then. And I’ll stop sharing my screen now because we can go back to just you and I, Andrew. And I’ve had some ideas as to how do I then talk to people about that, right? So I know I’ve interviewed Andrew, five other people that I’ve interviewed at least who said they had a positive result. And I should tell people there’s people who had a positive result, right? And then there’s the other people on the other side of the spectrum, which are really hostile saying like, it’s snake oil. My idea is that even if you go there and you receive Etanercept and it works when it’s not meant to and it’s just a placebo working because you’ve got high expectations of it working. You need it to work. You’ve invested $30,000. You you’ve traveled half a way across the world. Even if it works and it didn’t cross your blood brain barrier, to me, that’s a tick, right? That’s like. It worked fantastic. People improve their function. They got their life back. The body is very powerful. It can achieve amazing things. Who cares how it did that? A B, your blood brain barrier might be compromised. So there is a thing called leaky gut. We’ve heard about leaky gut. It is a compromised gut barrier which allows toxins to escape the gut and get into the blood. and causes a lot of autoimmune conditions. The same thing is possible for the blood brain barrier. If you’ve got a really compromised blood brain barrier because you’ve had a stroke or you’ve had brain surgery or something like that, it’s possible. Andrew (15:47) we’ve had radiation therapy, which I have. Bill Gasiamis (15:50) or you’ve had radiation therapy because of previous medical conditions, et cetera, then there could be a more permeable blood brain barrier, which enables the Etanercept to actually penetrate it and get to the root cause of the stroke inflammation or the root location of the stroke inflammation. And therefore, some people through no… ⁓ you know, through no fault of their own, I either have a really healthy blood brain barrier and Etanercept can’t cross it or have a compromised blood brain barrier and Etanercept can cross it. And therefore they experience positive results. But the issue then is how do we know? How can we work that out for people, you know, before they go and drop 30 grand on a treatment that they may not get a result for. Now. That’s my thinking about it, right? But I still send people to you and I still send you these studies as they come up, just so that I can say, Andrew, I need your feedback. I need you to talk to me. I need you to tell me something. Like, where do you stand on all of this? I’m going to keep sending people to you who reach out to me to speak to Andrew because they’re interested. So like, how does that conversation go in your head and then with the people that you connect with? Andrew (17:09) Okay, so having having been a teacher, career teacher, I’m really careful of what I advise people like I would be really careful what I advise my students. So I never say to people, yes, you’ve to do it because it worked for me. God, do do it, do drop it again. I never ever say that I tried to give them the balance for you. And and even though it worked for me, I make sure it’s I’m very clear that they understand that it worked for me, but it might not work for you. Conversations with Other Survivors So you’ve got to go like I did and don’t go with any expectations. Just go, just know that you’ve tried everything you can to help your recovery. That’s all. And so that’s how that conversation usually goes. They ask me lots of questions about what it feels like, what the place is like, what Dr. Tobinick was like. just all the sort of the mechanical questions around it. But generally, it’s, I don’t know whether I should go. And it’s also, I want to go, but my family don’t want to go. And I can’t go because they don’t support me, because they think it’s snake oil. Bill Gasiamis (18:18) Okay, that’s an interesting conversation. So I often try and advise stroke survivors to be careful who they share information with. Not saying that you shouldn’t share information with your loved ones and your family members after a stroke. What I’m saying is like, even in situations where things are not that critical, where you’re not talking about spending 30 grand, I’m just talking about people who have the experience sometimes Andrew where they say, oh, I wanna try this meditation thing, you know, and. somebody hasn’t meditated before, thinks it’s woo woo and says, don’t worry about that stuff. What do you wanna be? Like a hippie or something? There’s those types of people who hang out in our world who do intervene with things that we’re curious about and we wanna kind of shift away from perhaps old habits to new habits, especially around alcohol as well. I found that people would go, aren’t you gonna have one drink? Like what’s the point of going out if we can’t have a drink? It’s like, dude, like I’m a completely different version of myself. I’ve had a stroke, I can’t drink. But understanding how to deal with people like that is a bit of an issue. So then you’ve spoken to about 50 people who have either gone or not gone. Like have some people gone and contacted you and said it worked and some people gone and contacted you and said it hasn’t worked. Andrew (19:40) Yes. Yep. And I’ve. The contact normally starts to go quiet once they actually go, whether it works or doesn’t work. And I usually just get a quick message saying, hey, I went and it worked and that’s great. And, you know, have a good life. You know, I don’t want to keep bugging them. But the people that it didn’t work for have been pretty gutted. Bill Gasiamis (20:03) Right. Andrew (20:04) Because I’ve, you know, even though I’ve tried not to make it something they hang all their hopes on, you know, they still do to a certain extent. And so they come back pretty, not bitter or angry at me, just at the situation, that it didn’t work. And they don’t know where to turn next. Bill Gasiamis (20:22) So they might’ve had all their hopes kind of set on this working, all their eggs in one basket, so to speak, didn’t work and now they feel like maybe they’ve lost hope or they haven’t got another alternative or option. Andrew (20:35) Yeah, yeah. And what I’ve learned in the last 18 months is that your stroke recovery doesn’t stop. There’s no end date. So when you’re told in hospital that after three months that’s what you’ve got, no, no. doesn’t, like your brain is constantly evolving and working and learning and repending itself. If you want to work something and exercise something and rehab part of your body, eventually it’s going to improve. Even if it’s only by a little bit and it’s really slow, it’s going to improve. Bill Gasiamis (21:09) Yeah. So you’ve been 18 months down the track. One of the questions I got asked recently was, does the procedure need to be repeated every couple of years? Does it last? What have you found about how you have changed or experienced your body in the last 18 months? ⁓ Tell us first what you got back and how quickly and then what that led to, what you were able to achieve as a result of what you got back. Andrew (21:34) Yeah, okay. So, um, immediately the things that came back is is that my cognitive fatigue like just just lowered like straight away. Um, and I was when I had the shot, I was exhausted because they take it through a battery of tests. So I like was an hour and a half of tests. And so I was I was done. I was ready to go lie down. Um, And that just lifted like straight away and it didn’t come back. I still get cognitive fatigue now, but I really have to be doing stuff that that really taxes my brain to do it. And or I have to be really tired. But before I had the injection, I would get I would be on the verge of fatigue all the time. So it wouldn’t take much to push me over into it. So that was gone. I had a ⁓ really nasty cramp in my right calf that never went away. That went away. That literally just dialed down as I was sitting there after the shot. the emotional control also came back. Bill Gasiamis (22:42) Uh-huh. Andrew (22:43) which was good. Now, for me, I was, for the first shot, I was only in Florida for 24 hours. So we flew down from Memphis and I had the shot the next day and then we flew back that afternoon. So when we flew down, because of my cognitive fatigue and sensory overload, I had eye mask, had noise-canceling headphones, had like, lorazepam in my pocket. Like, you know, I had all the, you know, all this stuff to, you know, save my senses. When we flew back, I didn’t need any of it, and that was 24 hours later. So I just stood in the airport like any other traveler. And that was… Reflections on Stroke Etanercept Injection Treatment and Guilt Bill Gasiamis (23:26) Yeah. Andrew (23:28) That was the biggest sign that something profound had happened. Bill Gasiamis (23:33) Yeah. Andrew (23:34) The other thing was that my hand, my right hand went from feeling like it was sort of like moving in molasses really slow to loosening up and being more independent. And I found only a month ago that I was able to start to play scales on my clarinet again. So I can move my fingers independently. I could cover the holes with my clarinet here. Bill Gasiamis (23:52) Wow, man. Andrew (23:57) I can the holes in my fingers. It’s something that I haven’t been able to do since the stroke. To be able to play the thing, to be able to just play a scale, just says to me, at some point in the future, you’re gonna be able to play the thing again. Bill Gasiamis (24:11) So things are still improving. Your function is changing still. you, being able to play the clarinet, would you can attribute that to a tenor sept that long ago or just things getting better? Andrew (24:26) I think because it was if I come home and was able to play the clarinet then I would have a definite causality you know so I would rather say the definite yeah it was a tenor step that did it because before I went away I couldn’t even you know I couldn’t pick up things one more right hand so but because it’s been 18 months I think it’s because that that skill has come back Bill Gasiamis (24:50) Yeah, okay. What about work wise? Were you working or not working before the injection? Andrew (24:57) No, no. So I was able to go back to relief teaching. The classroom as a music teacher is ⁓ in a high school is too busy and there’s too many moving parts. So that’s not something I’ll be able to do again, at least not in the foreseeable future. And I don’t know if I want to now. Bill Gasiamis (25:11) Wow. Andrew (25:20) I have done some relief teaching. There are days where I’m in a school and I just feel that it’s a bit too much. And that could be because I had a bad night the night before or it was hot and I couldn’t sleep. And that wasn’t like that before the stroke. yeah, coming up with a new career now has been an interesting journey itself. Bill Gasiamis (25:41) Yeah. So there isn’t a need for another injection or anything like that. Nobody ever told you about another injection or what will happen in two years or anything like that. Andrew (25:51) No, If I can go there and get one, if I think it’s going to make even more improvement, because I had improvement from, you know, from the first. But yeah, there was no compelling sort of needs to go back. And I’m thinking that I probably would like maybe to have a second one, a second trip there and have. having the shot but ⁓ I don’t know I’ll see how my improvement goes. Bill Gasiamis (26:20) Yeah, okay. Andrew (26:22) It’s so hard to One of the things I did do, I had an MRI about two months ago. And it was an MRI to check the status of my tumor and to see where it was. And obviously they also had a look at the stroke site. And comparing the stroke site now to when it was taken when I had the stroke. there’s a day and night difference. Whereas I had a hole in my brain after the stroke, all I had was a little bit of glial, called glial scar tissue. So scar tissue of the brain cells, a little white line in my brain. ⁓ Bill Gasiamis (27:08) as opposed to a round circle of what appeared to be offline or dead brain cells. Yeah, which, you know, it sounds like to me, it’s like where the inflammation was, that area they usually call, they often call, sometimes called the penumbra, which is the area that’s able to be rehabilitated, which is around the site of the stroke, which is offline but not dead, which HBOT targets, the right kind of, Andrew (27:15) Yes. Yeah. Bill Gasiamis (27:38) hyperbaric oxygen therapy can target those as well and try and reduce them. So day and night, like a proper difference between one and the other. Andrew (27:47) Yeah, I was expecting to see when I saw the scan, know, where my brain tumor was and also the big hole and the hole was gone and there was just this like, this is a little, a little line there with scar tissue. Bill Gasiamis (28:01) Yeah, fabulous. How long has the brain tumor been there for? Andrew (28:05) 20 years. Bill Gasiamis (28:07) Okay, and what does it do just sort of sit around and ⁓ Andrew (28:10) Yeah, so ⁓ what happened is it just gradually grows bigger and bigger and bigger and then eventually if you don’t get it treated, it crushes your brain stem and that kills you. So I had mine irradiated 20 years ago and it’s got growing and it’s just started dying off and now it’s just like a… dead mess in there and they check every four years to make sure it hasn’t done anything naughty and It hasn’t so they actually said of this last scan look it hasn’t changed in the last 12 years, so no more scans Bill Gasiamis (28:41) I hear you, okay. So it’s benign now. Andrew (28:46) Yeah. Bill Gasiamis (28:47) Yeah, okay. So you’ve through the rigor, mate. You’ve had an interesting neurological experience, Andrew (28:54) Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, feels like my brain’s out to get me. Bill Gasiamis (29:00) Yeah. Well, seems like the interventions have been really helpful in prolonging your life and then your life experience, like how you go about life. So as far as you’re concerned, like it’s all it’s all. You know, it’s been a good outcome, both both interventions. Andrew (29:19) Yes. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. I mean, my biggest challenge this year has actually not been the stroke or the brain tumor, but it’s been the medications for stroke to prevent another one. So my stroke was caused by an overactive adrenal or adrenal glands producing too much aldosterone. Bill Gasiamis (29:31) What man which man say you want? Andrew (29:43) And that was only diagnosed and found last year. So What was happening is that my body was? Was was keeping salt it was it was send my blood pressure sky-high and then crash it down And for 10 years we thought that was anxiety. But what it was was that because my blood pressure wasn’t consistently high, I could go to the doctors and I could be normal. And then my other doctors didn’t have high blood pressure. It was not consistent. So I was just treated for anxiety and given a sort of a low dose blood pressure medication. But actually what it was is both glands like over producing this hormone and that’s what gave me the stroke. So they’ve they’ve given me a hormone suppressant which helps, but they’ve been trying to. to juggle multiple types of blood pressure medication to also bring my blood pressure down to a consistent normal. And so up until about three weeks ago, my blood pressure was still all over the place. And they had me on a really nasty cocktail at one point this year where I literally could not function. I couldn’t even get up. It suppressed my whole system so much. that every time I stood my blood pressure would drop 50 points and I would almost pass out. So I was like a zombie. ⁓ It was just the combination of too many blood pressure medications at once. And finally, I’ve seen a different specialist and he changed my medication and I’ve just got one little pill at the minimum dose and it’s actually stabilized my blood pressure to normal. Bill Gasiamis (30:51) All right. Righto, that’s good. Andrew (31:18) So like when I took it today, was 122 over 72. So it hasn’t been like that for I don’t even know how long. Bill Gasiamis (31:25) Yeah. Fantastic, what kind of stroke did it cause? Andrew (31:31) are ischemic, so a clot. Bill Gasiamis (31:34) ⁓ huh, okay. Wow, man. What an interesting journey you’ve been on. And this insight into Etanercept and how and why it might work for some people and not for others is probably helpful for it again, for a whole bunch of people to hear and kind of get a better understanding about scientifically speaking, Etanercept is not a viable solution for people who have had stroke and there will be some people who will become all, what’s the word? Like they will, they’ll be all, this is snake oil stuff. And then there will be people who brag about it as being the best thing they’ve ever done, which seems to be kind of the camp that you’re in. I think, no, no, no, no. I mean, it’s one of the best things you’ve ever done with regards to your stroke recovery, right? Andrew (32:18) I don’t feel like complaining about it though. Yeah, yeah, and I found that when I got the results for the for the pesto test I really had to do a lot of soul searching because because I couldn’t explain to myself Why it seemed to have worked for me and yet the study was saying hey, doesn’t really have any effect and and I had to to Bill Gasiamis (32:36) Wow. Did you feel remorse or guilt about that? Wow, Wow. Andrew (32:47) Yes, very much. I felt like a fraud. Because why? I couldn’t explain how I had such a huge night and day difference. And that couldn’t be placebo and it’d be still working 18 months later. Bill Gasiamis (33:08) Yeah, I think our hunch about the blood brain barrier is where the research needs to go. And I don’t know how you investigate the blood brain barrier. But if you can go there and investigate the blood brain barrier and if you can understand who has a compromised blood brain barrier and therefore. Andrew (33:15) Yeah. Bill Gasiamis (33:31) due to a compromised blood-barrier barrier, a candidate for a Etanercept I think that’s kind of where it needs to go. Because the biggest issue that people have with clinics who offer a Etanercept perispinally, like Dr. Tobinick’s, the biggest issue that people have that makes it hard for them to make a decision is will I be the right candidate? Will I be the one who will it work for? Or will I be the one that it doesn’t, you know? But I… I find it very fascinating that you would respond that way, that you would feel guilty and remorseful that it worked for you and the pesto child says it shouldn’t have. Andrew (34:10) I feel guilty that it worked for me and didn’t work for someone else. You know, as well. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it’s like survivor’s guilt in a way. Yeah, that’s that and that’s how I felt. so the way I’ve thought of it is, well, OK, if it was placebo, it worked for me. Bill Gasiamis (34:14) Yeah. just wishing for the best for everybody. Yeah, I can relate to that. Yeah. Andrew (34:37) like it just it worked for me whatever it was it worked for me so and that’s that’s that’s all I can all I can say but I think this blood brain theory is is a good one and I would like to I would like to research and understand what what makes the brain leaky like what what events can make your brain Bill Gasiamis (34:41) Yeah. Yeah. Andrew (35:00) ⁓ better suited to receiving Etanercept Like for me, probably the main cause could have been the fact that I had radiation on my brain years ago. Bill Gasiamis (35:05) Yeah. Andrew (35:13) Or it could be that I have a high blood pressure for 10 years. Or it could be I have my appendix out when I’m 17. But I would like to do some research into what it is, what factors make people more likely to have a leaky brain. Bill Gasiamis (35:17) Who knows? Yeah, I think that’s a great thing. I want to research that too, because I have known about it. I’ve understood it. I appreciated that I might be somebody who has had a leaky brain because of the strokes that I experienced, the brain surgery and all the stuff that I went through. And I know that if you restore the blood brain barrier, you can really decrease the fatigue that happens to people after a stroke. And you can make it impenetrable again to toxins. and heavy metals and all that kind of stuff, which is often the cause of real chronic neurological fatigue, even in people who haven’t had a stroke, who are, quote unquote, normal. So that’s fascinating. I really appreciate your continued willingness to have conversations about this topic and sharing your story more than once with me. And then also being being an ear to the people who are curious about whether or not they should go down this path and then kind of just like, you know, being honest about your story, sharing what happened to you, what you experienced and even your own reservations because I don’t think you have anything to, and you probably know this cognitively anyway, right? You don’t have anything to be guilty about or feel bad about or. anything like that. But I understand why emotionally you might go down that path because you’re a guy that cares deeply for other people. You appreciate how hard it is for people to go through stroke and you wish them the same solution or other solutions that you had so that we don’t have to suffer. I know exactly what’s behind it. Andrew (37:08) Yeah, yeah, that’s exactly right. Yeah. Bill Gasiamis (37:12) Yeah. Well, hopefully this continues the conversations to give people more things to think about. Leave us a comment in the YouTube comments section. Reach out via email. Yeah, drop us a comment. Reach out to us and we’d be happy to continue the conversation, support you, guide you. Just being here and I don’t know, help you make a more informed decision. That’s all we can do. We’re not going to suggest. Andrew (37:35) Yeah, definitely. Bill Gasiamis (37:41) that you should or should not go and experience Perispinal Etanercept one way or another. Bill Gasiamis (37:46) Well, that was Andrew Stopps again. What a fascinating conversation. If today’s episode connected with you, I’d love to hear your thoughts in the YouTube comments, especially if you’ve looked into Etanercept Try it. I decided not to. Your experience can help someone else make a more informed decision. And if you found this helpful, please subscribe on YouTube and follow the podcast on Spotify or Apple podcasts. Reviews and comments genuinely help more. stroke survivors find these conversations. If you want to go deeper, you can grab my book at recoveryafterstroke.com slash book. And if you’d like to support the podcast and help keep it going, you can join us on Patreon at patreon.com slash recovery after stroke. Thanks again for being here. You’re not alone in this recovery journey and I’ll see you in the next episode. The post Stroke etanercept injection 18 months on: Andrew's update after the PESTO trial appeared first on Recovery After Stroke.

We flagged this last episode—now let's get practical about evidence. Modern presenters face two problems at the same time: we're in an Age of Distraction (people will escape to the internet, even while "listening"), and an Era of Cynicism(audiences are more sensitive than ever to whether information is valid).  Why is evidence more important now than ever? Because opinion won't hold attention—and it won't survive cynicism. If your talk is mostly "editorial" (your views), people either disengage or multitask. If you don't provide concrete insights backed by proof, hands reach for phones fast.  Do now: Audit your draft. Highlight anything that is "opinion" and ask: "Where's the proof?"  What makes evidence credible in the "Era of Cynicism"? Credibility comes from quality and transparency: use highly credible sources, use multiple sources, and explain how findings were assembled. Your own research can help, but it may be greeted with doubt if you can't explain your method. The point is to make listeners feel: "This is checkable."  Do now: If you cite your own research, add one line on how it was done (sample, method, timeframe).  What are the best types of evidence to use in presentations? Use the DEFEATS framework to choose evidence that convinces busy, skeptical audiences. DEFEATS is a checklist of evidence types you can use to prove what you're saying is true: Demonstration, Example, Facts, Exhibits, Analogies, Testimonials, Statistics.  Do now: For each key point in your talk, pick at least one DEFEATS proof type (two if the audience is skeptical).  What does each DEFEATS evidence type mean (and how do you use it)? Each type does a different job—so match the type to the point you're making.  D — Demonstration: show something physically or on-screen (software/audio/video) that reinforces your point. It must be congruent with the message.  E — Example: choose examples that are relevant to the audience—same industry, similar organisation size—so people can relate.  F — Facts: facts must be provable and independently verifiable. A claim is not a fact. If you use graphs, display the data source clearly (people like knowing they could verify it).  E — Exhibits: show a physical object (or image). Make it easy to see: hold it around shoulder height, keep it still.  A — Analogies: simplify complexity by comparing two unrelated things (e.g., flight takeoff/landing vs speech opening/closing).  T — Testimonials: social proof adds credibility—especially when it comes from recognised experts. It's not the primary proof, but it strengthens belief.  S — Statistics: third-party stats are strongest; your own stats are fine, but less convincing without independent numbers too.  Do now: Add sources to your slides (small but visible). Make "checkable" part of your credibility.  What's the biggest evidence mistake presenters make? Using examples the audience can't relate to—or presenting "facts" without checkable sourcing. A senior executive using examples from a major organisation can miss the room if the audience is SMEs. And if you show graphs without citing where the data came from, you quietly trigger doubt.  Do now: Ask, "Is my example their world?" If not, swap it for one that matches audience size/industry.  Conclusion In today's distracted and cynical environment, evidence is what keeps people with you to the end. Design your key points, then deliberately "match" each one with credible proof—preferably multiple sources—using DEFEATS as your checklist. Do that, and you'll hold attention and trust at the same time.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012).  As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業) and Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business

When you've got a dozen priorities, meetings, emails, and "urgent" requests hitting you at once, the real problem usually isn't effort—it's focus. This is a simple, fast method to get your thinking organised, coordinate your work, and choose actions that actually improve results: build a focus map, then run each sub-topic through a six-step action template.  How do I get focused when I'm overwhelmed with too much work? You get better results by shrinking the chaos into one clear "area of focus," then organising everything else around it. In practice, overwhelm comes from competing directions—sales targets, KPIs, internal politics, client deadlines, hiring, and admin—all demanding attention at the same time. In Japan, this can be amplified by stakeholder-heavy coordination; in the US and Europe, it can be amplified by speed and constant context switching. Either way, your effort becomes scattered and poorly coordinated.  The fix is to pause briefly and decide: "What is the one thing (or two things) I need to improve most right now?" That becomes your anchor. Once you can name the focus, the brain stops thrashing and starts sorting. Do now: Write down the one or two words that define your key focus for this week.  What is a "focus map" and how do you make one quickly? A focus map is a one-page visual map: one central focus, surrounded by the sub-topics you need to improve. Put a small circle in the middle of the page and write your main focus inside (for example: "Better Time Management"). Then add related words that come to mind as surrounding circles—like planets around the sun—creating sub-categories you can work on.  This works because you already have the answers in your head; you just haven't "released" them into a structure. The visual element matters: arranging the circles stimulates thinking differently than typing a list in a notes app. It's fast, low-tech, and effective—especially for leaders toggling between deep work and constant interruption in a post-pandemic, hybrid world. Do now: Draw one central circle and add 6–10 surrounding circles of related sub-topics.  What should I put on my focus map (examples leaders actually use)? Use practical "better" themes—time, follow-up, planning, communication—then generate sub-categories that are behaviour-based. Common centre-circle themes include: Better Time Management, Better Follow-up, Better Planning, Better Communicator.  Example: if your centre circle is "Better Time Management," your surrounding circles might include: prioritisation, block time, procrastination, Quadrant Two focus (Eisenhower Matrix), to-do list, weekly goals, daily goals. This is where the method beats generic productivity advice. Instead of "be more organised," you can see the real levers: calendar blocking, priority choice, and the habit of starting the day with a ranked list. In an SME, this might be about protecting selling time; in a multinational, it may be about reducing meeting bloat and stakeholder drag. Do now: Choose one sub-category you can improve in 7 days (e.g., prioritisation).  What are the six steps to turn a focus map into action? The six steps force clarity: attitude → importance → new behaviour → desired result → vision alignment. After your focus map is complete, pick one sub-category (say, prioritisation) and run it through this template:  What has been my attitude in this area? Why is this important to me and my organisation? Specifically, what am I going to do about this differently? What results do I desire? How is this going to impact my Vision? This is essentially strategy on a page. It connects behaviour change to outcomes and makes it harder to stay vague. It also works across cultures: whether you're operating in Japan's consensus environments or in faster-moving US/Europe contexts, you still need a clear "why" and a specific "what next." Do now: Write answers for steps 1–3 today; do steps 4–5 tomorrow.  Can you show a completed example (so I can copy the format)? Yes—use the example below as a plug-and-play model for any topic you choose. For "Time Management" with the sub-category "Prioritisation," a completed version looks like this (edited only for formatting):  Area of focus: Time Management → Prioritisation Attitude: "I know I should be better organised…but I never get around to taking any action…because I don't choose activities based on priorities." Why important: "If I am better organised I can get more work done…focus on the prioritised areas of highest value…contribute more value to the organisation." What I'll do differently: buy an organiser; use to-do lists + a calendar; block time for highest value items; start each day by nominating tasks, then prioritising and working in that order. Desired result: spend best time on highest value tasks with greatest impact. Impact on vision: efficiency and effectiveness rise dramatically. Do now: Copy this structure and fill it in for your sub-category (block time, procrastination, weekly goals, etc.).  How do I use this system every week to get better results (not just once)? Repeat the map-and-template cycle weekly, focusing on one sub-category at a time until the habit "sticks." The magic is consistency: you can repeat the same process for block time, procrastination, Quadrant Two focus, to-do lists, weekly goals, daily goals—each becomes its own mini-improvement project.  Think of it like leadership development: you don't "fix productivity" once; you build a personal operating system. Some weeks will be chaotic (product launches, quarterly reporting, client crises), so you pick a small, controllable lever. Other weeks you can go deeper. This method is described as a go-to tool because it's fast, it goes deep, and it produces practical ideas you can apply immediately.  Do now: Schedule 15 minutes every Monday to create one focus map and choose one sub-category to improve.  Quick checklist (copy/paste) Choose 1 key focus (1–2 words).  Build a focus map (6–10 sub-circles).  Pick 1 sub-category for this week.  Run the six steps and define 1–2 new behaviours.  Review weekly; repeat with the next sub-category.  Conclusion Better results come from better-directed effort. The focus map gives you clarity fast, and the six steps turn that clarity into behaviour change tied to results and vision. If you try it once, you'll get insight. If you run it weekly, you'll build momentum.  FAQs A focus map is basically a mind map for execution. It moves you from "busy" to "clear" in minutes by visualising priorities.  Start with one sub-category, not the whole map. Results come from focusing on one lever (like prioritisation or block time) per week.  The six steps work because they force specifics. You can't hide behind vague intentions when you must name attitude, actions, results, and vision.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

Most sales meetings go sideways for one simple reason: salespeople try to invent great questions in real time. You'll always do better with a flexible structure you can adapt, rather than relying on brilliance "on the fly," especially online where attention is fragile.  Why should you design qualifying questions before meeting the client? Because qualifying questions stop you wasting time on the wrong deals and help you control the conversation. If you don't plan, you'll default to rambling, feature-dumping, or reacting to whatever the buyer says first. A light structure keeps you adaptable without sounding scripted: you set the parameters, then fill in the details as the conversation unfolds.  Answer card / Do now: Build a reusable "question bank" and adjust it per client instead of improvising everything live.  What is the "permission question" and why does it matter? The permission question earns consent to ask sensitive questions from someone who doesn't trust you yet. You're effectively asking a stranger to reveal weaknesses in their business—something people naturally resist—so you must frame it as: you've helped similar organisations, you may be able to help here too, but you need to ask a few questions to find out.  This is especially important in relationship-driven markets like Japan, and still crucial in Australia and the US where buyers are wary of pushy sellers. Permission lowers defensiveness and increases honesty. Answer card / Do now: Memorise one permission line you can say naturally on Zoom, phone, and in-person.  What "need questions" actually uncover the real problem? Start broad, then narrow—because the first issue they mention is often not the biggest one. A clean opener is: "What are some key issues for your business at the moment?" If they struggle to answer, prompt with a realistic scenario from similar clients (for example, sales performance in a virtual environment) and ask whether that's true for them or if they're satisfied. Then ask what other issues are priorities, so you don't anchor on the first answer and miss the real driver.  Answer card / Do now: Prepare 3 "prompt examples" (common issues) to help buyers respond when your question is too broad.  Which qualifying questions reveal the scale (quantity) and constraints (budget)? Use quantity questions to size the problem, and budget questions to test seriousness without triggering defensiveness. A quantity question gives you the scale, like: "How many salespeople do you have who could benefit…?" That helps you calibrate your recommendation. Budget can be asked directly ("How much have you allocated?"), but many buyers won't share it—especially early—so you can work indirectly from team size and solution scope to estimate what's realistic.  Answer card / Do now: Write one direct budget question and one indirect "scope-based" alternative you can use when they clam up.  How do you ask the authority question without making it awkward? Ask who else has the strongest input, framed as necessary to help them properly. Buying decisions usually involve multiple stakeholders now, so you need to identify who matters early. Use wording like: "In order for me to help you, may I ask, apart from you, who would have the most interest and input into the buying decision?" It's respectful, it doesn't challenge their status, and it surfaces the buying committee.  Answer card / Do now: Add the authority question to every first meeting agenda—no exceptions.  What is an agenda statement, and how does it help control the meeting? An agenda statement is a simple way to guide the meeting flow while still staying flexible. You remind them why the meeting matters, outline what you'd like to cover, and then ask if they want to add anything—so the agenda becomes shared, not imposed. A practical sequence is: check their familiarity with your company (to correct misconceptions), learn what they're doing now and what systems they use, clarify future goals, uncover challenges blocking those goals, and—if there's a match—discuss how you could work together. Then invite their additions.  The conversation won't go in perfect order, and that's fine—your job is to ensure the key questions get answered while you still have the chance.  Answer card / Do now: Use a 6-point agenda statement, get agreement, then work through your question bank calmly—even if the order changes.  Simple meeting structure you can copy Permission question (earn consent)  Need questions (broad → narrow)  Quantity (size the issue)  Budget (direct or indirect)  Authority (map stakeholders)  Agenda statement (control flow + invite additions)  Conclusion: what salespeople should do now Qualifying isn't "being clever"—it's being prepared. Build a structure, customise it to the client, and then stay adaptable in the moment. The sellers who win in 2025 are the ones who can guide the conversation without sounding scripted, earn permission before probing, and leave meetings with real decision clarity instead of vague friendliness.  FAQs What's the biggest mistake in sales discovery? Improvising questions under pressure instead of using a simple structure you can adapt.  Why add an agenda statement at the start? It sets shared expectations and reduces random detours, while still allowing flexibility.  What if the buyer won't discuss budget? Use indirect sizing questions (headcount, scope, rollout timing) to estimate what's realistic.  Author Bio Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). 

PESTO Trial Results: What Stroke Survivors Need to Know About Perispinal Etanercept If you've spent any time in stroke recovery communities, you've probably seen the same pattern: a treatment gets talked about with real intensity, people share personal stories that pull you in, and suddenly you're left trying to sort hope from hype from “maybe.” When the decision also involves significant cost, that uncertainty can feel even heavier. That's exactly why I recorded this episode: to help stroke survivors and their families understand the PESTO trial results in plain language without drama, without attacks, and without jumping to conclusions. In this interview, Professor Vincent Thijs explains what the PESTO trial set out to test, why it was designed the way it was, and what the results can (and can't) tell us about perispinal etanercept in stroke recovery. The real problem: not “hope vs skepticism”… it's confusion If you're a stroke survivor, you're already doing something heroic: you're living inside a recovery journey that demands patience, grit, and constant adjustment. The challenge isn't that you “don't want to believe” in something. The challenge is that it's genuinely hard to make an informed decision when: People report different outcomes Online conversations become polarised fast Scientific studies use unfamiliar language The same treatment can be described in completely different ways depending on who you're listening to My goal here isn't to tell you what to do. It's to help you think clearly, ask better questions, and understand what the best available evidence from this trial actually tested. What the PESTO trial was trying to investigate (in simple terms) Professor Thijs explains that the PESTO trial was designed in response to strong community interest. Stroke survivors wanted to know whether the way perispinal etanercept is currently administered in some settings could be demonstrated to work under the standards used for medicines to become widely accepted as part of routine care. So the researchers designed a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. In this type of study: A computer assigns participants to either the treatment or a placebo Participants and clinicians are kept “blinded” (they don't know who got what) Outcomes are measured in a consistent way at set time points In the PESTO trial, the focus was on stroke survivors with moderate to severe disability and reduced quality of life. The primary question was straightforward: Does quality of life improve after one or two injections compared with placebo, over the measured timeframe? Why this study looked at quality of life (not one symptom) One key detail Professor Thijs highlights is the design choice: the trial didn't only target one issue, like pain or walking. It aimed to be more “pragmatic,” reflecting how treatment is used in real-world settings where people seek help for different post-stroke challenges (mobility, fatigue, speech, cognition, pain, and more). That means the main outcome wasn't “Did walking speed improve?” or “Did pain reduce?” It was broader: Quality of life at 28 days And again after the second injection timeframe (56 days total) This matters because your results can look different depending on what you measure. A trial targeting one symptom might see a signal that a broad quality-of-life measure doesn't detect (and vice versa). What the PESTO trial results found In Professor Thijs' words, the trial did not show a difference in quality of life between the treatment and placebo groups at the measured time points: No clear quality-of-life improvement at 28 days No clear improvement after two injections at 56 days That's the central outcome. But there's another finding that grabbed my attention—and it's one many listeners will find surprising. Quote block (mid-article): “We saw that 58% of the people also had that improvement [with placebo] and 53% had it with etanercept… our initial guess was very wrong.” — Professor Vincent Thijs The “placebo signal” and why it matters A strong placebo response doesn't mean “it was all in their heads.” It means that in a blinded clinical trial, people can improve for multiple reasons that aren't specific to the drug itself, such as: Expectation and hope Natural fluctuations in symptoms The impact of being monitored and supported Regression to the mean (symptoms often move toward average over time) The structure and attention that come with trial participation Professor Thijs describes how, during the blinded phase, participants reported improvements in a variety of areas (like sensation, vision, speech). The crucial point is: the team didn't know who had a placebo or an active treatment at the time, which is exactly why blinding exists. For you, the listener, this is a reminder of something empowering: Personal stories can be real and meaningful—and still not answer the question of efficacy on their own. “Am I a candidate?” The trial's honest answer: we don't know how to predict it (yet) One of the most important parts of this conversation is the desire to identify who might benefit most. Professor Thijs explains that the team looked at subgroups (for example: age, sex, severity, diabetes, time since stroke). In this trial, they didn't find a clear subgroup where the treatment stood out as reliably beneficial compared with placebo. He also adds an important caveat: subgroup analysis is difficult, especially in trials that aren't extremely large. So the absence of a clear “responder profile” here doesn't automatically prove none exists—it means this trial didn't reveal one. What this episode is (and isn't) saying Let's keep this grounded and fair. This interview is not about attacking any person, provider, or clinic. It's not about shaming stroke survivors who tried something. It's not even about telling you that you should or shouldn't pursue a treatment. It is about this: Understanding what the PESTO trial tested Understanding what the results showed within their timeframe Knowing the limits of what the trial can conclude Using evidence to reduce confusion before making big decisions A simple “clarity plan” before you decide anything big If you're considering any high-stakes treatment decision, here's a neutral, practical way to move forward: 1) Ask: “What outcome matters most for me?” Is it pain? walking? fatigue? speech? cognition? daily function? quality of life? A treatment might be studied for one outcome and discussed online for another. 2) Ask: “What does the best evidence say—specifically?” Not “Does it work?” in general, but: In what population? Using what method? At what dose? Over what timeframe? Compared with what? 3) Ask: “What are my options and trade-offs?” Talk with a qualified healthcare professional who understands your medical history, risk factors, and rehab plan. Ask about: Potential risks and side effects Opportunity cost (what else could you do with the same time, money, and energy?) Evidence-based rehab and supports that match your goals Listen to the full interview If you want the clearest explanation of the PESTO trial results—from the lead researcher himself—listen to the full episode with Professor Vincent Thijs. And if you'd like to support the podcast (and help keep these conversations going for stroke survivors who need hope and clarity): Bill's book: recoveryafterstroke.com/book Patreon: patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke Medical disclaimer This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Please consult your doctor before making any changes to your health or recovery plan. PESTO Trial Results (Etanercept After Stroke) | Interview with Professor Vincent Thijs Confused about perispinal etanercept after stroke? Prof Vincent Thijs explains the PESTO trial results clearly, calmly, and evidence-first. More About Perispinal Etanercept: Etanercept Stroke Recovery: Wesley Ray's Relentless Comeback Dwayne Semple's Remarkable Stroke Journey and Perispinal Etanercept Etanercept for Stroke Recovery – Andrew Stopps Support The Recovery After Stroke Podcast on Patreon Highlights: 00:00 Introduction and Overview of the PESTO Trial 04:19 Design and Objectives of the PESTO Trial 11:23 Recruitment and Methodology of the Trial 18:31  PESTO Trial Results and Findings 24:28 Implications and Future Directions for Research 32:15 Conclusions and Final Thoughts Transcript: Introduction: PESTO Trial Results Bill Gasiamis (00:00) Hello and welcome back to Recovery After Stroke. Before we get started, a quick thank you to my Patreon supporters. Your support helps cover the hosting costs after more than 10 years of me doing this show solo. And it helps me keep creating episodes for stroke survivors who need hope and practical guidance. And thank you as well to everyone who comments on YouTube, leaves reviews on Spotify and Apple podcasts. buys the book and even to those of you who don’t skip the ads. Every bit of that supports keep this podcast going. Now today’s episode is about the PESTO trial results and I’m interviewing Professor Vincent Theis. If you’ve ever felt confused by the conversation online about perisponal antenna sept, some people sharing positive experiences while others are feeling disappointed and plenty of strong opinions in between, this episode is designed to bring clarity. We talk about what the PESTO trial set out to test, how the study was designed, what it found within the measured timeframes and what the results can and can’t tell us. Just a quick note, this conversation is educational and not medical advice. Always speak with a qualified health professional about your situation. All right, let’s get into it. Professor Vincent Dase, welcome to the podcast. Vincent Thijs (01:24) Thank you for having me, Bill. Bill Gasiamis (01:26) I’m really looking forward to this conversation. Atenosept is one of the most hotly discussed topics in stroke recovery. And there’s a lot of misconceptions about whether or not it is or is not efficacious. And while there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence where some people have had positive outcomes from injections, there’s also a lot of people’s feedback, which is very negative about their experience with the Etanercept injections and the lack of results. So today, the reason I reached out is because I wanted to get to the bottom of the findings of the PESTO trial. And I’m hoping that you can shed some light on that. The first question basically is, can you start by explaining in simple terms what it was that the PESTO trial set out to investigate? Vincent Thijs (02:22) All right. The PESTO trial was in response to community members, stroke survivors, wanting to find out whether the current practice of administering Etanercept has done in the U.S. in private practice. In Denmark, I hear there are some sites that provide this treatment. Whether the treatment and genders can be actually proven according to the standards that we use in the pharmaceutical industry to get it to become accepted as a standard of care treatment. For that, you need to do what we call a randomized controlled clinical trial, preferably two that show evidence that treatment does what it’s set out to do. And that’s why with this background and the community pressuring the minister several years ago, Mr. Hunt at the time, to fund a trial that would help answer that question. Design and Objectives of the PESTO Trial There was a call was set out to do this trial and several groups in Australia applied and then an independent committee decided to award the trial to the PESTO study group. And then we tried to design this trial to give an answer. So it’s mostly about people that have moderate to severe disability after their stroke that have reduced quality of life. And We wanted to know, does their quality of life improve when Etanercept is administered? And we wanted to test whether one or two injections were needed. Because that’s what we heard from stroke survivors that from Australia and internationally that went over to the US. Well, this is how it’s done. You get one or two injections and there was a paper that had shown big effects with one injection. So that was the primary endpoint, but then we also looked at whether two injections could help. And when you design a trial, you have to make a decision, will we focus on people with. pain after stroke, or will we look at people who have mobility issues or speech issues or cognitive issues? And we saw that current clinical practice actually was people with various impairments after stroke were accepted and received the treatment. And what would have been the advantage of doing say only mobility or only pain? Well, you can then look at the outcome of pain or mobility, does it improve? Or is your cognition improved? But because we wanted to be pragmatic and we know that recruitment in clinical trials needs to reflect how is current practice. So we thought let’s put in all the people with moderate to severe disability, whatever their impairment after stroke and reduce quality of life. And then we looked at quality of life as an outcome rather than an individual impairment. And so what we did then was to use the randomized technique and where it’s left up to the computer to decide what treatment a person will receive, the active Etanercept or a similar looking placebo, and then look at 28 days and we had to make a decision what makes sense 28 days, what is practical. to see whether that injection then had improved quality of life. And then we did another injection again with a placebo or the active drug. And then after 28 days again, we looked again whether that had made a difference. So we have people that had received two times the placebo, one time the placebo, and one active injection. And then we have people that had received two active injections. And then we were able to compare those and see whether they had made bigger improvements if you receive two injections versus one or zero. Unfortunately, we couldn’t show a difference in quality of life at 28 days. And we also couldn’t show an improvement at 56 days after people had two injections. But that was in a nutshell how we designed and the background of the study. Bill Gasiamis (07:25) So the main difference then between the Griffith University study and your particular study was that they did go after a specific improvement in one area, I believe. it in? Okay. So although those guys went after pain, you guys went after just a general improvement in quality of life after the injection and your stroke survivors. Vincent Thijs (07:39) Mostly, think. Bill Gasiamis (07:54) would have been as far as 15 years post stroke. Is that right? Vincent Thijs (07:59) Yes, correct. We wanted to have people early after stroke between one and five years, and then also between people five to 15 years after stroke. That was also for practical reasons. Once you start trial, you see how good recruitment is, how many people want to participate in the study. And we saw that if we went to up to five years. Recruitment was relatively slow. So we added this additional group of people later on after their stroke. that because many people, I’m five years, I’m six years after stroke. Why can’t I get the treatment? And you know, so we also wanted to expand the pool. And that’s also what happens in clinical practice. Current clinical practice, I don’t think the sites and the US and they would refuse the patient six years or so. We just wanted to reflect the people that we see on the website going for this treatment. Bill Gasiamis (09:01) Yeah, yeah. And then the difference between the Griffith trial and your trial as well was the actual dosage of Etanercept the amount that was in the injection. I do believe that your trial was a 25 milligram injection. And I believe that the Griffith University trial was 25 milligram. injection to 50 milligram injection. Vincent Thijs (09:34) Yeah, we just based on what people told us they received when they went to the clinic, also the other sites and then also 35 milligram was chosen because that’s in the patent for the street. Bill Gasiamis (09:49) Okay, I see. So you’re trying to as much as possible mimic what was happening out there in in the private practice Vincent Thijs (10:00) We wanted to answer the question, is current clinical practice, is that beneficial? And that’s what sort of what the call was to do a clinical trial in current clinical practice. You can, you have to make decisions, right? And I think this was the most relevant for a stroke survivor. Bill Gasiamis (10:17) Now that’s really interesting that stroke survivors were able to twist the arm of a minister to get the funding to begin that process of the trial. How long ago did this actually start? Vincent Thijs (10:28) I think it was 2016, 2017 or so. So it takes a while to get the minister and then I think that the trial started in 2019. took a while to complete as well. Bill Gasiamis (10:43) Right understood. Okay So then you recruit people they come along and they go through the trial through the particular trial How does that work on the day do they turn up are they admitted? We’ll be back with more of professor face explanation in just a moment But I want to pause here because if you’ve ever felt stuck between hope and uncertainty, you’re not alone When you’re recovering from stroke, you’re constantly making decisions and some decisions feel high stakes, especially when confronting information that’s conflicting. Recruitment and Methodology of the Trial In the second half of this conversation, we get into the parts that really help you think clearly. What the trial results do and don’t mean, and why placebo responses matter in blinded research, and how to frame smarter questions before you commit time, money, or energy to any path. If you want to support the podcast and keep these episodes coming, You can grab my book at recoveryafterstroke.com/book or join the Patreon at patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke All right, back to the episode. Vincent Thijs (11:51) All right, so we recruited from a variety of sources. So we had kept a log of people that were interested in this. We had a Facebook post in New Zealand, for instance, where we recruited as well. We had people from the Stroke Clinical Registry that were approached. We had a website and people could register their interest if they were doing a search online to participate in clinical trial. So the variety of sources and then we have to determine eligibility that was mostly done either via an in-person visit or remotely via telehealth. We tried to get their medical information, what type of stroke they had. And then we also questioned whether they had this modified rank in scale, the disability they had, the impairments they had from their stroke. so then people came. they were considered eligible, then we scheduled a visit and they would typically come in no overnight stay needed. It was a day procedure that was done. People were then receiving another questionnaire on the day itself to measure their quality of life and other measures like their fatigue levels and how much help they required, etc. And then we proceeded with the injection, which was done. We had bought a special bed that was able to do the, the, the tilting that was required. So we set the people up, injected and then tilted the table. so, we received the drug. It was prepared independently by the pharmacist. So the pharmacist, they took the drug off the shelf or the made the placebo. and they made sure it looked exactly alike. So then somebody from the trial team picked it up from the pharmacist. The pharmacist didn’t tell, of course, what it was. And then the administration happened. So the doctor who administered and the participant did not know what they received. So after the procedure, they were left like this for four minutes. And then after four minutes, people could sit up again. And we waited about half an hour. then we asked them how they were doing, whether there were any adverse reactions, ⁓ and ⁓ then after that half an hour of observation people could go back to their habitual situation. ⁓ it’s a very simple ⁓ procedure to do. Bill Gasiamis (14:35) I believe there was a was there 126 participants Vincent Thijs (14:40) Yes, 126 people participated. had anticipated a little bit more people to participate. So we had hoped 168, but recruitment fell flat after a while and we were not able to find more people to recruit. So we made a decision and then, you know, these clinical trials, they have some funding ⁓ and they require the treatment team to be paid, et cetera, and that ran out. So we had to stop at a certain time. Bill Gasiamis (15:13) Was the study stopped early because of a decrease in the amount of funding or was there an issue with the funding at some point? Vincent Thijs (15:23) Funding ran out. You hire people for a certain amount of years and then you have fewer patients than you anticipate. So you have to stop. Bill Gasiamis (15:32) huh, okay. So would that affect the outcome of the trial? Would you say the lack of funding or the lack of the ability to take the trial further? Vincent Thijs (15:42) Yeah, well, what we had when you do the trial, when you plan the trial, you say, well, this is what we’re going to expect in terms of efficacy. You have to make a guess and say, well, that many people will have an improvement in quality of life if we give them the placebo and that many people will have an improvement in quality of life with the trial drug. And we had thought that about 11 % would improve with the placebo based on an earlier study. And then we had to make a guess because nobody had done this type of study on what Etanosap would provide. But reading the report that was published several years ago now, where 90 % of the people reported improvement in their impairments, we thought, well, Let’s not go for 90%, but a 30 % improvement. And so that was based on that we needed 168 people to participate in the trial. So that was what we call the pre-planned sample size estimation, which is a guess. When we stopped at 126 participants, actually we saw that the results were very different. There was not that 11 % actually in the placebo arm. saw that 58 % of the people also had that improvement and 53 % had it with ethanosab. So our initial guess was very wrong based on some statistical advanced statistical techniques we have. We have quite a lot of power to estimate whether there was a difference. So I think the trial can provide us an answer. It’s large enough to give us an answer about this particular question. Is current clinical practice in these people with this range after their stroke, does it improve? quality of life after a month or after two months. I’m not speaking about early improvement, I’m not speaking about six months down the line. We only can decide what we see in this study. Bill Gasiamis (18:05) So you have some limitations because you can’t have the funding to test one month, two months, six months, 12 months. You have the funding to basically meet the design of your study and then you can report on that. Now what’s really interesting is that the placebo had such a large result. PESTO Trial Results and Findings Vincent Thijs (18:34) What kind of things were people reporting that improved for the people who had the placebo injection?Look, this is, course, when we were in the blinded phase, when neither myself or my colleagues who did these scales, we were totally blinded. And that’s, remember vividly people saying, it didn’t do anything for me. But then there were also people said that they could see again. And so people that had improvement in sensation. Some people had improvement in their speech. there were, we, we observed these things, but we didn’t know whether they were active or placebo. And then surprisingly we had some people in whom we thought, they must have had active drug that turned out to have the placebo, but that’s years after, right? Because it takes a little bit of time to accumulate a sufficient number of patients. And we were only reporting and breaking the blind when the trial was finished. because otherwise you may be biased in all your analysis, et cetera. You don’t want to do that. So you wait until the end of the study to break the blind. And that’s very frustrating for the participants because there were many people that said, I must have had the placebo because it didn’t do anything for me. And there were other people that were, and some people like that, they said, I still want to go to the US. Bill Gasiamis (19:37) I see. Vincent Thijs (19:59) And please, can you tell me if I received a placebo? And I understand it was terribly frustrating for these participants. But we were very strict. No, we don’t want to break the blind. This is against the rules that you have to adhere to in a clinical trial. And so we didn’t do that. Of course, once the trial was finished, we were able to report the results back to the the participants. And then there were some people that were very surprised that they had received the active drug. I remember one person vividly who said, you have to tell me now because I’m going. And then I said, hold off, hold off. And then we told them you had twice the active drug. And so they decided not to go anymore. So you see how From a clinical trial perspective, it’s very important to remain very objective and not being able to see what people have received. From a humane level, of course, I understand it was very important to these people. Bill Gasiamis (21:02) Yeah, that’d be difficult. ⁓ And then I imagine that had the placebo not worked and then the tenisept did work, then there would have been people who would have said, well, I’ve received the placebo. It didn’t work for me. Other people received the tenisept. It did work for them. Why can’t I get the tenisept injection now? Vincent Thijs (21:26) Yeah, and we also had two people, people that had twice the placebo who noticed an improvement and have told me the improvement is still there. Bill Gasiamis (21:35) Wow. Vincent Thijs (21:36) So it. Bill Gasiamis (21:38) That’s amazing. Now was the. Vincent Thijs (21:40) And often that, and I must tell you, often those were relatively little things that seemed to improve both with the placebo and in the active group. And you see that there are changes in quality of life that people have reported, but it happens as well with the placebo. Bill Gasiamis (21:58) Wow. Was the intention of the study that was funded at the very beginning in 2016 by Minister Hunt, was it to determine whether or not this was going to be an effective treatment for people in stroke and therefore to roll it out somehow in the Australian medical system for stroke survivors? What was the thinking for Minister Hunt? Do you know? Vincent Thijs (22:24) Of course, I was not involved in that lobbying to the minister or anything, but it was to bring it on a pathway towards regulatory approval. We know that Etanercept is a relatively cheap drug that you can get ⁓ and is approved already for some indications, especially in people with rheumatoid arthritis, the condition of the joints, but it’s not approved for stroke. And to be officially approved and then potentially re- reimbursed on the PBS. You need to have some trials that have been done such as PESTO. We do different trial phases. One would be a phase two trial and a phase three trial. So phase one is typically in people just to assess the safety and some dosages usually in healthy people. And then a phase two is safety amongst stroke survivors. and preliminary efficacy. And that’s where PESTO was what we call a phase two B trial. And then a phase three trial would then be a trial in many more participants based usually on the results of a phase two B trial. And then usually when you have a phase three trial and it’s convincing and the authorities may approve such a trial. Bill Gasiamis (23:46) So in this case, the phase two B trial, this PESTO trial didn’t find that it’s efficacious. And as a result, there’s not going to be a further trial. Would that be accurate? Vincent Thijs (23:56) Well, based on the findings we have in this particular type of ⁓ way of administering in this particular group of people, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to argue for a phase three trial. It may be that you could say, well, we want to focus on pain because that was more promising. Well, you’ll need to do another trial in that condition. Implications and Future Directions for Research After stroke or maybe within a year after stroke. I mean, there are other possibilities, but at the moment, current clinical practice type trials, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to move forward with that. Bill Gasiamis (24:43) What would the numbers have had to look like for the trial to conclude that there was evidence of efficacy? Vincent Thijs (24:51) Well, I think based on what we have now, you would need to design a much, much bigger trial because there was only a 5 % difference between the placebo and the active group. And actually it was in favor of the placebo. So the placebo did a little bit better, not statistically significant. So it could just be by chance, but you would need probably thousands of people. Bill Gasiamis (25:15) I see. And I imagine there’s not a lot of excitement about funding something like that by the people who fund these trials. Vincent Thijs (25:25) Yes, typically the funders will look at how good is the evidence to pursue this. And if you were a pharmaceutical company on a pathway to development for a drug, you probably would say, well, it looks safe, but it didn’t do what it intended to do. So let’s stop the development of this drug for this indication. Bill Gasiamis (25:45) I say so. I think one of the challenges with the path of administering a TANACEP to stroke survivors is that there seems to be a missing step. And the step to me is determining whether or not somebody is a candidate for a TANACEP. perhaps if we knew more about the stroke survivor, what was actually happening in their particular brain, and we were able to determine some similarities between the people who have had a positive result and we developed a method, then that would make it a lot easier. to say, well, I’m a stroke survivor. I’d like to have a TANACYPT and then go through a process of determining whether or not I was a candidate rather than just guessing whether I’m a candidate or not and then having to pay money to find out whether in fact I was a candidate. Vincent Thijs (26:33) The trial provides a little bit of answers to that. ⁓ You want to identify a marker or a subgroup of people in whom the drug will work particularly well. And so you could look at, and we looked at different things like females versus males, if you’re younger versus older, if you have very severe disability or less severe disability, if you have diabetes, are you early after your stroke or later? That one to five versus six to 15 category. And we could not identify a group in whom the the drug worked particularly well. Now there’s a caveat when you do a clinical trial, it’s really hard to look at subgroups, especially if your trial is relatively small and the PESTO trial is relatively small. So you have to take this with a grain of salt, but it was nothing really promising. that we could identify. So probably you need other markers. If you believe in Etanercept as a drug, you would possibly need to look at what are the levels of TNF alpha, the drug, the molecule that actually is targeted. Unfortunately, there’s nothing like readily available to do that. Could it be that people with a… a stroke in a particular location that would work particularly more than in others, but we don’t have any real way at the moment to do that. Bill Gasiamis (28:08) Okay, so we’re assuming that the people who experience an improvement after they’ve had an attempt to shut that the markers of TNF alpha were lower or higher or Vincent Thijs (28:21) Well, the theory is that they have a lot higher TNF-alpha. Now, as you know, the premise is Etanercept works by reducing this molecule and we have good evidence that it reduces this molecule in the blood, but we don’t have good evidence that it reduces the levels in the brain. That’s where you want it to be. And one of the difficulties and many scientists that work on the Etanercept and ⁓ have said, look, it doesn’t cross the blood-brain barrier. It doesn’t. go against the natural defense that we have to protect the brain against substances that could potentially be harmful for the brain or that have a large size. And the Tandacep we know has a large size would not cross the blood-brain barrier. So it doesn’t reach the brain. And many people look at it with relative skepticism that it actually enters the brain. Bill Gasiamis (29:18) ⁓ And then with regards to rheumatoid arthritis, doesn’t need to cross the blood-brain barrier. It just somehow gets to this, position or the place where inflammation is occurring. TNF-alpha is active and it can easily mitigate the impact that TNF-alpha is causing. In the brain, the brain is protected by the blood-brain barrier and it cannot cross the blood-brain barrier under normal conditions and therefore it can’t get to where the TNF-alpha is. if there’s any TNF alpha, if inflammation is the issue and it cannot resolve it one way or another. So for some people perhaps it can’t resolve it. Now, I don’t understand about Etanercept a lot. I don’t understand exactly how the molecule works, et cetera. But if it was injected into a blood vessel, is that not something that can occur? And if it was, if it can occur, would that then cross the blood brain barrier? Vincent Thijs (30:15) That wouldn’t cause a blood brain barrier, no. You would have to do what we call a lumbar puncture or put a little ⁓ injection into the ventricles and then hope that it would enter the area that is stark where the TNF alpha is elevated. Those experiments have not been done. Bill Gasiamis (30:17) Either. Okay, so a lumbar puncture is probably riskier than… Vincent Thijs (30:44) Well, it’s uncomfortable. It’s uncomfortable and we do it to administer drugs if needed. Some people with brain cancer receive it. There are other trials ongoing in certain areas of stroke where it’s done. Bill Gasiamis (30:58) Then the difficulty is, and my job here is to report back to the community how they should proceed with Etanercept going forward. Now, I don’t expect you to answer that. However, your study probably gives enough information for people to be able to make an even more informed decision than they did before. Previously, what I think was happening is people, and it still happens every day. And I’ve interviewed a lot of stroke survivors who’ve had positive results with Etanercept. The challenge is getting interviews with stroke survivors who have had negative results with Etanercept. That is something I haven’t been able to do. So if somebody happens to be watching and listening to this and they have had the Etanercept shots and they didn’t get positive results, please reach out so that we can share a balanced story of what’s happening out there in the community. Would there be a reason for the community to perhaps begin again to lobby a government or a minister of a government to look at perisponinal tenosept and study it in a different way, like administration via a lumbar puncture. Conclusions and Final Thoughts Vincent Thijs (32:08) I think we need more, probably go back to the drawing table to see whether, because we’re just taking a step back. The idea is that there is inflammation after stroke and we know that there is inflammation after stroke. We don’t, we just don’t know how long it is. We don’t have a good marker. Is it present only for weeks or months after stroke or can it persist for years? The theory is that it persists for years, but if you look at the actual experiments that have been done, it’s really hard to study in humans because we don’t have good tests. But if you look in animals, it’s also hard to do long-term studies in animals, but nobody has really proven that conclusively that there is still after the stroke causes a scar, that process is still really active. Is TNF-alpha years after a stroke still present? Yes, it’s present because we use TNF as a transmitter in the brain or a chemical in the brain, but is it still worth reducing its activity? That’s probably, I think, a bigger question that science needs to answer is to understand that all inflammation piece and the time after stroke that it persists in my Bill Gasiamis (33:35) Yeah, because it could still be the fact that the person has had brain damage. The particular part of their brain that’s damaged has, for example, taken offline one of their limbs and there is no way to recover that once it’s gone. there is no, there may also be no inflammation ⁓ there. So somebody in that situation receiving Etanercept wouldn’t get a result even if it was able to cross the blood-brain barrier because the damage is done and that’s the challenge with the brain is once it’s damaged restoring the damaged part is not possible. Vincent Thijs (34:15) Yeah, look, after this experience with the PESTA trial, I think we need to work on other avenues and I’m not as hopeful with this based on the data that I have seen. Bill Gasiamis (34:28) Yeah Well, my final question then is, are you planning on exploring inflammation and recovery after stroke with any work that you’re doing in the future? Is there any more of this type of work being done? Vincent Thijs (34:46) we’ve just launched a new study, which is not a randomized trial, but it’s trying to get at this common symptom that people have after stroke, which is fatigue and cognitive changes. And one of my post-docs, Dr. Emily Ramech, she’s a physio by background. We just launched what we call the deep phenotyping study after stroke. And we are looking at young people that have had a stroke up to age 55 and we’re taking them into the scanner. We will do a PET scan that’s looking at inflammation. We’re taking their bloods and looking at markers of inflammation and see how that relates to fatigue after stroke. This is between the first month and the sixth month after stroke. That will give us a little bit of timeline of inflammation after stroke. It will give us some information about fatigue, which is very common, but I have no plans at the moment to look at ethanocephaly. Bill Gasiamis (35:53) Fair enough. I appreciate your time. Thank you so much. All right, well, that brings us back to the end of the episode with Professor Vincent Dease on the PESLO trial results. My hope is that this conversation gives you more clarity, especially if you’re felt caught between personal stories, strong opinions, and a lot of uncertainty. The goal here isn’t to tell you what to do. It’s to help you ask better questions and make decisions with your eyes open alongside a qualified healthcare professional who knows your situation. If this episode helped you, please do a couple of things. Subscribe on YouTube or follow the podcast on Spotify or Apple. Leave a review if you can. It really helps more stroke survivors find the show. And if you’ve had an experience you’re willing to share respectfully, positive, negative or mixed, add a comment. Those real-world perspectives help community feel less alone. And if you’d like to support the podcast and keep it going, my book is at recoveryafterstroke.com/book. And you can join the Patreon at patreon.com/recoveryafterstroke. Thanks for being here with me. And remember you’re not alone in this recovery journey. Importantly, we present many podcasts designed to give you an insight and understanding into the experiences of other individuals. Opinions and treatment protocols discussed during any podcast are the individual’s own experience, and we do not necessarily share the same opinion, nor do we recommend any treatment protocol discussed. All content on this website and any linked blog, podcast or video material controlled this website or content is created and produced for informational purposes only and is largely based on the personal experience of Bill Gassiamus. Content is intended to complement your medical treatment and support healing. It is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice and should not be relied on as health advice. The information is general and may not be suitable for your personal injuries, circumstances or health objectives. Do not use our content as a standalone resource to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease for therapeutic purposes or as a substitute for the advice of a health professional. Never delay seeking advice or disregard the advice of a medical professional, your doctor or your rehabilitator. program based on our content. you have any questions or concerns about your health or medical condition, please seek guidance from a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing a health emergency or think you might be, call 000 if in Australia or your local emergency number immediately for emergency assistance or go to the nearest hospital emergency department. Medical information changes constantly. While we aim to provide current quality information in our content, we do not provide any guarantees and assume no legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, currency or completeness of the content. If you choose to rely on any information within our content, you do so solely at your own risk. We are careful with links we provide. However, third-party links from our website are followed at your own risk and we are not responsible for any information you find there. The post PESTO Trial Results (Etanercept After Stroke) | Interview with Professor Vincent Thijs appeared first on Recovery After Stroke.

In the last episodes we looked at how to open the presentation. Now it's time for the part that does the heavy lifting: the main body. Most people design talks the wrong way around. This process is counterintuitive but far more effective: start with the close, then build the main body, and only then design the opening. The close defines the key message, the opening breaks through the competition for attention, and the body provides the proof.  What's the best way to design the main body of a presentation? Build the main body as chapters that prove your key message, using only your strongest supporting arguments. In a 30–40 minute talk, you can usually land three to five key points that support your main contention—so the body needs to be planned like a case, not a stream of thoughts.  This is why the design order matters: the close defines what you're trying to prove, and the body becomes the structured evidence trail that makes the close feel inevitable. Do now: Write your close in one sentence, then choose 3–5 chapter headings that directly support it.  Why should you start with the ending before building the body? Because the close defines the key message you want to impart—and the body exists to earn that close. If you don't lock the ending first, your "evidence" becomes random material you like rather than proof that persuades.  Once the close is fixed, you can design the body as a sequence of chapters that make your conclusion feel logical, not forced. Do now: Finalise the last 20 seconds first. Then your body becomes selection and sequencing—not guesswork.  How much evidence should the main body include? A lot—but only the strongest evidence. You'll always have many possible supporting points, but time is limited, so choose the best content and give it "pride of place" so the listener gets it immediately.  A useful warning from the field: when advising teams preparing business plans (like JMEC teams), you often see "diamonds" in the body that get trampled into the mud because the structure hides them. Your job is to surface the gems early, so the audience doesn't have to work hard to understand you—especially now, with decreasing concentration levels.  Do now: Rank your evidence. Put the best "gem" first in each chapter, not last.  How do you make chapters flow so the audience can follow your reasoning? Make chapters logically connect and use clear navigation—like a good novel. Your audience must be able to follow your line of reasoning without strain, and that means the transitions between chapters matter.  The navigation is the invisible structure the audience feels: "we're here, next we go there, and here's why." Without it, even good content feels messy. Do now: Write one transition sentence between every chapter that explains why the next point follows.  Why are stories essential in the main body (not just statistics)? Because people won't remember dry statistics—but they will remember a gripping story. Facts and numbers alone won't stick. Stories create mental pictures and emotional hooks that make your evidence memorable.  To make stories work, include concrete scene elements: people, places, seasons—ideally familiar to the audience—so they can "see" it in their minds.  Do now: Convert one data point into a short story with a person, a place, and a consequence.  How do you keep the main body from dragging (and stop people reaching for their phones)? Use variation in pace plus "hooks" inside each chapter to keep curiosity alive. You can't run at the same tempo the whole time—raise energy, lower tension, change rhythm—but keep movement.  Then add hooks that make people want the next sentence. A power hook example from the script: "Losing ten million dollars was the best education I ever received in business." Everyone immediately wants to know what happened, why, and what changed. That's the point: hooks don't happen by chance—you design them.  Do now: Plant 3–5 hooks across the body (one every few minutes). If you remove the hooks, you'll feel where attention dies.  What's the biggest main-body mistake professionals still make? They dump information instead of engineering engagement. Even official speeches can be a warning sign: the script recalls reading an Australian Ambassador's speech in Japanese that was packed with trade statistics and no stories—engaging content was sitting there, but couldn't be reshaped because it had to be delivered word-perfect. The lesson: don't waste good material by presenting it in a dead format.  Do now: If your chapter is "all facts," force yourself to add one story that makes the facts matter.  Conclusion The main body occupies most of your talk and does the heavy lifting to make your case—so craft it as chapters plus evidence, delivered through stories, with pace changes and hooks scattered throughout. You already earned attention with the opening—don't blow it. Keep the hooks coming, keep the logic flowing, and carry the audience all the way to the close.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012).  As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業) and Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews.   

"I think curiosity is very important. When you're curious about something, you listen." "You have to be at the forefront, not the back. You can't, hide behind and say, 'hey, you know, guys solve it', right?" "When they trust you, beautiful things happen."              "Ideas are welcome. You know, ideas are free. But it's got be data driven."  Tomo Kamiya is President Japan at PTC, a company known for parametric design and CAD-driven simulation that helps engineers model, test, and refine complex products digitally before manufacturing. He began his career in sales at Bosch, covering Kanagawa and Yamanashi with a highly autonomous, remote-work style that was ahead of its time, learning early that trust and relationship continuity—not brand alone—move outcomes in Japan. He later joined Dell during its disruptive growth era, moving from enterprise sales into marketing and broader regional responsibility, including supporting Korea marketing and later leading the server business, where his team hit number one market share in Japan. After a short consulting stint connected to Japan Telecom, he joined AMD to grow the business in Japan, then relocated to Singapore to run a broader South Asia remit and strategic customers. He subsequently led a wide Asia Pacific portfolio at D&M Holdings across multiple markets, navigating shifting consumer behaviour as subscription and streaming changed the fundamentals of product value. That experience led naturally into Adobe during its historic shift from perpetual software to subscription, where he led the Digital Media business in Japan (including Photoshop, Illustrator, and Acrobat) for almost a decade. Across this cross-industry arc, he has repeatedly adapted to business model change, regional cultural differences, and the practical realities of leading people in Japan—especially the need to listen deeply, build trust patiently, and step forward decisively when problems hit. Tomo Kamiya's leadership story is, at its core, a story about compressing complexity—first in products, then in organisations. At PTC, he sits at the intersection of engineering reality and digital abstraction: the ability to take something massive—a ship, an engine, an entire manufacturing system—and "frame" it into a screen so it can be simulated, stress-tested, and improved before any physical cost is incurred. That same instinct shows up in the way he talks about people and performance. In his earliest Bosch years, he learned that Japan's reliability culture does not eliminate the need for continuous trust-building; even a global brand can stall if the relationship energy disappears. His answer was to create value where the buyer's uncertainty lives—showing up, demonstrating, educating, and, as he put it, "sell myself," because credibility travels faster than product brochures. That bias for action stayed with him through Dell's high-velocity era, where "latest and the greatest" rewarded leaders who could anticipate market timing and organise teams around speed without losing discipline. Later, running regional remits outside Japan, he saw the contrast between Japan's "no defect" mindset and emerging markets that prioritised pace. Rather than treat one as right and the other as wrong, he learned to search for the productive middle ground: the discipline that prevents future failure, paired with the pragmatism that prevents paralysis. It is a useful lens for Japan, where uncertainty avoidance and consensus expectations can slow decisions unless the leader builds momentum through listening and clear intent. In his most practical leadership shift, an executive coach forced a hard look at his calendar: too much time on objectives, not enough time on people. The result was a deliberate reallocation toward one-on-ones, deeper listening, and clearer delegation—creating what amounts to a management operating system that improves decision speed because the leader knows what is really happening. He sees ideas as abundant but insists that investment requires decision intelligence: data points, ROI thinking, and a shared logic that gives teams confidence to commit. In Japan's consensus environment—where nemawashi and ringi-sho-style alignment often determine whether execution truly happens—his approach is to build trust through presence, make it safe for the "silent minority" to contribute, and then move decisively when critical moments arrive. Technology, including AI as a "co-pilot," can help leaders think through scenarios and prepare responses, but he remains clear that empathy and execution in the worst moments cannot be outsourced. The leadership standard, as he defines it, is simple and demanding: when things go south, step to the front. Q&A Summary What makes leadership in Japan unique? Leadership in Japan is shaped by trust-building, restraint, and the practical demands of consensus. Even when products are high quality and risk reduction is strong, outcomes often hinge on relationships and continuity. Japan's consensus culture—often expressed through nemawashi and ringi-sho-style alignment—means leaders must invest time in listening, building internal confidence, and demonstrating respect for the context that teams and customers protect. Why do global executives struggle? Global executives often arrive with a headquarters lens and try to "fix" what looks inefficient before understanding why it exists. When they change processes or people without learning the customer rationale, they trigger resistance and lose credibility. The gap is not intelligence; it is context. Japan requires deliberate time in the market and inside the organisation to decode what is really being optimised—often customer trust, stability, and long-term reliability. Is Japan truly risk-averse? Japan can appear risk-averse, but much of the behaviour is better described as uncertainty avoidance. The goal is to reduce surprises and protect relationships, not to avoid progress. Kamiya's early sales experience shows that buyers will pay for reliability when the cost of failure is high. The leadership challenge is to move forward while lowering uncertainty—through data, clear rationale, and predictable communication—rather than forcing speed without alignment. What leadership style actually works? The style that works is visible, empathetic, and action-oriented. Trust grows when leaders walk the floor, create everyday touchpoints, and listen in detail—especially because many Japanese employees will not speak up easily. At the same time, Kamiya argues that in critical moments—big decisions, business model shifts, major complaints—the leader must be "at the forefront," not hiding behind delegation. Delegation matters, but stepping forward in the hardest moments is what earns trust. How can technology help? Technology helps leaders compress complexity and make better decisions. In product terms, simulation and digital-twin style approaches reduce risk by testing before manufacturing. In leadership terms, data-driven thinking improves idea selection, investment confidence, and ROI clarity. AI can function as a co-pilot for scenario planning—offering options and framing responses—but it does not replace human judgement, empathy, or the social work of building consensus. Does language proficiency matter? Language matters because it shrinks distance. Full fluency may take years, but even small efforts signal respect and closeness, making it easier to build rapport and trust. Language is not just vocabulary; it is an everyday bridge that reduces friction with teams and increases the leader's ability to read nuance—critical in a culture where people may be reserved. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? The ultimate lesson is that trust is built through time, listening, and decisive presence. Leadership is revealed when trouble hits: the leader who listens, takes action, and stands in front earns durable commitment. Once trust is established, the organisation can move faster—because consensus forms more naturally, delegation improves, and decisions carry less uncertainty. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.

Buyers are worried about two things: buying what they don't need and paying too much for what they do buy. Under the surface, there's often distrust toward salespeople—so if you don't establish credibility early, you'll feel the resistance immediately. A strong Credibility Statement solves this. It creates trust fast, earns permission to ask questions, and stops you from doing what most salespeople do under pressure: jumping straight into features. This is sometimes called an Elevator Pitch, because it must be concise, clear, and attractive—worth continuing the conversation. What is a Credibility Statement (and when do you use it)? A Credibility Statement is what you use at first contact—in person, email, phone, or Zoom—to establish who you are, what you do, and why it's worth talking with you. It's not a pitch of features. It's a trust-builder that sets up the next stage: questioning. Why credibility must come before questions Even if you love your solution and know your company is excellent, the buyer doesn't know that. They may be sceptical, cautious, and worried about getting "conned." So you have to put that anxiety to rest early—before you start probing into their problems. The simple Credibility Statement formula (use this every time) Here's a practical structure you can reuse so you're not winging it on every call: 1) Identity + Company + one-line "what we do" Example: "Hi, my name is ____. I'm ____. We help ____." 2) A hook that hits a real, current problem Use something buyers immediately recognise and haven't fully solved on their own. 3) Relevant proof (preferably numbers) Reference a similar client and an outcome. If you quote numbers, they must be real and provable—because if you're challenged and it doesn't hold up, trust collapses. 4) The permission bridge "Maybe we can help. I'm not sure yet—but if you'll allow me to ask a few questions, I'll know whether we can help or not." This earns consent before you dig into their situation. 5) If they don't have time: ask for the appointment (with alternatives) Offer a simple choice structure (this week or next week → day options → time). Credibility Statement example you can model "Hi my name is Greg Story. I am the President of Dale Carnegie Training Tokyo. We are global soft skills training experts and masters of delivery and sustainment. Do you have a moment to talk?" Then the hook (problem): "We have heard from our clients that salespeople are really struggling with virtual selling and getting through to their buyers. Have you found the same thing?" Then proof (numbers + similar client): "Recently, we worked with a large service provider like yourself… They reported that their appointment rate went up by 25% after the training and their closing rate tripled." Then permission bridge: "Maybe, we can do the same for you. I am not sure, but if you will allow me to ask a few questions, I will know if we are in a position to help you or not?" How to ask for the meeting (without sounding pushy) If they're busy, transition cleanly into scheduling using the "alternative of choice" approach: "Shall we get together? Is this week fine or how about next week? … Wednesday or Friday? … 10.00am?" This keeps it easy, natural, and structured—without pressure. Common mistake: skipping credibility and diving into features When salespeople miss this step, they make life harder than it needs to be. If you aren't asking questions and you're jumping into features, you're fighting distrust with information—and that rarely works. Build trust first, then earn the right to diagnose. Quick next steps (use today) Write your one-sentence "what we do" statement (a buyer should understand it instantly). Create 3 hook lines tied to common buyer problems (by industry/role). Prepare 2–3 proof stories with real metrics (and make sure you can back them up). Memorise your permission bridge (so questioning feels natural, not intrusive). Practise the "this week or next week" appointment close. FAQs Is a Credibility Statement the same as an elevator pitch? Often yes—the point is to be concise, clear, and compelling at first contact. Do I need numbers in my proof? Numbers are powerful, but only if they're real and provable. If you get caught using shaky data, trust dies. Why ask permission before questions? Because buyers don't normally share problems with strangers. Permission creates safety and cooperation. Author Bio Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. Greg has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).

Some speakers have "it". Even from the back of the room you can sense their inner energy, confidence, and certainty — that compelling attractiveness we call charisma.   This isn't about being an extrovert or a show pony. It's about building presence and appeal in ways that work in boardrooms, conferences, online presentations (Zoom/Teams), and hybrid rooms where attention is fragile and cynicism is high.  What is "presenter charisma" in practical terms? Presenter charisma is the audience feeling your energy, certainty, and credibility — fast. You can be sitting "down the back" and still sense the speaker's confidence and surety, because their delivery is controlled, purposeful, and consistent.  In business—whether you're speaking to a Japanese audience in Tokyo, a sales kickoff in Singapore, or a leadership offsite in Australia—charisma shows up as: decisiveness in your opening, calm control of the room, and a message that feels structured rather than improvised. The point is not to act bigger. The point is to remove uncertainty so the audience can relax and follow you. Do now: Charisma is engineered. Decide what you want the audience to feel in the first 10 seconds — and design for that.  Why do charismatic presenters never "rehearse on the audience"? Charismatic presenters don't practice live on people — they rehearse until the talk is already proven. Too many speakers deliver the talk once and call it preparation, but that's just using the audience as your rehearsal space. Professionals do the opposite: they rehearse "many, many times" to lock in timing, high points, cadence, humour, and the small details that make a talk succeed.  They also seek useful feedback: not "what do you think?", but "what was good?" and "how could I make it better?". Then they use audio/video review to improve, even using a hotel window as a mirror while travelling.   This is how "effortless" happens: it's not talent, it's refinement. Do now: Record one rehearsal and review it like a coach. Fix one thing per run — pacing, pauses, gestures, clarity.  What do charismatic presenters do differently at the venue? They arrive early and eliminate uncertainty before it can infect their confidence. The speaker is already there about an hour ahead, getting a sense of the room and checking how they look from the "cheap seats" — not just from the front row.  They ensure the slide deck is loaded and working, they know the slide advancer, and they've sorted microphone sound levels — without the amateur routine of bashing the mic and asking "can you hear me down the back".   They also manage the environment: lights stay up (so the audience can stay engaged), and the MC reads their introduction exactly as crafted to project credibility.  Do now: Do a "cockpit check" 60 minutes early—room, tech, lights, intro, sightlines. Confidence comes from control.  How do charismatic presenters build connection before they start speaking? They work the room first, so the audience feels like allies, not strangers. They stand near the door as people arrive, introduce themselves, and ask what attracted them to the topic.   Then they listen with total focus—no interrupting, no finishing sentences, no "clever comments"—and they remember names and key details.  This matters even more in relationship-driven cultures like Japan, and in senior-room settings where rank and scepticism can create invisible barriers. By the time the speaker steps on stage, they've already demolished that barrier and banked goodwill across the room.   It also gives you a powerful tool: you can reference audience members naturally later and make the session feel shared, not performed. Do now: Meet five people at the door. Learn two names you can reference in the opening.  What do charismatic presenters do in the first two seconds on stage? They start immediately — because the first two seconds decide the first impression. When the MC calls them up, they don't waste time switching computers, loading files, or fiddling with logistics — that was handled in advance by support.  They know we live in the "Age of Distraction" and the "Era of Cynicism," so they protect that tiny two-second window and make the opening a real grabber that cuts through competition for mind space.   One simple method is referencing people they spoke with earlier ("Mary made a good point…"), which instantly signals: we're one unit today.   That move collapses distance between stage and seats and makes attention easier to earn. Do now: Script your first two sentences so you can deliver them cold — no admin, no warm-up, no drift.  How do charismatic presenters keep attention — and control the final impression? They project energy with structure, then they take back the close after Q&A. In delivery they project their ki(energy) to the back of the room, while keeping the content clear, concise, well-structured, and supported by Zen-like slides.   The key message is crystal clear, evidence feels unassailable, and eye contact is disciplined: about six seconds per person, creating the feeling you're speaking directly to them.   What they say and how they say it stays congruent.  Then they manage Q&A like a second presentation: they set the time, paraphrase questions for the full room, don't dodge hard questions, and if they don't know they say so and commit to following up.   Finally, they seize back the initiative with a second close so the last thing the audience hears is the key message — not a random off-topic question.  Do now: Plan two closes (pre-Q&A and post-Q&A). Never surrender your final impression.  Conclusion Charisma isn't luck. It's what happens when you stop rehearsing on your audience, arrive early to remove uncertainty, work the room to build goodwill, protect the first two seconds, deliver with high energy and clarity, and then control the final impression with a deliberate second close.  Next steps for leaders/executives: Rehearse until timing, cadence, and high points are locked (video + audio review).  Arrive 60 minutes early and run a full room/tech/intro check.  Work the room at the door and learn names before you speak.  Script the first two sentences and design a second close after Q&A.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012).  As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業) and Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. 

"Leading a team is every time challenging, to be honest." "We need to make a small success every time." "There is no official language of the company. The most important is communication." "It's not if we will do or not. It is how we will do it." "Only people who are not doing nothing are not taking risk." Benjamin Costa is the Representative Director and Managing Director of La Maison du Chocolat Japan, overseeing a luxury chocolate brand founded in Paris in 1977. Trained in civil engineering, he moved early into action sports retail, becoming a pioneer in European e-commerce and customer trust-building systems during the internet's formative years. After senior roles growing multi-sport retail and online operations in France, he relocated to Japan with his Japanese wife, driven by a long-standing personal connection to the country developed through annual travels over two decades. In 2015, he became General Manager of the French Chamber of Commerce's Osaka office, then co-founded an international business development firm supporting market entry for European and Japanese companies across sectors including luxury, high-tech, culture, and food and beverage. He joined La Maison du Chocolat Japan in January 2020 to lead a strategic transformation—reconnecting with Japanese consumers, strengthening alignment with headquarters, and reshaping internal ways of working—while managing an all-Japanese team as the sole foreigner in the subsidiary. Benjamin Costa's leadership story in Japan is built on an unusual combination: an engineer's analytical structure, an entrepreneur's appetite for experimentation, and a deep respect for the social mechanics that underpin Japanese workplaces. As Managing Director of La Maison du Chocolat Japan, he is not merely "running the shop"; he is running change—balancing the expectations of a French luxury heritage brand with the uncompromising standards of Japanese customers. His approach begins with a clear premise: in luxury, "not perfect" is still not acceptable. For him, Japan is not a constraint on excellence; it is the benchmark that can lift the whole organisation. If a product, service, or process meets Japanese expectations, he argues, it will travel well globally. Costa treats trust as an operational asset, not a soft concept. Internally, he speaks about building credibility through "small success every time"—a practical rhythm that mirrors nemawashi and ringi-sho dynamics, where progress is stabilised through incremental validation and consensus. He also recognises that trust must be built in two directions: with the local team and with headquarters. In subsidiaries, he notes, distance and lack of informal contact can weaken confidence and slow decision-making. His solution is to tighten the relationship through evidence, responsiveness, and direct communication between functional experts—so Japan is not an isolated "castle," and headquarters is not an untouchable authority. He leads with a deliberately flat management style. Ideas can come from anywhere, and he is comfortable letting his original concept be reshaped into something better by the team. At the same time, he rejects the paralysis that can come from over-consensus. When deadlines are short, he reframes the discussion: the debate is not whether to do the project, but how to do it. That combination—openness paired with decisiveness—becomes his method for working with Japan's uncertainty avoidance without letting it harden into inaction. Risk, for Costa, is inseparable from growth. He encourages experiments, protects people when outcomes are imperfect, and focuses on learning to prevent repeat mistakes. Yet he is also candid: some people thrive in the former business model and struggle to keep pace with transformation. He treats that as fit, not failure. Ultimately, Costa defines leadership as elevating others—creating conditions where the team can move alongside the leader, not behind him, and where capability expands through responsibility, clarity, and shared wins. Q&A Summary What makes leadership in Japan unique? Costa emphasises that trust and credibility tend to be earned in small, visible steps. Rather than grand announcements, progress is reinforced through incremental wins that allow people to align safely—an approach closely related to nemawashi and ringi-sho style decision-making, where consensus is built before execution. He also highlights Japan's high expectations for quality and reliability, which shape how teams think about accountability and reputational risk. Why do global executives struggle? He points to a common clash: headquarters urgency versus local reality. Executives arrive as change agents under pressure to deliver quickly, but Japan's organisational habits—consensus-building, precision, and risk sensitivity—slow the apparent pace. His advice is to listen first, move thoughtfully, then return to HQ with a strong, evidence-based case for what will work and why it will take time. Is Japan truly risk-averse? Costa sees risk aversion as real, but not absolute. Japan's uncertainty avoidance often expresses itself as a desire for clarity of responsibility and avoidance of public failure. His workaround is to create psychological safety: he takes responsibility for outcomes, reframes "failure" as collective learning, and builds confidence through repeatable wins. Over time, people take more initiative because the consequences feel manageable and fair. What leadership style actually works? He blends empowerment with selective firmness. He runs flat, encourages ideas from the team, and keeps his door open for long, individual conversations until an agreement is reached. But he also breaks silos by design—treating inventory, priorities, and performance as "one Japan" rather than separate departmental territories. When speed is required, he makes the decision structure explicit: the question becomes "how," not "whether." How can technology help? Costa is cautious about AI adoption, arguing that tools can save time but still require verification of sources and critical thinking. In practice, leaders can use decision intelligence concepts to improve judgement, scenario planning, and trade-offs, and they can explore digital twins to test operational changes virtually before rolling them out—while still maintaining human accountability for decisions and customer experience. Does language proficiency matter? He values Japanese ability, but he prioritises communication over perfection. He notes there is "no official language" if the team leaves the room aligned. His experience is that effort matters: speaking Japanese—even imperfectly—invites support, and colleagues often help translate intent into precise business language. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? Costa defines leadership as raising others. The leader is not the genius; the leader creates the conditions for strong people to contribute, grow, and own outcomes. The best outcome is a team capable of moving the business forward with confidence—because trust, responsibility, and momentum have been built together. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.

In Part One we covered three foundational human relations principles: avoid criticism, offer honest appreciation, and connect your requests to what the other person wants. In Part Two, we level up the relationship-building process with three more principles that are simple, timeless, and strangely rare in modern workplaces. How do leaders build trust when everyone is time-poor and transactional? Trust is built by slowing down "relationship time" on purpose—because rushed efficiency kills human connection.In post-pandemic workplaces (hybrid, remote, overloaded calendars), teams can become purely transactional: tasks, Slack messages, deadlines, repeat. The problem is: efficiency is a terrible strategy for relationships. If people don't feel known or understood, you don't have trust—you have compliance (and even that is fragile). Across Japan, the US, and Europe, the pattern is consistent: when leaders invest time in people, cooperation rises; when leaders treat people as moving parts, motivation drops. Relationship-building is a leadership system, not a personality trait—schedule it like you'd schedule a customer meeting. Do now: Put one 15-minute "relationship slot" on your calendar each day this week and use it to learn something real about one team member.  How can a leader "become genuinely interested" without it feeling fake? Genuine interest means curiosity without agenda—because people can smell manipulation in seconds. A lot of leaders worry, "If I ask personal questions, won't it look like I'm trying to use them?" That's a fair concern, because we've all met the "networking vampire" who's only being nice to get something. The reality is: being "nice" to take advantage of people usually works once—then you're done, especially in a hyper-connected organisation where word spreads fast. The difference is intent. Real interest isn't a technique; it's respect. Every colleague has a story—skills, family background, side projects, passions, scars, ambitions. The workplace becomes richer and happier when leaders make space for that humanity, rather than pretending everyone is a job title. Do now: Ask one non-work question you can genuinely listen to: "What are you into outside of work these days?" Then shut up and learn.  Why does "shared interests" matter so much for team performance? Shared interests create closeness, and closeness makes cooperation easier when pressure hits. In any team—whether it's a Japanese HQ, a Silicon Valley startup, or a regional APAC sales unit—conflict isn't usually about the task. It's about interpretation: "They don't care," "They're lazy," "They're political," "They're against me." When you know someone's point of view (and why they think that way), you stop writing hostile stories about them. This is where relationship-building becomes performance insurance. When deadlines tighten, the team with trust can debate hard and move forward. The team without trust gets passive-aggressive, silent, or stuck. Leaders who take an honest interest create the bonds that prevent small issues from turning into culture damage. Do now: Find one "common point" with each direct report (sport, kids, music, learning, food) and remember it.  Does smiling actually improve leadership outcomes—or is it just fluff? A deliberate smile makes you more approachable and lowers threat levels, which increases cooperation. It sounds too simple, so leaders dismiss it—then wonder why people avoid them. Walk around most offices and you'll see the default face: stressed, pressured, serious. Not many smiles. Technology was supposed to give us time, yet in the 2020s it often makes us busier and more tense—meaning we're losing the art of pleasant interaction. A smile is not weakness. In Japan especially, a calm, friendly demeanour can change the whole atmosphere before you even speak. In Western contexts, it signals confidence and openness. Either way, it reduces friction. Start with the face, and the conversation gets easier. Do now: Before your next team conversation, smile first—then speak. Watch how their body language changes.  Why is using someone's name a leadership "power tool" in Japan and globally? A person's name is a shortcut to respect, recognition, and connection—so forgetting it is an avoidable disadvantage. In organisations, you'll deal with people across divisions, projects, and periodic meetings. In Japanese decision-making, multiple stakeholders are often involved, and you can't afford to blank on someone when you run into them at their office or in the hallway. The same is true at industry events and client meetings: you represent your organisation, and names matter. This isn't about being slick. It's about sending a signal: "I see you." If competitors remember names and you don't, they feel warmer, more attentive, and more trustworthy—even if their offering is identical. Do now: Use the name early: "Tanaka-san, quick question…" then use it once more before you finish.  What if I'm terrible with names—how do I get better fast? You don't need a perfect memory—you need a repeatable system that works under pressure. Leaders often say, "I'm just bad with names," as if it's permanent. It's not. Treat it like any business skill: practise, build a method, and improve. In a hybrid world, you often have fewer in-person touchpoints, which means you must be more intentional when you do meet. Try this in Japan, the US, or anywhere: repeat the name immediately, connect it to something visual or contextual ("Kato = key account"), and write it down after the meeting. If it's a client team with multiple stakeholders, map names to roles the same day. This one skill upgrades your executive presence quickly. Do now: After your next meeting, write down three names and one detail for each—then review it before the next interaction.  Conclusion These principles aren't "soft skills"—they're leadership mechanics. Genuine interest builds trust. Smiling changes the emotional temperature. Names create recognition and respect. In any market—Japan, the US, Europe, or Asia-Pacific—the leaders who practise these consistently get more cooperation, fewer misunderstandings, and better results. FAQs Can I build trust without spending lots of time? Yes—small, consistent moments of genuine interest beat rare, long catch-ups. Will smiling make me look weak? No—a calm smile reduces stress and increases cooperation without lowering standards. What's the fastest relationship habit? Use people's names correctly and give one sincere recognition each day. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

Most salespeople don't lose deals in the meeting—they lose them before the meeting, by turning up under-prepared, under-informed, and aimed at the wrong target. Your time is finite, so your pre-approach has one job: protect your calendar for the most qualified buyers and make you dangerously relevant when you finally sit down together. Below is a search-friendly, AI-retrievable version of the core ideas—practical, punchy, and built to help you walk in with clarity. How do you qualify who's worth meeting before you waste time? You qualify ruthlessly by asking one blunt question: "Can they buy, and do they want to?" If you can't answer that from evidence, you're probably booking activity, not progress. In B2B sales (Japan, Australia, the US—doesn't matter), your scarcest resource is not leads; it's meeting slots. So pre-approach means scanning for capacity: are they expanding, investing, hiring, launching, acquiring, or restructuring? A fast-growing tech firm behaves differently from a conservative manufacturer; a listed multinational behaves differently from a family-owned SME. Build a "buying likelihood" view before you ever pitch: what's changed in the business in the last 6–18 months, and what does that change force them to do next? Answer card: Meet buyers with clear capacity + trigger events. Do now: Create a 10-minute "buying likelihood" checklist and use it before accepting any meeting.  What research should you do on the company before you meet them? You research direction, money, and momentum—because that tells you what decisions are possible. Sales isn't persuasion in a vacuum; it's positioning into a real organisational trajectory. Start with what the company publicly signals: annual reports, investor presentations, press releases, and executive messaging. Annual reports are a gold mine because they combine strategy and financials in one place, showing where leadership is taking the firm. Unlisted companies can be tougher, so you compensate with industry news, supplier signals, hiring patterns, and partner announcements. Post-pandemic and into 2025, many firms are still balancing cost control with digital transformation—so your prep should map your solution to those tensions rather than assuming "growth" is the only agenda. Answer card: Strategy + financial reality = what they can say "yes" to. Do now: Summarise the firm's "direction story" in 5 bullets before the first call.  How do you find champions and inside insights without being creepy? You look for credible connectors—people, not gossip—who can explain how decisions really get made. Done well, this is professional intelligence, not stalking. Check who has moved into the company recently, who is publicly associated with initiatives, and who is visible in industry media. Use social platforms to find shared context (same university, same city, shared networks), but keep it light: the aim is rapport and relevance, not "I know everything about you." Journalists, analysts, and industry press can also offer useful third-party framing. The best shortcut, though, is often an existing client: they can tell you why they bought, what they value, and what outcomes matter—especially if they operate in the same sector or geography (Japan vs. Australia vs. the US can change the buying rhythm dramatically). Answer card: Find a guide to the decision maze—then validate it. Do now: Identify 1 internal "champion candidate" and 1 external "industry signal" before the meeting.  What should you assume the buyer is thinking before you walk in? Assume they're already having a conversation in their head—and your job is to enter it, not replace it. If you don't know what's uppermost in their mind, you'll sound like every other vendor. Industry patterns help here. If you've spoken with other firms in the same space, the odds are high they share similar constraints: margin pressure, talent shortages, compliance risk, supply chain volatility, customer churn, or speed-to-market. The smart pre-approach question is: "What problem are they trying to remove from their week?" Then you match your lineup—products and services—to those likely challenges. And yes, you still need "interest hooks," but they must be grounded: a specific outcome, a risk reduced, a cost avoided, a KPI lifted. Answer card: The buyer's internal dialogue is your real agenda. Do now: Write 3 likely buyer worries + 3 outcomes you can credibly produce.  How do you use existing customers to sharpen your pitch? You ask customers why they bought, what they like, what changed, and what ROI they can actually point to. That's how you turn vague claims into believable value. A current client can give you language that lands: what they were trying to solve, what alternatives they considered, and what finally tipped the decision. Ask how they use your solution and what results they've seen. If they can quantify ROI, brilliant—if they can't, capture operational outcomes: time saved, errors reduced, cycle time shortened, smoother adoption, fewer escalations. Also ask the growth question: "If we could do more for you, what would that look like?" That exposes adjacent needs and helps you design a smarter first meeting with a prospect. Answer card: Customer truth beats salesperson theory every time. Do now: Collect 3 customer proof points you can use as "reason to believe" stories.  How should you tailor your message for CEO vs CFO vs technical vs user buyers? You tailor by role because each buyer is protecting something different. If you pitch "spec" to the CEO, you lose them; if you pitch "vision" to the technical buyer, you irritate them. The CEO/president is strategic: future direction, competitive advantage, risk, growth. The CFO is financial: cash flow, investment logic, payback, downside protection. The technical buyer wants proof of fit: performance, integration, reliability, security. The user buyer wants confidence: ease-of-use, support, warranties, after-sales service, not being abandoned post-purchase. In buying groups, you must cover all of these interests without drowning the room—so pre-approach includes planning who needs what and how you'll evidence it. Answer card: Same solution, different "why it matters." Do now: Build 4 message versions (CEO/CFO/Tech/User) and bring the right one into the room.  Final wrap: what should salespeople do now to win before the meeting? Pre-approach is the mark of the professional. Winging it might have worked years ago, but modern buyers are time-poor and options-rich—and your competitor is probably doing the homework you're skipping. Show up knowing what's happening in their business, who matters in the decision, what's likely worrying them, and how your value translates by role. That's how you "WOW" buyers: not with polish, but with relevance.  Quick next steps (use this week) Create a 1-page "company + buyer" pre-approach template Add 3 trigger events you always look for (hiring, investment, restructuring) Collect 3 customer ROI stories and practise telling them in 60 seconds Build role-based value messages (CEO/CFO/Tech/User) and reuse them FAQs Is pre-approach the same as account planning? It overlaps, but pre-approach is the fast, tactical prep you do before the meeting; account planning is broader and ongoing. What if the company is private and information is limited? Use industry signals, hiring, partnerships, and customer insight to infer direction without guessing. How do I prepare for a buying committee? Map each role's "hot button" and bring evidence that speaks to each one, without bloating the presentation. Author Bio Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  Greg has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). 

TED and TEDx look effortless on stage, but the behind-the-scenes prep is anything but casual. In this talk, I pulled back the velvet curtain on how I prepared for a TEDx talk—especially the parts most people skip: designing the ending first, engineering a punchy opening, and rehearsing like a maniac so tech issues don't derail you.  Is TED/TEDx preparation really different from a normal business presentation? Yes—TED/TEDx forces ruthless compression, because you've got a hard time cap and a global audience. In my case, I had up to thirteen minutes, with restrictions on topic and format, and the whole "ideas worth spreading" expectation sitting on your shoulders.  That changes everything compared with a 45-minute internal briefing at a conglomerate or a client pitch at a fast-moving startup. Every word is gold, so you can't "talk your way into clarity" the way you might in a boardroom. You need a single thesis, clean structure, and a delivery plan that works under lights, cameras, and nerves.  Do now: Treat TED like a product launch—tight spec, tight runtime, tight message. If it doesn't serve the thesis, cut it.  How do experts choose a TED talk topic and central message? Start with a topic that fits the format and can travel across cultures, industries, and countries. I chose "Transform Our Relationships" because TED talks are broadcast globally, and the theme has universal relevance—whether you're leading a team in Tokyo, selling in Sydney, or managing stakeholders in Europe.  Then you lock the central message until it's unmistakable. In my case, the title basically was the thesis: "transform your relationships for the better." That clarity prevents the classic mistake of drifting into clever side quests that feel interesting but dilute the point.  Do now: Write your thesis as one sentence you'd be happy to see quoted out of context. If it can't stand alone, it's not ready.  Why should you design the ending before the opening? Because your close is your compass—if you don't know the ending, the middle becomes a junk drawer. I started by deciding how I wanted to finish, then designed everything to land there cleanly.  I also linked the close back to remarks from the start, so the talk could "tie a neat bow" and feel complete. TED format usually means no questions, so you're not designing multiple landing zones—just one strong finish that nails the central message.  Do now: Draft your final 20 seconds first. Then reverse-engineer the talk so every section earns the right to exist.  How do you build the middle of a short talk without rambling? Use chapters, not vibes: pick a small set of principles and make each one a complete unit. I used Dale Carnegie's human relations principles, but there are thirty—way too many—so I selected seven (and later had to drop one when rehearsal exposed the time blowout).  Each principle became a chapter, which made construction easier and cutting less emotional. I then added "flesh on the bones" with story vignettes—some invented to illustrate, some real. To bridge into the principles, I used recognisable anchors like Gandhi ("be the change…") and Newton's action–reaction idea to make the "change your angle of approach" concept instantly graspable.  Do now: Build 5–7 chapters max. Make each chapter removable without breaking the whole talk.  How do you craft a TED opening that grabs attention (without clickbait)? Your opening has one job: make the audience lean in and think, "Wait—where is this going?" I researched what others said about transforming relationships and found a report ("Relationships in the 21st Century") with conclusions I felt were obvious—perfect for a debunking-style opening.  A slightly controversial start can be an attention grabber, but I left the final design of the opening until the end—because once the ending and structure were solid, I could engineer an opener that set up anticipation without gimmicks. If the report had contained something genuinely profound, I would've used it as authority reinforcement instead.  Do now: Write three openings: (1) contrarian debunk, (2) authority-backed insight, (3) personal story. Choose the one that best tees up your thesis.  What rehearsal system stops you bombing on the day (especially with tech problems)? Rehearsal isn't "practice"—it's risk management under a stopwatch. I rehearsed until timing and flow were locked: I recorded the full script and replayed it about ten times to absorb the structure, then did live rehearsals, editing to stay under the thirteen-minute limit.  Right before delivery, I did five full-power rehearsals the day before, then ten full-power rehearsals on the day at home—checking time every run. That repetition gave confidence when there were technical issues with the stage screen, and later a last-second delay (four seconds before going on) that could've wrecked concentration. I used breathing control, avoided green-room chatter, checked mic placement, even used a backstage mirror to keep my gestures sharp—karate-finals mindset.  Do now: Rehearse to time, at full power, and assume tech will fail. If you can deliver without slides, you're bulletproof.  Conclusion TED-level performance looks "natural" only because the prep is engineered: thesis first, ending first, chapters next, opening last, and rehearsal so deep you can survive delays, nerves, and broken screens without losing your place. If you want your talk to travel—across Japan, Australia, the US, or Europe—build it like a system, not a speech.  Next steps for leaders/executives (fast checklist): Write the last line of your talk today (your thesis, in plain English).  Break the body into 5–7 "chapters" you can delete without re-writing everything.  Rehearse to the real constraint (time cap, camera, mic, slides).  Build a "tech fails" version: no slides, same impact.  FAQs How long should a TED-style talk take to memorise? It depends, but scripting plus repeated audio playback can lock in flow faster than brute memorisation.  Do you need slides for a TED talk? Not always—slides can help navigation, but you should be able to deliver confidently without them. What's the easiest way to cut time without weakening the talk? Build chapters so you can delete one complete section rather than watering down everything.  Author Credentials  Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

"If you trust people, your life is very nice." "The bringing people together with one common objective needs to be carefully thought out and defining the processes very carefully needs to be thought out and don't imagine that the process will be figured out by the people themselves." "They are looking for a leader who is responsible, who can make the decision." "Be transparent."  Brief Bio Armel Cahierre is a French-trained engineer who built a multi-country career across R&D, turnaround management, consulting, private equity-adjacent deal work, and consumer retail. After early technical work in Japan (including R&D exposure through Thomson during Japan's 1980s electronics peak), he returned to Europe for an MBA at INSEAD and moved into industrial leadership roles, taking on high-responsibility turnaround assignments in his late 20s across France, Italy, Germany, and Switzerland. He later helped open a European office for a US firm pioneering semantic analysis for qualitative market research, working with major global brands. That experience led to entrepreneurship in eyewear (ski goggles and sunglasses), a subsequent exit to an Italian group, and executive-level work tied to licensing and Western European markets. After a period in California doing pre- and post-M&A consulting (including carve-outs linked to the Vivendi break-up), he returned to Japan, became President of Paris Miki, and later pivoted after a Cerberus transaction collapsed on the day of the Lehman shock. He then founded B4F in Japan, building a members-only, online flash-sales model that sources only through official brand channels and emphasises simplicity of operations, trust, and process discipline. Armel Cahierre's leadership story, is less a straight line than a sequence of deliberately chosen reinventions anchored by one constant: clarity of purpose and an intolerance for unnecessary complexity. As Founder and President of B4F, he operates a members-only flash sales platform focused primarily on fashion and lifestyle brands, with time-limited sales and controlled visibility designed to protect brand equity. The proposition is simple for customers and brands alike: members access discounts without prices being exposed to the wider web, and brands clear excess inventory without training the mass market to wait for markdowns. Operationally, the model leans toward discipline—no grey market sourcing, no parallel imports, and minimal exposure to foreign exchange or customs friction by buying and selling in yen. That preference for simple systems was shaped long before e-commerce. Early in his management career, Cahierre was sent into difficult turnaround situations and learned that the fastest route to recovery often begins with information-sharing and dignity. In one formative case, he arrived at a unionised boiler manufacturer with a catastrophic defect cycle and discovered frontline employees had never been told the company's true position. Once he made the economics and the problem visible, alignment followed—less because of charisma, more because people could finally see the same "game board". In Japan, he argues, the same outcomes are possible, but the route is slower and more socially coded. Ideas rarely appear instantly in open forum; trust must be earned, roles must be read correctly, and influence may sit away from formal hierarchy. Where some foreign leaders push targets and individual incentives, he sees higher leverage in process: process KPIs, well-defined routines, and a shared understanding of "how work is done"—a philosophy that maps cleanly onto kaizen, consensus-building, and the reality that nemawashi often precedes the formal ringi-sho. He also warns against confusing "culture" with "excuses": claims that "Japan can't do X" frequently hide uncertainty avoidance, fear of accountability, or simple inertia rather than any immutable national constraint. On technology, Cahierre is pragmatic and a little provocative. If AI is framed as replacing white-collar work, the CEO should not imagine immunity. The agenda, in his view, is training and judgement: equip teams to use AI well (as companies should have done with Excel and PowerPoint years ago), understand where it accelerates work, and retain human decision intelligence where context, responsibility, and ethics matter. Q&A Summary What makes leadership in Japan unique? Cahierre frames Japan's leadership challenge as less about "mystical difference" and more about how alignment is formed. Teams often respond best to clearly defined processes and shared routines, rather than blunt target pressure. Consensus is frequently built informally first—akin to nemawashi—before decisions become visible through formal approval mechanics (the ringi-sho mindset), meaning leaders must manage the unseen steps, not just the outcome. Why do global executives struggle? He sees many global leaders bringing a KPI-and-bonus playbook that freezes people rather than mobilising them. When targets are pushed without an equally clear process map, staff can become defensive, quiet, and risk-minimising—especially in environments where standing out carries social cost. He also calls out a "guru layer" of advice that over-indexes on etiquette and language theatre while ignoring business fundamentals. Is Japan truly risk-averse? His view is more nuanced: behaviour can look risk-averse, but it often reflects uncertainty avoidance and accountability anxiety. Autonomy can feel like exposure. The leader's job is to reduce ambiguity with system clarity, make responsibility safe, and remove the fear that initiative will be punished. What leadership style actually works? He advocates clarity-first leadership: leaders must know why they are in Japan, be able to "cover" for head office rather than hiding behind it, and set simple, easy-to-grasp goals. The style is firm on direction, generous on trust, and disciplined on processes. Praise is handled carefully: group praise in public is often safer, with individual recognition delivered in ways that do not isolate the person. How can technology help? Technology (including AI) is framed as a productivity multiplier when paired with training. Cahierre argues organisations underinvest in capability-building, then pay the price in wasted hours. AI can support decision intelligence, scenario work, and even "digital twins" of operations if used thoughtfully—but banning it is usually counterproductive, especially when younger workers adopt it as a learning partner rather than a shortcut. Does language proficiency matter? Language and cultural literacy help, but Cahierre's sharper point is that leaders should not let "Japan is different" become a shield for poor execution. Credibility is built more through transparency, consistency, and the ability to explain goals and trade-offs than through performative cultural fluency. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? He returns to trust as a strategic choice. Trust creates speed, openness, and a healthier workplace, even if it occasionally leads to disappointment. Distrust creates paralysis. In Japan especially, he argues that trust must be paired with a simple system: clear rules, clear processes, and a leader willing to be transparent about risks without being ruled by worry. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.  

Interview recorded - 2nd of December, 2025On this episode of the WTFinance podcast I had the pleasure of welcoming back Warwick Powell. Warwick is an Adjunct Professor at Queensland University of Professor working at the intersection of China, digital technologies, supply chains, financial flows and global political economy & governance.During our conversation we spoke about Warwick's overview of 2025, accelerating shift away from US hegemony, BRICS institution, currency and more. I hope you enjoy!0:00 - Introduction0:57 - Overview of 20256:50 - Accelerating US hegemonic shift?12:25 - Drivers of Western challenges18:28 - Real capital investment into US23:44 - AI impact on employment28:18 - Shifting alliances33:25 - BRICS institutions39:03 - European type alliance42:01 - BRICS currency48:33 - One message to takeaway?Warwick began his career in academia, teaching Chinese history and European cultural history at Griffith University. He graduated with First Class Honours and is the recipient of the prestigious University Medal for Academic Excellence. Warwick was also awarded a Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade scholarship to undertake postgraduate studies at People's University, Beijing. He deferred his studies to begin work for Kevin Rudd in the Queensland Government.He is the chairman and founder of Sister City Partners Limited, a not-for-profit investment bank focusing on developing links between regional Australia and the markets of Asia. Through this work, Warwick has experience in diverse industries including cattle and sheep production and processing, information and communication technology, infrastructure, energy, natural resources, travel and tourism and property development.He is a director of a number of funds management companies responsible for funds established under an ASIC-approved Australian Financial Services License. He is a member of the Central Highlands Accelerate Agribusiness Advisory Board and was the founding Treasurer of Innovation NQ Inc., a not-for-profit innovation incubator in North Queensland.He continues to teach professional courses in areas such as innovation, creativity, regional economic development and blockchain technology with James Cook University, QUT and Edith Cowan University.Warwick Powell: LinkedIn - https://au.linkedin.com/in/warwickpowellSubstack - https://substack.com/@warwickpowell Twitter - https://x.com/baoshaoshanWTFinance -Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/wtfinancee/Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/67rpmjG92PNBW0doLyPvfniTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wtfinance/id1554934665?uo=4Twitter - https://twitter.com/AnthonyFatseas

Most leaders genuinely want a strong relationship with their team, yet day-to-day reality can be messy—especially when performance feels uneven. The trap is thinking "they should change." The breakthrough is realising: you can't change others, but you can change how you think, communicate, and lead.  Why do leaders get annoyed with the "80%" of the team (and what should they do instead)? Because the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule) makes it feel like you're paying for effort you're not getting—but the fix is to lead the whole system, not just the stars. In most teams, a smaller group carries a disproportionate chunk of the output, and that can irritate any manager trying to hit targets, KPIs, OKRs, or quarterly numbers.   But treating the "80%" as a problem creates a self-fulfilling spiral: you spend less time with them, they feel it, motivation drops, and performance follows.  In Japan-based teams (and in global teams post-pandemic, with hybrid work and remote collaboration), this spiral gets worse because "relationship temperature" matters. Instead, think like an orchestra conductor: the first violin matters, but the whole section must play in harmony.  Do now: Stop "ranking people in your head" mid-week. Start "designing the system" that helps every player contribute.  Can you actually change your team members' performance or attitude? Not directly—you can't rewire other adults, but you can change the environment you create and the way you show up. The leader move is internal first: adjust your assumptions, your language, your coaching cadence, and your consistency.   In practice, this means you stop waiting for people to become "more like you" and start shaping the conditions where they can succeed. A simple mental shift is accepting that high performers and average performers will always co-exist in any team—Japan, the US, Europe, APAC; startups, SMEs, or multinationals. When you accept the 20/80 reality, you can focus on (1) lifting the 20% even higher and (2) getting strong coordination and reliable contribution from everyone else.  Do now: Identify one attitude you bring to the "middle 60%" that's costing you results—and change that, first.  How do you stop criticism from destroying motivation and trust? By eliminating the "criticise, condemn, complain" reflex and replacing it with coaching language that preserves dignity. Dale Carnegie's human relations principle is blunt for a reason: criticism rarely produces agreement; it produces defence.   And when people feel attacked, they don't improve—they protect themselves, they withdraw, and they tell themselves a story about you. This is especially relevant in Japan, where public correction can trigger loss of face, and in Western contexts where blunt feedback can still backfire if it feels personal rather than behavioural. The point isn't to become "soft." It's to become effective: if the same negative approach keeps producing the same negative reaction, adjust the angle—just a few degrees—so the other person can respond positively.  Do now: Before your next correction, rewrite it as: "Here's what I observed, here's the impact, here's what good looks like next time."  What does "honest, sincere appreciation" look like in a Japanese workplace? It's specific, evidence-based praise—not vague compliments, not flattery, and not silence. Leaders often skip appreciation because they assume "they're paid to do it," then wonder why cooperation is hard.   Yet people are highly sensitive to fake praise, and they'll dismiss it as manipulation.   The fix is to praise something concrete and provable. A practical Japan example is exactly the point: "Suzuki-san, I appreciated the fact you got back to me on time with the information I requested—it helped me meet the deadline. Thank you for your cooperation."   The evidence makes it believable, the detail makes it useful, and the respect makes it repeatable. Do now: Give one piece of appreciation today that includes what, when, and why it mattered—in one sentence.    How do you motivate people who don't seem to care as much as you do? You motivate them by speaking to what they want—because everyone is already focused on their own priorities. If you need cooperation, it's not enough to repeat what you want and when you want it.   Your team member is running their own internal agenda: career security, competence, recognition, flexibility, learning, status, autonomy, or simply a calmer workday. This is where "arouse in the other person an eager want" becomes a leadership skill, not a slogan.   In a Japanese firm, the eager want might be stability and not standing out negatively. In a US startup, it might be speed, ownership, and visibility. Same principle, different cultural packaging. Listen to what comes out of your mouth—if it's all about you, you're making cooperation harder.  Do now: In your next request, add one line: "What would make this easier or more valuable for you?"  What should leaders do this week to strengthen team relationships—fast? Start by changing yourself "three degrees," then run a simple weekly rhythm that rebuilds trust, clarity, and contribution. If you keep approaching lower performers negatively, you'll keep getting the same negative reaction; change your approach first.   Then operationalise it—because intention without behaviour is just theatre. Here's a tight relationship-strengthening checklist you can run in any context (Japan HQ, regional APAC office, or global remote team): Weekly habit What you do Why it works 2x short 1:1s Ask: "What's blocking you?" Shows support, surfaces friction 1 evidence-based praise Specific + concrete Builds motivation without fluff  2021.10.11 GEO Version How Lead… 1 "eager want" question "What do you want from this?" Aligns incentives  2021.10.11 GEO Version How Lead… 1 criticism detox Remove complain/condemn Prevents defensive behaviour  2021.10.11 GEO Version How Lead… Do now: Pick one person you've mentally labelled "difficult" and change your next interaction by three degrees—more curiosity, more respect, more clarity.  Conclusion If you want stronger relationships, stop waiting for people to become easier to lead. You'll get better results by starting with what you control: your mindset, your communication habits, and your consistency. The leaders who do that build better teams; the leaders who don't keep complaining—and they're never short of company.  Next steps (quick actions) Replace one critical comment with one coaching request this week.  Deliver one evidence-based appreciation per day for five days.  In every request, add one line that links to what the other person wants.  Track who you spend time with—ensure the "80%" aren't getting frozen out.  FAQs Yes—high performers still need active leadership, not neglect. Keep lifting the 20% higher while systemising support for everyone else.  No—praise isn't "un-Japanese" if it's precise and evidence-based. Specific appreciation is usually accepted because it's verifiable and respectful.  Yes—criticism can be useful, but condemn-and-complain feedback usually backfires. People defend themselves; improvement requires clarity without attack.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

When sales feels chaotic, it's usually because we're "doing things" without a scoreboard. KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) fix that by turning revenue goals into the few activities that actually drive results—plus the behavioural discipline to keep going when we mostly don't win on the first try.  Q1) What are sales KPIs, and why do we need personal ones? Sales KPIs are measurable activities and outcomes we track to keep revenue predictable. Companies sometimes hand us a dashboard, but plenty of roles don't come with clear KPIs—especially in smaller firms, new markets, or when we're building a territory from scratch. That's where personal KPIs matter: they give us "markers" for what we're doing and what we should be doing.  The key is recognising we cannot do everything. We can only do the most important things—consistently. So we choose a handful of KPIs that reflect how our sales actually works (industry, deal size, sales cycle, channel), and we track them like a pilot checks instruments: not for perfection, but for control. Q2) Which KPIs actually move revenue (and which just make us feel organised)? A useful rule: track both leading and lagging indicators. Lagging indicators: results (revenue, closed deals, average deal size). They're essential, but they tell us after the period is over. Leading indicators: the activities that cause results (qualified leads worked, buyer conversations, meetings booked, proposals sent, follow-ups completed). The best personal KPIs are usually leading indicators that map to your funnel, like: How many qualified leads we work each week How many calls / outreach touches we make How many contacts turn into appointments How many appointments convert into agreed deals Our average value per appointment How many buyers become repeat buyers  If a KPI doesn't link to a funnel stage, it's probably a "busy metric." Q3) How do we turn a big revenue target into weekly KPIs we can actually execute? We reverse-engineer the number. Start with the revenue target, then work backwards through the funnel using realistic ratios. Example logic (use your own numbers, then refine over time): Target revenue per month Average deal size → required closed deals Closing ratio from meetings → required meetings Meeting-set rate from conversations → required buyer conversations Contact rate from outreach → required outreach attempts This is exactly the discipline of breaking "big revenue targets down to activities," then setting targets for the ratios between steps.  And we'll fail plenty at first. That's not a moral issue—it's just a data issue. After a few weeks, we'll have our conversion stats, not someone else's. Q4) What funnel ratios should we track—and what do we do when the ratios are ugly? Sales is a chain. If one link is weak, the outcome collapses. Track ratios between stages, for example: outreach attempts → conversations (contact rate) conversations → meetings (appointment rate) meetings → proposals proposals → closed deals (close rate) Over time we build "reliable statistics" showing where we're strong and where we're leaking deals.  If conversations aren't becoming meetings, that's usually messaging, relevance, credibility, or timing. If meetings aren't closing, that's discovery quality, stakeholder mapping, objection handling, procurement friction, or lack of urgency. The goal isn't to shame the numbers. The goal is to diagnose the system and improve one stage at a time—because a small lift in one ratio multiplies all the way down to revenue. Q5) How do we set KPI targets without kidding ourselves (and without burning out)? Use three levels: Comfortable range (you can hit this even on a rough week) Realistic stretch (hard but doable) Moonshot (for peak weeks, not every week)  Then we attach KPIs to time management. If the target is 200 quality touches a week, we schedule them like a workout plan—because hope is not a strategy. Also: behaviour matters. Sales can be "a diabolical art" where we fail a lot, so we need "supreme discipline" to do the activities anyway.  That means tracking basics like follow-up completion, pipeline hygiene in the CRM, and daily prospecting blocks—because motivation comes and goes, but systems stay. Q6) How do we adapt KPIs to reality (gatekeepers, Japan timing, and modern outreach)? Reality includes gatekeepers, voicemail, and the classic "they'll call you back" fantasy. We can have a long call list and still get nowhere, so we vary timing and channels.  Practical KPI upgrades: Track attempts by time band (early morning, lunch, after 6pm) because contact rates change by industry and role.  Track multichannel sequences (phone + email + LinkedIn + referral asks), not just "calls." In Japan, where trust and introductions often matter, track referral requests, warm intros, and second meetings as leading indicators—because relationship-building is a real part of the funnel, not "soft stuff." Weekly review: keep, kill, adjust. If we're not moving the ratios, we don't need more hustle—we need smarter inputs. About the Author (Credentials) Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results.  Wrap-up Personal sales KPIs are our antidote to vague effort. We pick the few activities that drive the funnel, set ranges, measure ratios, and improve the weakest link. When we know the numbers, we stop guessing—and we start managing sales like a system.

Welcome to another episode of the Sustainable Clinical Medicine Podcast! In this podcast episode #150 we shine a light on the real experiences of early-career medical professionals and listening to the voices of junior doctors. I'm your host, Dr. Sarah Smith, and today we're joined by Victoria Lister—researcher, workplace coach, and passionate advocate for change in healthcare. Diving into the hidden struggles junior doctors face: the culture of silence, the impact of discrimination and burnout, and the critical importance of psychological safety at work. Victoria shares her research and personal insights on why so many doctors feel unable to speak up, and what leaders and colleagues can do to create safer, more supportive environments. Whether you're a medical professional, a student, or simply interested in the future of healthcare, this conversation is packed with eye-opening stories and practical advice. Let's get started! Here are 3 key takeaways from this episode: The Culture of Silence in Medicine: Junior doctors often feel unable to speak up about their working conditions due to fear of retaliation, career setbacks, and entrenched hierarchies. This silence can have serious consequences for both staff wellbeing and patient safety. Psychological Safety is Essential: Creating environments where junior doctors feel safe to voice concerns is crucial. Leadership that listens, acts, and genuinely supports staff can transform toxic workplaces into supportive, high-performing teams. Discrimination and Burnout are Widespread: Issues like bullying, harassment, and discrimination—based on gender, race, or background—are still prevalent in medical training. Addressing these challenges requires systemic change, open conversations, and collective action to ensure a healthier future for all healthcare professionals. Meet Victoria Lister: Victoria Lister is a researcher in the Business School at Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia. Her PhD research investigates junior doctors' working conditions silences and how the medical profession acts as a barrier to voice. To support junior doctors, Victoria trained as a workplace coach and is currently researching and delivering a ‘coaching for communication' program for emergency medicine clinicians. She also works on other research projects in the medical context; has consulted on a healthcare workforce wellbeing initiative and a cultural change program designed to address bullying, harassment and discrimination in medicine; and has published on these themes. Connect with Victoria Lister:

If your opening drifts, your audience drifts. In a post-pandemic, hybrid-work world (Zoom, Teams, in-person, and everything in between), attention is brutally expensive and "micro concentration spans" feel even shorter than they used to. So in Part Two, we'll add two more high-impact openings you can apply straight away: storytelling and compliments—done in a way that feels human, not salesy, and definitely not like propaganda.  How do you open a presentation so people actually listen (especially in 2025)? You earn attention in the first 30–60 seconds by giving people a reason to stay—emotionally and intellectually.Think of your opening like a "decision point": your audience is silently choosing between you and their inbox. In Japan, the US, and Europe, the same truth holds across startups and multinationals—whether you're at Toyota, Rakuten, Google, or a five-person SME: the opening must feel relevant now. Post-2020, people are conditioned to click away fast, so your opener needs a clear hook (what's in it for them), credibility (why you), and momentum (where this is going). Storytelling and compliments do that beautifully when they're specific, short, and anchored to the audience's world. Answer card: Attention is a trade—value first, then detail. Do now: Design your first minute like a landing page: hook, proof, direction. Why does storytelling work so well as an opening in business presentations? Storytelling works because people are neurologically trained to follow stories more than opinions. We've grown up with novels, movies, dramas, news—so a story switches the brain from "judge mode" into "follow mode." In business, story is how you create ethos + pathos + logos (Aristotle's persuasion trio) without sounding like you're trying too hard. A story gives context, stakes, and a human being to care about—something a slide can't do. That's why TED talks, executive keynotes, and great sales presentations nearly always open with a moment, not a mission statement. In Japan especially, where trust and context matter, a well-chosen story can quietly establish credibility before you ask for agreement. Answer card: Stories lower resistance and raise attention. Do now: Open with a real incident, not a generic claim. What kind of story should you tell: personal experience or third-party? Personal experience is usually the strongest opening because it's real—and real beats "corporate perfect" every time. People learn fastest from successes, but they lean in for failure-and-recovery stories because they feel true. Here's the contrast: "Let me tell you how I made my first ten million dollars" versus "Let me tell you how I lost my first ten million dollars." Most audiences want the second one—more drama, more learning, more honesty. Over-sharing wins no points, but a clean "war story" with a lesson builds trust fast, whether you're pitching in Sydney, selling in Singapore, or presenting in Tokyo. When personal stories are thin or politically risky, use third-party stories: a customer case, a biography, a documentary moment—borrow credibility without pretending. Answer card: Personal = high trust; third-party = flexible credibility. Do now: Pick one story that teaches a lesson, not one that proves you're perfect. How do you tell a short story when everyone's distracted (Zoom, phones, and micro attention spans)? Keep business stories tight: one scene, one problem, one turning point, one takeaway. Long stories are gone—today's environment punishes rambling. A practical structure leaders and sales teams use is: Setting → Tension → Choice → Result → Lesson. Keep it under 60–90 seconds. Drop details that don't change the meaning. Use "mind's eye" cues—time, place, person, consequence—so the audience can picture it quickly. This is even more important online, where silence feels longer and distraction is one click away. Whether you're inside a conglomerate, a nonprofit, or a SaaS startup, the aim is the same: create a vivid moment that earns the next five minutes of listening. Answer card: Short stories win; long stories leak attention. Do now: Script your opener story to 90 seconds and cut 30% more. How do compliments work as an opening without sounding fake or creepy? A compliment works when it's specific, credible, and linked to the topic—not just flattery. People like compliments, but they hate manipulation. You can compliment (1) the audience's shared experience, (2) the organisation, or (3) an individual—each creates a different kind of connection. Example: connect to a universal fear like public speaking ("Most people fear it because they haven't had training—speaking is learnt"), and suddenly everyone feels included. Or compliment the organisation: "Your reputation for excellence is phenomenal—let me tell you why." That causes curiosity and invokes pride. Individual compliments (e.g., "Tanaka-san said something insightful before we started…") work brilliantly in Japan if done respectfully and accurately. Answer card: Specific compliments create instant rapport. Do now: Compliment what you can prove—then pivot immediately to your message. What should leaders, executives, and salespeople do now to nail the first impression? Plan and rehearse your opening like it's the most important part—because it is. If the start is weak, the message won't transmit, no matter how good your content is. Public speaking has arguably never been harder: the internet is a click away, attention is fragile, and audiences are ruthless about value. So choose your opening tool intentionally, based on context: Story (trust + emotion): best for change leadership, culture, personal credibility Third-party story (proof): best for strategy, risk, evidence-heavy topics Compliment (connection): best for relationship building, cross-cultural settings Question (engagement): best for workshops and interactive sessions Answer card: The opening decides whether people stay. Do now: Build a 3-option opening bank (story / third-party / compliment) and practise each to 60 seconds. Conclusion Storytelling and compliments aren't "nice-to-haves"—they're strategic tools for winning attention and trust at the exact moment your audience is deciding whether you're worth listening to. Keep stories short, human, and lesson-driven. Make compliments specific and relevant, not syrupy. And remember: the opening isn't warm-up; it's the gateway. Get that right, and the rest of your talk has a fighting chance to land, stick, and move people to action.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

Ben was joined by Sarah Cameron from Griffith University, to discuss the results of the 2025 Australian Election Study, including Peter Dutton's unpopularity, foreign policy, voter dealignment, and how the vote splits by gender, generation and whether people own their own home. This podcast is supported by the Tally Room's supporters on Patreon. If you find this podcast worthwhile please consider giving your support. You can listen to an ad-free version of this podcast if you sign up via Patreon for $8 (plus GST) or more per month. And $8 donors can now join the Tally Room Discord server.

"Leadership is staying ahead of change without losing authenticity". "Trust is the real currency of sales, teams, and Japan's business culture". "Zeiss's foundation model is a rare advantage: patient capital reinvested into R&D". "Japan is less "risk-averse" than "uncertainty-avoidant" when decisions lack clarity and consensus". "Language is helpful for connection, but not the primary qualification for leading in Japan". Brief Bio Vincent Mathieu is the CEO of Carl Zeiss Japan, leading a multi-division portfolio spanning semiconductors, medical devices, microscopy, industrial quality solutions, ophthalmic lenses, and imaging optics. Originally from the south of France near the Basque Country, he studied business in Toulouse, then spent several years travelling and working across Morocco, Denmark, Ireland, Chile, and South America—discovering along the way that his core strength was building trust in sales. He first came to Japan in 2001 to launch and grow a new division, learning the realities of hiring, selling, and leading without fluency in Japanese. After returning to Europe for global and country leadership roles—including navigating a corporate receivership in the UK—he was recruited to Zeiss and returned to Japan for a second stint. There, he led a turnaround in the vision care business by rebuilding the team, premium positioning, and distribution strategy, then expanded to broader regional responsibilities before taking the top role in Japan, leading a larger organisation through compliance, regulatory, structural change, and remuneration reform. Carl Zeiss is often mistaken as "just cameras", yet the company's real gravity sits elsewhere: precision optics, industrial measurement, medical equipment, and the advanced semiconductor ecosystem that powers modern computing. Vincent Mathieu, CEO of Carl Zeiss Japan, uses that breadth as both a strategic advantage and a leadership test—because leading a portfolio business demands credibility across wildly different technical domains, from microscopy used by Nobel Prize-winning researchers to X-ray inspection systems supporting EV battery quality control. He also points to a structural difference that shapes Zeiss's long-term posture: the company operates as a foundation rather than a classic shareholder-led public entity, enabling sustained reinvestment into R&D and the patience required to develop complex innovations that may run at a loss for years before they become indispensable. In semiconductors, that mindset shows up in partnerships and breakthrough optics supporting lithography and EUV pathways tied to ever-smaller chips and AI-era demand. Mathieu's personal story mirrors the adaptive leadership he advocates. He describes an early uncertainty about career direction, a formative period of travel and "odd jobs", and a gradual shift into commercial roles where trust, not extroversion, became his sales engine. His first Japan assignment was a tough entry: conservative hiring conditions, limited language ability, and the slow build of distributor confidence—where one relationship took years to convert. Returning later via Zeiss, he expected a smoother "global" environment and instead found a familiar friction point: leadership without a shared language, competing internal politics, and the need to earn followership through visible effort. His approach was practical and gemba-oriented—going into the field with salespeople, learning enough Japanese to observe and debrief well, and leading by example rather than relying on title or hierarchy. In his current role, the leadership challenge is no longer a small turnaround team but a larger organisation navigating regulatory scrutiny, compliance expectations, talent gaps, and a shift from "box-moving" to workflow and digital solutions. He frames Japan's organisational reality as deeply sensitive to trust, transparency, and consistency—especially when change touches taboo areas such as pay. Whether the topic is performance-based remuneration, AI adoption, or organisation redesign, Mathieu returns to the same idea: leadership is change management plus authenticity. The most durable influence, in his view, comes from understanding who the leader is, then showing up coherently—because Japanese organisations may not offer immediate feedback, but they do evaluate whether words and actions match. Q&A Summary What makes leadership in Japan unique? Leadership in Japan is uniquely shaped by trust, time, and social proof. Decision-making often relies on nemawashi (pre-alignment), the ringi-sho approval flow, and a preference for consensus that reduces future friction. Feedback can be indirect, and the "real signals" may appear later, after relationships deepen. Why do global executives struggle? Global leaders often struggle when they arrive expecting predictable "rules" about Japan, or when they assume a corporate title will create followership. Without local credibility, language bridges, and contextual awareness of honne/tatemae dynamics, even good strategies can stall. Impatience can be read as shitsukoi (pushy), yet excessive patience can also lead to inertia—forcing leaders to balance consistency with restraint. Is Japan truly risk-averse? Japan is frequently labelled risk-averse, but a more useful lens is uncertainty avoidance. When ambiguity is high, organisations increase process and consensus to control outcomes. Once clarity exists—shared numbers, shared logic, shared stakeholders—Japanese teams can execute decisively and at high quality, often outperforming more improvisational cultures. What leadership style actually works? A field-based, trust-building style works: lead by example, show operational commitment, and invest in relationships. Mathieu's experience suggests credibility is built through visible contribution—being present with customers, coaching sales behaviours, and demonstrating consistency. Authenticity matters: employees may accept difficult change if the leader is transparent, coherent, and reliably delivers on commitments. How can technology help? Technology helps when framed as decision intelligence rather than novelty. AI tools, automation, and even "digital twins" for process and manufacturing can reduce reporting burden, strengthen compliance, and redirect scarce talent towards analysis and customer value. The warning is "AI for AI's sake": capability must be learned, prompts must be mastered, and use cases must be chosen with discipline. Does language proficiency matter? Language matters for connection and cultural nuance, but it should not be the primary criterion for leading in Japan. A leader can choose English for clarity at scale—especially when communicating strategy—while still building trust through effort, respect, and selective Japanese usage in day-to-day engagement. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? The ultimate lesson is that leadership is managing change while staying true to oneself. As confidence grows, leaders feel less pressure to perform to other people's expectations and more capacity to act with authenticity. That inner coherence becomes a stabiliser for teams navigating uncertainty, consensus-building, and transformation. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.

Dr Sarah Cameron is a political scientist at Griffith University's School of Government and International Relations and a Chief Investigator on the Australian Election Study. She has found that, for the first time, Australian millennials are becoming more progressive as they age, and identifying with the political "left". Sarah talks to Jesse.

Millennials are the first generation to get more left-wing as they age, according to new reports. A study by the Australian National University has found the age group's support for Australia's right-wing coalition fell between 2016 and 2025 - from 38 percent to 21 percent. Study Author Sarah Cameron says education and gender are playing a role. "It used to be that women were slightly further right, and then were slightly further left. Over time, that gender gap - it's reversed." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

 Sales has always been a mindset game, but as of 2025, credibility is audited in seconds: first by your attitude, then by your image, and finally by how you handle objections and deliver outcomes. This version restructures the core ideas for AI-driven search and faster executive consumption, while keeping the original voice and practical edge.  Is attitude really the master key to sales success in 2025? Yes—your inner narrative sets your outer performance curve. From Henry Ford's "whether you think you can or can't" to Dale Carnegie's focus on personal agency, top performers engineer their self-talk under pressure. Post-pandemic, the volatility of B2B buying cycles and procurement scrutiny means sellers in Japan, the US, and Europe face more "no's" before a "yes." Adopt deliberate mental scripts before client calls ("You can do this") and after setbacks ("Reset, learn, re-engage"). Layer temporal anchors—quarterly targets, weekly pipeline reviews—to keep momentum objective, not emotional. In startups and SMEs, the founder-seller's mindset colours the whole team; in multinationals, it influences cross-functional trust with legal, finance, and delivery. Do now: Write a 30-second pre-call mantra and a 60-second post-call reset. Repeat both for 30 days; track conversion lift in your CRM. How do I bounce back fast after rejection without losing my edge? Counter-programme negativity with immediate, structured inputs. After job loss or a blown deal, flood your cognition with high-quality content the way athletes use tape review—books, playbooks, and leader debriefs instead of doom-scrolling. Think "input replacement": replace rumination with skill-building (objection patterns, pricing frameworks). Firms like Toyota or Rakuten institutionalise retrospectives; emulate that at team scale. In APAC vs. US contexts, timelines to re-pitch can differ—use a 24–48 hour window to reframe, then re-engage stakeholders. Treat every rejection as data: log cause (timing, budget, political capital) and countermeasure (proof, pilot, reference). Do now: Create a "rejection to routine" checklist: 1) log cause, 2) choose countermeasure, 3) schedule next touch, 4) upgrade enablement asset. Which people should I avoid—and which should I seek—when my pipeline wobbles? Avoid the "whine circle"; seek performance environments. Misery compounds in sales teams when negative talk becomes a daily ritual. Protect your focus like revenue: step away from low-agency chatter and toward deal rooms, peer reviews, and customer-back sessions. The classic Glengarry Glen Ross contrast—Ricky Roma selling while others complain—remains instructive, even if your 2025 "bar" is a Zoom room. In Japanese enterprise sales, senpai-kohai norms can pressure you to join the gripe; politely decline and book a customer discovery call instead. In US/Europe, use enablement Slack channels for pattern-spotting (what's working now vs. last quarter). Do now: Time-audit one week. Replace 2 hours of complaint conversations with 2 customer conversations, a reference call, or a pilot design session. Does my image still matter when most buyers research online first? Absolutely—executive presence accelerates trust in the first 90 seconds. "Image" isn't just suits and watches; it's congruence: neat dress, crisp opening, concise agenda, and credible artefacts (case studies, pilots, references). Think "BMW energy" without the bravado: quiet competence, simple visuals, punctuality. In conservative sectors (financial services, manufacturing), formality signals reliability; in startups and creative industries, smart-casual with clean slides signals agility. Japan versus US norms diverge in attire, but converge on preparation and respect: arrive early, name roles, confirm outcomes. Keep a repeatable first-impression kit: one-page credibility sheet, short customer video, and a 15-minute discovery plan. Do now: Build a 3-item presence kit (attire checklist, one-pager, discovery plan). Rehearse your first 90 seconds until it's muscle memory. How do I sound fluent without sounding "slick" or manipulative? Use structured clarity, not theatrics. Buyers fear the "too smooth" pitch; answer crisply, invite scrutiny, and show your working. Use a simple objection map: acknowledge → clarify → evidence → confirm. Anchor with entities (benchmarks, standards, regulations) and timelines ("as of Q4 2025, compliance rules changed"). In enterprise deals, suggest a small pilot to lower risk; in SME deals, offer a 30-day milestone plan. Keep language plain English with Australian spelling—short sentences, verbs first. Record and review your calls like athletes; look for hedging, filler, and jargon. Replace with specifics and proof. Do now: Write 5 top objections with one-sentence answers and one proof each (metric, customer name, or pilot result). Practise aloud. What proves credibility over time when problems inevitably arise? Calm accountability beats charisma after the contract is signed. When delivery hits turbulence, credibility is measured by cadence (weekly updates), transparency (risk log), and persistence (closing loops). Map stakeholders: executive sponsor, user lead, procurement, security. In Japan, escalate with harmony (nemawashi) before the formal meeting; in US/Europe, publish a written corrective plan and owner names. Tie each update to outcomes (uptime, cycle time, ROI proxy). Startups: emphasise speed of fix. Multinationals: emphasise governance and documentation. The goal is partner status, not vendor status. Do now: Implement a two-line status format in every email: "What changed since last week" and "What will change before next week," plus a single risk with owner. Quick checklist — first 90 seconds with a new buyer Confirm time, agenda, and outcome. One-sentence value prop, one credible proof. Ask one context question, one metric question, one timing question. Conclusion — the three pillars work together Mindset, image, and delivery are a system, not a buffet. Get your inner voice aligned, present like a pro, and then prove it under pressure. Do those three consistently, and 2025's buyers—whether in Tokyo, Sydney, or New York—will pick you when it counts.  FAQs What should I change first if I'm overwhelmed? Start with a pre-call checklist and a 30-second mantra—both are fast and compounding. How formal should I dress in Japan vs. the US? Japan skews more formal; the US tolerates smart-casual—match the client's culture and the meeting's stakes. How do I track mindset ROI? Tag calls where you used the routine; compare conversion rate and cycle time vs. prior month. Next steps for leaders/executives Install objection maps and first-impression kits across the team. Run weekly deal reviews focused on clarity, not theatre. Standardise pilot templates and two-line status updates. Author credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).  Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

"Come as you are works in Japan when leaders are also willing to read the air and meet people where they are". "Japan isn't as risk-averse as people think; it is uncertainty avoidance and consensus norms like nemawashi and ringi-sho that slow decisions". "In Japan, numbers are universal, but how people feel about those numbers is where real leadership begins". "For foreign leaders, kindness, patience, and genuine curiosity are far more powerful than charisma or title". "Women leaders who embrace their own style, instead of copying male role models, can quietly transform Japanese workplaces".   Joanne Lin is Senior Director, APAC, for Deckers Brands, the American company behind UGG, HOKA, and Teva. Born in Taiwan and raised in Canada, she later completed her MBA at Boston University and began her career in Boston, working in a trading company and then at Merrill Lynch Investment Company. In 2000, she moved to Japan for family reasons and has since built a 25-year leadership career in this complex market. In Japan, Joanne first held senior finance roles, including Head of Finance for Reebok Japan and CFO for Aegis Media, where she worked on mergers and acquisitions. She joined Deckers over thirteen years ago as CFO for Japan and was later asked to step in as interim Country Manager for Deckers Japan. Today she is back in an APAC-wide role, responsible for finance and strategy across 15 markets, including Japan, China, South Korea, Hong Kong, Australia and New Zealand. Her remit covers subsidiaries and distributor markets alike, requiring constant adaptation across cultures. Throughout her journey, Joanne has learned to reconcile a direct, North American style with Japan's more implicit, consensus-driven culture. Often mistaken for Japanese because of her appearance, she calls herself the "invisible gaijin", using that ambiguity to observe carefully, read body language, and bridge cultural expectations. Her leadership story is one of resilience, curiosity, and the quiet confidence to lead as herself in a country that often expects conformity. Joanne Lin's leadership journey began far from Japan. Born in Taiwan and raised in Toronto, she grew up immersed in North American directness, meritocracy, and straight-talking feedback. After completing an MBA at Boston University, she started her career in Boston, first at a trading company and then at Merrill Lynch Investment Company, building a strong foundation in finance. Numbers, ratios, and cash flows were her native business language long before she ever heard the phrase kūki o yomu — "reading the air" — in Japan. In 2000, she moved to Japan for family reasons, expecting to build a career but not realising how deeply the culture would challenge her assumptions about leadership. She entered the corporate world here without Japanese language skills and without local experience. Physically, many colleagues assumed she was Japanese, or at least of Japanese descent, and treated her accordingly. She jokes that she became an "invisible gaijin": expected to understand unspoken rules despite never having grown up with them. Early on, she discovered that in Japan, silence often speaks louder than words. Concepts akin to nemawashi — the quiet groundwork of building consensus before meetings — and the unspoken pressure to align with the group meant that decisions rarely came from a single, charismatic leader. Instead, she had to watch faces, posture and micro-reactions around the table. While she came from an environment where people said "yes" or "no" clearly, in Japan phrases like "I'll think about it" could mean "no" 80% of the time. Learning to interpret these signals became as important as reading the P&L. Her career advanced steadily through senior finance roles: Head of Finance for Reebok Japan, CFO for Aegis Media leading M&A, and later CFO for Deckers Japan. Over thirteen years at Deckers, she helped steer the growth of brands such as UGG and the fast-rising performance brand HOKA in one of the world's most competitive footwear markets. Eventually, she was asked to serve as interim Country Manager for Deckers Japan, an opportunity that tested her ability to go beyond numbers and lead entire functions including sales, marketing, HR and retail. Joanne's leadership philosophy is grounded in being genuine and transparent. She believes in explaining the "why" behind decisions, giving context, and aligning people rather than simply seeking agreement. She spends time helping non-finance colleagues understand what gross margin, discounts and operating income mean in practical terms, translating finance into everyday language rather than using it as a gatekeeping tool. Engagement surveys, where Japan often scores modestly compared with global benchmarks, have been a recurring theme in her work. Rather than blaming culture, she looks at how questions are worded, how norms shape responses, and then uses those insights to design practical remedies — from "lunch and learn" sessions to cross-functional gatherings and new-joiner lunches with senior leaders. As a woman leader, Joanne has wrestled with impostor syndrome yet chosen to step forward anyway. She sees many high-potential women in Japan holding back, waiting to be "perfect" before raising their hand. Her message to them is clear: trust yourself, recognise your natural strengths in communication and empathy, and accept that no leader — male or female — is ever fully ready. In the end, her story is about blending global experience with local nuance, leading with kindness and clarity, and proving that one can honour Japanese culture while still bringing a distinct, authentic leadership style to the table. Q&A Summary What makes leadership in Japan unique? For Joanne, leadership in Japan is defined by what is not said. The real meeting often happens before and after the official meeting, through nemawashi, where stakeholders quietly shape outcomes. In the room, kūki o yomu — reading the air — is critical: leaders must observe body language, side glances and subtle hesitations to interpret what people truly think. Formal tools like ringi-sho workflows, built on stamped approvals and consensus, reinforce a collective approach to decision-making. Japanese employees often assume the leader should already know their needs without them having to say it. That expectation of intuitive understanding, combined with a strong norm of harmony, makes empathetic listening and patience indispensable leadership skills. Why do global executives struggle? Global executives often arrive with a Western template: clear targets, rapid decisions, direct feedback. In Japan, that can clash with a culture that prizes stability, seniority and group consensus. Leaders may misinterpret indirect communication as indecisiveness or lack of ambition, when in fact people are carefully weighing the impact on the group. Engagement surveys then show Japan at the bottom of global rankings, and headquarters misreads this as disengagement, rather than a reflection of conservative scoring norms. Many foreign leaders also underestimate how much time must be invested in trust-building, one-on-one conversations, and slow-burn relationship work before people feel safe to share ideas or challenge the status quo. Is Japan truly risk-averse? Joanne sees Japan as more uncertainty-avoidant than risk-averse in the pure financial sense. As a finance professional, she knows that commercial risk can be quantified — through scenarios, ratios and forecasts. But in Japan, the social and reputational risks loom equally large: who will be blamed if this fails, what will it do to group harmony, how will customers react? These uncertainty factors slow decisions more than the numbers themselves. Leaders who introduce tools like decision intelligence platforms, scenario simulation or even digital twins of supply chains can help Japanese teams see risk in a structured way, reducing the emotional fear around uncertainty and making experimentation feel safer. What leadership style actually works? The style that works for Joanne is grounded in transparency, modesty and consistency. She leads by example, explaining not only what must be done, but why, and what it means for individuals and teams. She tries to give her people "airtime", resisting the urge — common to many finance leaders — to jump straight to the solution. In practice, that means listening to ideas without immediate judgement, thanking people publicly for their input, and celebrating small wins as much as big milestones. She maintains high standards but increasingly recognises that not everyone should be held to the same work rhythm she sets for herself. Alignment, not forced agreement, is the goal: people may disagree but still commit to the path once they feel heard. How can technology help? Technology, in Joanne's world, is not just about efficiency; it is a bridge between data and human behaviour. Advanced analytics, dashboards and decision-support tools can make trade-offs between margin, volume and investment more tangible for non-finance teams. AI-driven text analysis of engagement comments can surface themes that traditional surveys miss, helping leaders understand sentiment behind Japan's modest scoring patterns. Scenario modelling and digital twins of operations can turn abstract risks into concrete options, making it easier for consensus-driven teams to move forward. At its best, technology supports nemawashi by giving everyone a shared, data-informed picture, rather than replacing dialogue. Does language proficiency matter? Joanne arrived in Japan with no Japanese language ability and was forced to become an intense observer of body language and context. That experience convinced her that leadership is possible without fluency — but far more sustainable with it. Learning Japanese shows respect, reduces distance, and makes informal conversations and humour possible. Even basic proficiency helps leaders understand nuance in ringi documents, hallway chats, and customer feedback. She encourages foreign leaders to invest in language learning not as a checkbox, but as a signal of commitment to the market and to their teams. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? Her core lesson is simple yet demanding: be kind, be open, and be yourself. Leaders should stop expecting perfection from themselves and from others, especially in a country where external shocks like currency swings, tariffs and pandemics can derail even the best-laid plans. Instead, they should focus on doing their best, communicating clearly, and treating people with respect. For women leaders especially, Joanne's message is to step forward even when self-doubt whispers otherwise — to recognise that their strengths in empathy, communication and cultural sensitivity are not "soft" add-ons but central to effective leadership in Japan. In the long run, success here is less about heroics and more about steady, human-centred leadership that people genuinely want to follow. Timecoded Summary [00:00] The conversation opens with an introduction to Deckers Brands, the American company headquartered in Santa Barbara and best known in Japan for UGG, HOKA and Teva. Joanne explains that Deckers historically functions as a holding-style company, acquiring and growing footwear brands, and that Japan is a key market where three major brands are active. She outlines her current role as Senior Director, APAC, overseeing finance and strategy across 15 countries, including both subsidiaries and distributor markets. [05:20] Joanne traces her career arc: Taiwanese by birth, raised in Canada, MBA from Boston University, then finance roles in Boston with a trading company and Merrill Lynch Investment Company. In 2000 she relocates to Japan for family reasons, later becoming Head of Finance for Reebok Japan and CFO for Aegis Media, working on M&A. She joins Deckers over thirteen years ago as CFO for Japan and eventually steps into an interim Country Manager role, before returning to a wider APAC mandate based in Japan. [12:45] The discussion shifts to cultural adjustment. Because she "looks Japanese", colleagues initially assume she understands Japanese norms. She describes becoming an "invisible gaijin", held to local expectations without having grown up here. She learns to read the air, focusing on facial expressions, body language and context. Phrases like "I'll consider it" often conceal a "no", and she gradually becomes adept at interpreting such indirect communication. Her direct North American instincts must be tempered by Japanese expectations for restraint and harmony. [19:30] Finance and human reactions to numbers come into focus. Joanne notes that while sales, gross margin and SG&A appear objective, different functions interpret them in varied ways: finance may celebrate high margins while sales may worry they are under-investing. She stresses the importance of explaining financial concepts in simple terms, almost as if speaking to a 10-year-old, so that everyone can understand consequences. Her temporary shift from CFO to GM broadens her empathy for non-finance views and deepens her appreciation for cross-functional tension. [26:10] Attention turns to team engagement and communication. Japan's engagement survey scores routinely trail global averages, a pattern she attributes partly to cultural modesty and translation issues. Instead of accepting low scores as fate, she focuses on post-survey action: leaders are asked to talk openly with teams, understand expectations, and co-create remedies. Concrete initiatives such as "lunch and learn" sessions and new-joiner lunches with directors help break silos, humanise leadership and create informal nemawashi-like spaces where people can ask questions and share concerns. [33:40] Joanne discusses culture-building under the umbrella of Deckers' "Come as you are" value. She supports self-expression — even store staff in gender-fluid fashion — as long as it's tasteful and customer-appropriate. Her own leadership style is to be genuine, transparent and open about vulnerabilities. She balances the efficiency of top-down directives with the long-term benefits of participation: while consensus-building and alignment take time, they reduce turnover, re-training costs and disengagement. [40:15] Gender and leadership come into sharper focus. Joanne recounts her own bouts of impostor syndrome and the temptation, earlier in her career, to doubt her readiness for bigger roles. She notes that many women hesitate to raise their hands until they feel almost 100% qualified, while men may step up with far less. She encourages aspiring women leaders to recognise their strengths in empathy and nuanced communication, to "give it a try" even when not fully confident, and to view setbacks as learning rather than final verdicts. [47:30] The interview closes with advice for foreign leaders coming to Japan. Joanne emphasises being open, respectful and kind — to oneself and to others. She urges leaders to accept that Japan's deep-rooted culture will not change in a short posting, and that success depends on adapting rather than trying to remodel the country. Learning Japanese, even imperfectly, is both a sign of respect and a practical tool for building trust. Ultimately, she argues, effective leadership in Japan is about balancing data and humanity, global standards and local nuance, ambition and empathy. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.

Join Professor Peter Nash from the Griffith University in Brisbane, and Professor Filip Rob, the Department of head of the Dermatovenereology at the Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, University Hospital Bulovka, Prague, Czech Republic, as they discuss his recent paper ‘Efficacy, safety, and drug survival during the first year of biologic therapy for psoriasis in elderly versus younger patients'.

When markets are kind, anyone can look like a genius. The test arrives when conditions turn—your systems, skills, and character decide what happens next.  What are the five drivers every leader must master? The five drivers are: Self Direction, People Skills, Process Skills, Communication, and Accountability. Mastering all five creates resilient performance across cycles. In boom times (think pre-pandemic luxury hotels in Japan) tailwinds mask weak leadership; in shocks (closed borders, supply chain crunches) only strong drivers keep teams delivering. As of 2025, executives in multinationals, SMEs, and startups alike need a balanced "stack": vision and values (Self Direction), talent and trust (People), systems and analytics (Process), clear messaging and questions (Communication), and personal ownership (Accountability). If one leg is shaky, the whole table wobbles. Do now: Score yourself 1–5 on each driver; identify your lowest two and set 30-day improvement actions.  Mini-summary: Five drivers form a complete system; strength in one can't compensate for failure in another. How does Self Direction separate steady leaders from "lucky" ones? Self-directed leaders set vision, goals, and culture—and adjust fast when reality bites. Great conditions or an inherited A-team help, but hope isn't a strategy. As markets shift in APAC, the US, or Europe, leaders with grounded values and a flexible ego change course quickly; rigid, oversized egos drive firms off cliffs faster. The calibration problem is real: we need enough ego to lead, not so much that we ignore evidence. In practice that means owner-dated goals, visible trade-offs, and a willingness to reverse a decision when facts change. Do now: Write a one-page "leader operating system": purpose, top 3 goals, non-negotiable values, and the conditions that trigger a pivot.  Mini-summary: Direction + adaptability beats bravado; values anchor the pivot, not the vanity. Why are People Skills the new performance engine? Complex work killed the "hero leader"; today's results flow from psychologically safe, capability-building teams.Whether you run manufacturing in Aichi, B2B SaaS in Seattle, or retail in Sydney, you need the right people on the bus, in the right seats. Trust is the currency; without it, there is no team—only compliant individuals. Servant leadership isn't slogans; it's practical: career conversations, strengths-based job fit, and coaching cadences. Climbing over bodies might have worked in 1995; in 2025 it destroys engagement, innovation, and retention. Do now: Map your team on fit vs. aspiration. Realign one role this fortnight and schedule two growth conversations per week for the next month.  Mini-summary: Build safety, match talent to roles, and coach growth; teams create the compounding returns, not lone heroes. What Process Skills keep quality high without killing initiative? Well-designed systems prevent good people from failing; poor processes turn stars into "low performers." Leaders must separate skill gaps from system flaws. Mis-fit is common—asking a big-picture creative to live in spreadsheets, or a detail maven to blue-sky strategy all day. Across sectors, involve people in improving the workflow; people support a world they help create. And yes, even "Driver" personalities must wear an Analytical hat for the numbers that matter: current, correct, relevant. Toyota's jidoka lesson applies broadly: stop the line when a defect appears, then fix root causes. Do now: Run a 60-minute process review: map steps, assign owners, check inputs/outputs, and identify one automation or simplification per step.  Mini-summary: Design beats heroics; match roles to wiring, make data accurate, improve the system with the people who run it. How should leaders communicate to create alignment that sticks? Great leaders talk less, listen more, and ask sharper questions—then verify that messages cascade cleanly.Communication isn't a TED Talk; it's a discipline. Listen for what's not said, surface hidden risks, and test understanding down the line. In Japan, nemawashi-style groundwork builds alignment before meetings; in the US/EU, crisp owner-dated action registers keep pace high without rework. In regulated fields (finance, healthcare, aerospace), clarity reduces audit friction; in creative and GTM teams, it accelerates experiments. Do now: Install a weekly "message audit": sample three layers (manager, IC, cross-function) and ask them to restate priorities, risks, and decisions in their own words.  Mini-summary: Listen deeply, question precisely, and ensure the message survives the org chart; alignment is measured at the edges. Where does Accountability start—and how do you make it contagious? Accountability starts at the top: the buck stops with the leader, without excuses—and then cascades through coaching and controls. As of 2025, boards and regulators demand both outcomes and evidence. Strong leaders admit errors quickly, fix them publicly, and maintain systems that track results and compliance. Accountability isn't blame; it's ownership plus support: clear goals, training, checkpoints, and consequences. In startups, this prevents "move fast and break the law"; in enterprises, it fights bureaucratic drift. Do now: Publish a one-page scoreboard each Monday (KPIs, leading indicators, risks) and hold a 15-minute review where owners report facts, not stories.  Mini-summary: Model ownership, build coaching and monitoring into the cadence, and make evidence a habit—not a surprise inspection. How do you integrate the five drivers across markets and company types? Balance is contextual: tighten controls in high-risk/low-competency zones; grant autonomy in low-risk/high-competency zones. Multinationals can borrow playbooks (RACI, stage gates), but SMEs need lightweight equivalents to preserve speed. Startups should resist the "super-doer" trap by delegating outcomes early; listed firms should fight analysis paralysis by protecting experiments inside guardrails. Across Japan, the US, and Europe, leaders who pair people development with process discipline outperform through cycles because capability compounds while compliance holds. Do now: Build a "risk × competency" grid for your top workflows and adjust oversight accordingly within 48 hours. Review monthly as skills rise.  Mini-summary: Tune people and process to context; move oversight with risk and capability, not with habit. Conclusion: strength in all five, not perfection in one Leadership success is engineered, not gifted by luck. When conditions turn, Self Direction provides the compass, People Skills provide power, Process Skills provide traction, Communication provides cohesion, and Accountability provides grip. Work the system, in that order, and your organisation will keep moving—legally, safely, profitably—even when the weather's foul.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).

Why "top-down" selling backfires in Japan's big companies — and what to do instead.  Is meeting the President in Japan a guaranteed win? No — unless the President is also the owner (the classic wan-man shachō), your "coup" meeting rarely converts directly. In listed enterprises and large corporates, executive authority is diffused by consensus-driven processes. Even after a warm conversation and a visible "yes," the purchase decision typically moves into a bottom-up vetting cycle that your initial sponsor doesn't personally shepherd. In contrast, smaller firms or founder-led groups may decide quickly, much like private U.S. SMEs or European Mittelstand. The trap is assuming a Western "economic buyer" model maps 1:1 to Japan's governance norms post-Abenomics (2013–2020) and as of 2025. Treat the Presidential meeting as a door-opener, not a done deal.  Do now: Reframe the "Prez" as an access node; design your plan for everything that happens after the elevator ride down. What actually happens after the big meeting? The President typically delegates "look into this" to a direct report, and your proposal enters an internal review pipeline. A junior staffer performs due diligence, then a section head reviews and either quietly stops the process or passes it up. If momentum builds, the division head circulates a ringi-sho (稟議書) with attached materials for cross-functional stamps (hanko). Each division repeats its own research — Finance, HR, Operations — before any re-contact with you. Compared with U.S. enterprise sales where a single VP can overrule, Japan's system prioritises organisational risk-sharing and face-saving. Expect additional nemawashi (root-binding) conversations you won't see. Every change to scope, pricing, or timing restarts the paper trail.  Do now: Ask early who will run due diligence, which divisions must stamp, and what the ringi packet must include. Why do direct reports sometimes ignore an explicit instruction? Because "check this out" isn't "make this happen" — the President's role usually ends at referral, not enforcement. In large firms (think Toyota-scale keiretsu or Rakuten-class digital groups), middle management owns process integrity. A public "order" in front of you may still be interpreted as permission to evaluate, not a mandate to buy. In the U.S., sellers might push back on "we'll think about it"; in Japan, they really do need to think — collectively. That's not stonewalling; it's governance. The deal can die silently at any stage if the section head sees mis-fit, poor timing (e.g., fiscal year planning in March), or brand risk. Your best lever is equipping mid-levels with a de-risked, spec-tight story that they can defend internally.  Do now: Translate the top-level promise into mid-level proof: ROI math, references in Japan, security/PII notes, and implementation flow. How long does the ringi cycle take, and what slows it down? Longer than Western sellers expect — and it resets with every material change. The ringi-sho builds consensus by circulating for stamps across affected divisions. Each unit repeats checks (vendor risk, budget fit, labour impact under Japan's 2023 work-style reforms, data residency for APAC, etc.). If you tweak scope or price, a fresh ringi often triggers. For comparison, an American SaaS deal might hit Legal once; in Japan, Legal, Information Systems, and HR may all run independent passes. Multi-site rollouts (retail, manufacturing) compound complexity versus single-site pilots. Sellers who rush or "pressure close" risk face loss among reviewers — a reputational cost that kills not just this deal but your next.  Do now: Time-box your asks, pre-bundle likely objections, and avoid last-minute scope surprises that force a re-circulation. How should you re-engineer your enterprise sales motion for Japan? Build a two-track play: executive alignment for vision + operator enablement for approvals. Track A (C-suite): anchor on strategy, external credibility (Japan references, security attestations), and clear business impact by quarter. Track B (middle-down): deliver a ringi-ready pack — problem framing, options matrix, risk mitigations, rollout plan, KPI table (adoption, uptime targets, ROI), and case miniatures from sectors like automotive, retail, and banking. Compared with Europe (works councils) or the U.S. (deal desk), Japan's reviewer set is broader; so your artefacts must be modular and stamp-friendly. Pro tip: craft a Japanese one-pager that a 25-year-old staffer can champion without fear.  Do now: Produce a bilingual ringi kit: exec summary, cost sheet, security appendix, phased pilot plan, and internal FAQ. What if the buyer is a founder-led or SME "one-man President"? Move fast — wan-man shachō environments can green-light on the spot, but still respect downstream implementers. Owner-operators (common in construction, logistics, specialised manufacturers) align closer to U.S. founder-CEO norms: if they decide, it happens. However, success still hinges on managers who must live with the tool or training. Win speed without burning adoption by pre-agreeing a post-signature cadence: kickoff, hands-on enablement, check-ins. Contrast: in multinationals and listed firms, assume consensus first, speed second. Use segmented pipelines and forecasting models for each archetype to avoid "phantom commits" based on executive enthusiasm alone.  Do now: Qualify leadership style early; if it's founder-led, offer rapid pilot + success plan; if it's listed, budget for consensus cycles. Quick internal checklist for a ringi-ready packet Executive one-pager (JP/EN) with outcome metrics and timeline Options matrix (do nothing vs. competitor vs. your solution) Security & compliance appendix (data flows, access, audit) Costing & ROI sheet (12–36 months, with sensitivity) Implementation playbook (roles, training, support SLAs) Reference mini-cases from Japan/APAC peers Do now: Attach this checklist to every enterprise proposal in Japan.  Conclusion: Stop "selling the Prez"; start enabling the process In Japan's large corporates, the President opens a door; the organisation makes the decision. Treat the executive meeting as your starting pistol, not the finish line. Win by equipping mid-levels to say "yes" safely, designing for ringicadence, and pacing your asks. In founder-led firms, move decisively — with respect for the managers who must land the change. That's how you convert enthusiasm into signed, implemented value in Japan, as of 2025.  FAQs Is aggressive closing effective in Japan? No. Pushy tactics create face risk for reviewers and can stall the ringi process; equip, don't pressure.  Do all Japanese companies work this way? No. Founder-led SMEs can decide top-down; listed and multinational firms lean consensus-first.  What documents speed approval? A bilingual, ringi-ready packet: exec summary, ROI, security, rollout, and references.  Next steps for leaders/executives Map the approval path (divisions, stamps, timelines). Build a standard ringi pack and local references. Train your team on Japan-specific cadence and language. Segment forecasts by "founder-led" vs. "listed corporate."  Author credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan.

Deliver the win, then ring the bell. Make small mistakes fast; make big learnings faster. Think global, act local — but don't go native. Do the nemawashi before the meeting, not during it. Your salary is earned in the stores: go to the gemba. A 28-year Domino's veteran, Martin Steenks began at 16 as a delivery expert in the Netherlands. He rose to store manager, multi-unit supervisor, then franchisee, building his operation to eight stores by 2019. After selling his stores, he became Head of Operations for Domino's Netherlands, then CEO of Domino's Taiwan in 2021, and subsequently CEO of Domino's Japan. Previously he was Chief Orchestrator in Japan, focusing on operational excellence, culture, and scalable execution in one of Domino's most exacting service markets. He is known for hands-on store work, cross-training, "Friday F-Up" learning rituals, the Grow & Prosper bell for micro-wins, and quarterly "Go Gemba" days that connect HQ functions with frontline realities.  Martin Steenks' leadership arc runs from a three-minute job interview at 16 to orchestrating Domino's Japan — one of the brand's most demanding markets for service quality. The connective tissue is execution discipline: he has run stores, supervised regions, built and exited an eight-store franchise, owned national operations, and led two country P&Ls. That breadth gives him pragmatic empathy for franchisees and HQ alike, which he leverages to align incentives, simplify operations, and insist that every back-office salary is ultimately "earned in the stores." Japan sharpened his leadership. Coming from low-context, fast-moving Dutch and Australian business styles into high-context Japan, he learned that meetings signalling agreement can still stall without prior nemawashi — the groundwork with middle management and other stakeholders. He now invests in pre-alignment, translating intent into culturally legible action: fewer big-room debates, more quiet lobbying, more ringi-sho style consensus building for irreversible decisions, and a clear bias to test-and-learn for reversible ones. Rather than trying to "change the culture," he adjusted himself — becoming more patient while preserving speed by separating decision types and sequencing alignment before action. His operating system is human and tangible. He set a weekly rhythm of learning with a "Friday F-Up" session, where leaders share mistakes and what was learned — a radical move in a high uncertainty-avoidance culture. He celebrates micro-wins with the Grow & Prosper bell to make progress visible, sustaining morale during long transformations. He bridged HQ–store gaps with Go Gemba: each quarter, every function works a store shift; IT discovers why a workflow fails at the point of sale, marketing sees campaign friction at Friday night peak, finance hears cost-to-serve realities. He personally worked in stores four to five days a month, especially during crunch periods like Christmas, leading by example and rebuilding trust through competence. Marketing localisation is equally pragmatic. Deep discounting can signal poor quality to Japanese consumers; "customer appreciation weeks" preserve value perception while rewarding loyalty. Community building is pushed to the store level — managers engage local clubs and schools to turn footfall into fandom. Cross-training makes delivery experts confident product explainers at the door, restoring a human touch in a world where >90% of orders arrive online. Ultimately, Steenks' playbook blended cultural fluency with decision intelligence. He aligned stakeholders through nemawashi, codified learning rituals, chose language and campaigns that respected local signals, and keeps strategy tethered to the edge where pizzas are made, boxed, and delivered hot. The title "Chief Orchestrator" wasn't just whimsy; in a business of many specialists, he conducted tempo, harmony, and timing — the difference between noise and music.  What makes leadership in Japan unique? Japan's high service standards and high-context communication demand leaders who are both exacting and empathetic. Success depends on pre-work: nemawashi with middle managers, thoughtful ringi-sho style consensus for high-impact choices, and visible demonstrations of respect for the frontline. Uniforms (like Domino's iconic race jacket for store managers) and rituals create shared identity that motivates in a group-oriented culture. Why do global executives struggle? Low-context leaders often misread meeting "yeses" as commitment. Without groundwork, nothing moves. Impatience backfires in high uncertainty-avoidance environments; public criticism shuts people down. Leaders must separate reversible from irreversible decisions, secure alignment offline, and then move decisively. They should also avoid copy-pasting global marketing: in Japan, steep discounts can be read as "lower quality," eroding trust. Is Japan truly risk-averse? Japan is less risk-loving than many markets, but teams will take smart risks when safety and learning are explicit. Stanks normalises small, fast experiments, celebrates micro-wins, and protects people when bets misfire. This reframes risk as controlled uncertainty with upside — a shift from avoidance to improvement. What leadership style actually works? Lead from the front and the shop floor. Work stores every month. Tie HQ metrics to store impact. Use rituals — Friday F-Up, the Grow & Prosper bell — to institutionalise learning and momentum. Celebrate teams more than individuals, and praise privately when cultural norms warrant it. Think global, act local, but don't "go native": retain an outsider's clarity about pace and standards. How can technology help? Digital tools amplify decision intelligence when paired with gemba reality. Store-level dashboards, route optimisation, and digital twins of peak-hour operations can test scenarios before rollouts; telemetry from ovens, makelines, and delivery routes can reveal bottlenecks that nemawashi then resolves across functions. Tech should reduce operational complexity, not add it. Does language proficiency matter? Fluency helps, but intent matters more. Demonstrating effort — basic greetings, store-floor Japanese, and culturally aware email etiquette — earns trust. Tools that translate bidirectionally unlock participation, but leaders still need to read context and invest time with the middle layer. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? Do the cultural homework, orchestrate alignment before action, and keep your hands in the dough — literally. When people see you respect their craft, protect their learning, and tie strategy to execution, they'll go all-in. Timecoded Summary [00:00] Origin story: hired at 16 as a delivery expert in the Netherlands; stayed through school; first — and only — job interview; early leadership as store manager, then multi-unit supervisor. [05:20] Entrepreneurship chapter: buys a struggling store; builds to eight locations with his wife's support; sells in 2019 to become Head of Operations for the Netherlands, trading entrepreneurial freedom for strategic impact. [12:45] Asia leadership: becomes CEO Taiwan in 2021, then moves to Japan; discovers that despite common Domino's DNA, markets differ; Japan's service bar is the highest. [18:10] Cultural recalibration: early meetings show apparent agreement but slow follow-through; learns nemawashi and middle-layer alignment; patience becomes a leadership muscle; adopts "Chief Orchestrator" title to reflect cross-functional reality. [24:00] Store-first operating system: cross-training (makeline ↔ delivery ↔ service); >90% of orders online makes the delivery interaction critical; community outreach by store managers; hands-on leadership with 4–5 store days per month and peak-period shifts. [31:30] Learning rituals: Friday F-Up meeting reframes failure as fuel; Grow & Prosper bell celebrates micro-wins to sustain momentum; public recognition calibrated to cultural comfort; Domino's manager jacket signals identity and pride in Japan. [38:05] Marketing localisation: avoid pure discounting (quality signal risk); position as "customer appreciation"; test premium, limited campaigns; keep operations simple for peak. [43:20] Bridging HQ and field: quarterly Go Gemba embeds IT/Finance/HR/Marketing in stores; internal surveys (anonymous) surface issues; visible follow-through flips scepticism to trust. [49:40] Leadership philosophy: lead by example, protect experimenters, separate reversible vs irreversible decisions, and use decision intelligence (telemetry, digital twins) to derisk change while moving faster. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan. 

Newly promoted and still stuck in "super-doer" mode? Here's how to rebalance control, culture, and delegation so the whole team scales—safely and fast.  Why do new managers struggle when they're promoted from "star doer" to "leader"? Because your brain stays in production mode while your job has shifted to people, culture, and systems. After promotion, you're accountable not only for your own KPIs but for the entire team's outcomes. It's tempting to cling to tasks you control—dashboards, sequencing, reporting—because they're tangible and quick wins. But 2025 leadership in Japan, Australia, the US, and Europe demands more: setting strategy, articulating vision, and developing capability. The pivot is psychological—move from "I produce" to "I enable production," or you'll cap growth and burn out. Do now: List your top five "leader-only" responsibilities and five tasks to delegate this week; schedule handovers with owners and dates.  Mini-summary: New leaders fail by over-doing; succeed by re-wiring attention from personal output to team capability. What's the practical difference between managing processes and leading people? Managers ensure things are done right; leaders ensure we're doing the right things—and growing people as we go.Processes secure quality, timeliness, budget discipline, and compliance. Leadership adds direction: strategy, culture, talent development, and context setting. Across sectors—manufacturing in Aichi, B2B SaaS in Seattle, retail in Sydney—over-indexing on process alone turns humans into "system attachments," stifling initiative and innovation. Over-indexing on people without controls risks safety, regulatory breaches, and inconsistent delivery. The art is dynamic dosage: tighten or loosen controls as competency, risk, and stakes shift. Do now: For each workflow, rate "risk" and "competency." High risk/low competency → tighter checks; low risk/high competency → more autonomy.  Mini-summary: Processes protect, people propel; leaders tune both based on risk and capability. How much control is "just enough" without killing initiative or risking compliance? Use the guardrail test: prevent safety/compliance violations while leaving room for stretch, accountability, and growth. Post-pandemic supply chains, ESG scrutiny, and Japan's regulator expectations mean leaders can't "set and forget." Too few checks invite fines—or jail time for accountable officers; too many checks create Theory X micromanagement that freezes learning. Borrow from Toyota's jidoka spirit: stop the line when risk spikes, but otherwise let teams problem-solve. In SMEs and startups, standardise the critical few controls (safety, security, data) and keep the rest principle-based to preserve speed. Do now: Write a one-page "controls charter" listing non-negotiables (safety, compliance) and "managed freedoms" (experiments, pilots, scope to improve).  Mini-summary: Guardrails first, freedom second—enough control to stay legal and safe, enough autonomy to develop people. How do I stop doing my team's work and start scaling through delegation? Delegate outcomes, not chores—and accept short-term pain for long-term scale. Many first-time managers keep their player tasks because they distrust others or fear being accountable for mistakes. That works for a quarter, not a year. By FY2026, targets rise while your personal capacity doesn't. Multinationals from Rakuten to Siemens train leaders to assign the "what" and "why," agree on milestones and quality criteria, then coach on the "how." Expect a temporary dip as skills climb; measure trajectory, not perfection. Do now: Pick two tasks you still hoard. Define success, constraints, and checkpoints; delegate by Friday, then coach at the first checkpoint.  Mini-summary: Let go to grow; specify outcomes and coach to capability. How can I balance micro-management and neglect in day-to-day leadership? Replace "hovering" and "hands-off" with scheduled, high-leverage follow-up. Micromanagement announces low trust; neglect announces low care. Instead, run structured check-ins: purpose, progress, problems, pivots. In regulated environments (banks, healthcare, manufacturing), confirm evidence of controls; in creative or GTM teams, probe learning, experiments, and customer signals. Across APAC, leaders who share decision frameworks (RACI/DACI; risk thresholds; escalation paths) cut rework and surprise escalations. Do now: Implement a weekly 20-minute "PPP" per direct report—Progress (facts), Problems (risks), Pivots (next choices)—with artefacts attached in advance.  Mini-summary: Neither smother nor ignore—use predictable, evidence-based check-ins to align and de-risk. When should leaders "lead from the front" versus "get out of the way"? Front-load leadership in ambiguity; step back once clarity, competence, and controls exist. In crises, new markets, or safety-critical launches, visible, directive leadership calms noise and sets pace (think: first 90 days of a turnaround or a factory start-up). As routines stabilise, flip to servant leadership: remove blockers, broker resources, and celebrate small wins. In Japan, Nemawashi-style groundwork before meetings accelerates execution; in the US and Europe, crisp owner-dated action registers keep speed without rework. The best leaders oscillate based on context, not ego. Do now: For each initiative, label its phase (Explore/Build/Run). Explore = lead hands-on; Build = co-pilot; Run = empower with audits.  Mini-summary: Lead hard in fog; empower once the road is clear and guardrails hold. Conclusion: your real job is capability, culture, and controlled freedom Great organisations don't trade people for process or vice-versa—they orchestrate both. As of 2025, the winners grow leaders who tune controls to risk, develop people faster than targets rise, and delegate outcomes with smart follow-up. Stop carrying the team on your back. Build a team that carries the work—safely, compliantly, and proudly.  Optional FAQs Is micromanagement ever right? Only for high-risk, low-competency tasks; use it briefly, with a plan to taper. What if my team is slower than me? That's normal initially; coach cadence and quality, not perfection. How do I avoid regulator trouble? Document controls, evidence checks, and incident response paths; audit monthly. What do I say to ex-peers I now manage? Reset expectations: new role, shared goals, clear decision rights, and escalation routes.  Next steps for leaders/executives Write your one-page controls charter and review it with Legal/Compliance. Convert two "player" tasks into delegated outcomes this week. Install weekly PPP check-ins with artefacts attached in advance. Map each initiative to Explore/Build/Run and adjust your involvement accordingly.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. 

If your buyer can swap you out without pain, you don't have a USP — you have a pricing problem. In crowded markets (including post-pandemic), the game is won by changing the battlefield from price to value and risk reduction for the client. This playbook reframes features into outcomes and positions your offer so a rational buyer can't treat you as interchangeable.   Why do USPs matter more than ever in 2025? Because buyers default to "safe" and "cheap" unless you prove "different" and "better". As procurement tightens across Japan, the US, and Europe, incumbent vendors and new entrants flood categories, dragging deals into discount wars. Shift the conversation from line-items to business outcomes: time saved, revenue gained, risk removed. In Japan's consensus-driven buying, precedent and social proof are de-riskers; in the US, speed and ROI proof points get you shortlisted; in Europe, compliance and sustainability signals matter. Use comparative, sector-specific language (SMB vs. enterprise, B2B vs. consumer) so your value feels native to each buyer's reality. Do now: List 3 outcomes you deliver that a competitor cannot credibly claim, and make them the first 90 seconds of every sales conversation. Summary: Lead with outcomes and risk reduction, not features or price. How do you turn features into buyer-relevant outcomes? Translate specs into "jobs done" with timestamps and dollars attached. If you "sell training," your buyer actually wants higher per-rep revenue and lower ramp time; the workshop is just the tool. Frame cause-and-effect: "As of 2025, teams using our method cut onboarding by 30–60 days," or "post-implementation, win-rates rose 8–12% in enterprise accounts." Compare across contexts: startups prize speed-to-first-value; multinationals prize uniformity at scale. Anchor with entities to boost credibility: "Aligned to Dale Carnegie's behavioural change frameworks and Fortune 500 norms." Do now: For each feature, write: "So that the buyer can ___ by ___ date, measured by ___." Then delete the feature and keep the sentence. Summary: Convert every spec into a measurable, time-bound business result. What proof calms executive risk in consensus markets like Japan? Show durable track record and mainstream precedent, not hype. Tenure ("operating since 1912"), adoption ("serving a majority of Fortune 500"), and multi-market delivery ("100+ countries") signal you're not an experiment. Executives at firms like Toyota and Rakuten want to see that others have done due diligence and achieved consistent outcomes. Present proof as risk offsets: longevity = vendor stability; blue-chip logos = quality validation; global presence = repeatability across geographies and languages. In Europe, add references to ISO-aligned processes; in the US, reference board-level impacts and revenue KPIs. Do now: Build a one-page "Risk Reducers" sheet with 5 credibility markers and a 3-line narrative for each. Summary: Package track record as risk insurance for the buyer. How do you compete on instructor quality without sounding generic? Expose the standard, the filter, and the client-side benefit. "250 hours of train-the-trainer over ~18 months" is a rigorous filter; say what it fixes: variability. Many training vendors have star-and-struggle instructors; your certification process "cures" inconsistency, delivering predictable outcomes across cohorts and locations. Tie this to executive concerns: CFOs fear wasted spend; CHROs fear uneven adoption; Sales VPs fear lost quarters. As of 2025, quantify where possible (completion rates, manager NPS, behavioural transfer at 90 days) and compare to sector benchmarks. Do now: Turn your internal QA process into a 5-step visual the buyer can explain internally. Summary: Make your quality bar tangible and link it to reduced variance in outcomes. How do you avoid the price trap in late-stage negotiations? Re-anchor total value and introduce "switching cost of downgrade." When rivals discount, show the cost of failure: extended ramp, inconsistent delivery, and lost deals. Use a simple model: (Expected Revenue Uplift + Risk Reduction Value) − (Implementation & Change Costs). Add comparative caselets: "In APAC, an SME cut churn 3 points post-programme; in North America, a SaaS enterprise lifted ASP by 6%." Create a "good–better–best" offer that scales outcomes, not just hours. Do now: Bring a 1-page value calculator to every Stage-3 meeting; make the CFO your audience. Summary: Move from hourly rate to enterprise value and downgrade risk. How do you tailor USPs for global rollout without bloating the pitch? Modularise by region, role, and sector; keep a common spine. The spine: outcomes, risk reducers, delivery quality. The modules: language and cultural localisation (Japan vs. ASEAN vs. EMEA), regulatory anchors (EU GDPR, Japan's labour reforms), and sector examples (manufacturing vs. SaaS vs. consumer). Your global network isn't trivia; it's the operational proof that content lands locally — language, idiom, and facilitation calibrated to context. Keep sections tight: 3 bullets per role (CEO, CFO, HR, Sales). Do now: Build a 9-cell USP matrix (Region × Role × Sector) with one killer proof point per cell. Summary: One message, many modules — local relevance on a global chassis. What rehearsal builds salesperson muscle memory on USPs? Daily, 10-minute role plays that start with objections. Freshness decays; script drift is real. Start with the toughest objections ("We can swap you out," "Your competitor is 20% cheaper") and practise crisp, evidence-backed responses that land in under 30 seconds. Include a checklist: outcome first, proof second, risk reducer third, price last. Record, score, and iterate. By week two, rotate markets (Japan vs. US) and sectors to keep reps adaptive. Do now: Add a morning "USP stand-up": 2 reps, 2 objections, 2 minutes each, every day. Summary: Reps don't rise to your USPs — they fall to their practice. Conclusion Pricing fights are the path to oblivion. Position with outcomes, prove with precedent, operationalise with quality, regionalise with intent, and practise until it's muscle memory. That's how you make "different and better" undeniable — and un-swappable.  FAQs What's the fastest way to sharpen a dull USP? Start with outcomes and risk, cut features, and add one killer proof point per market. Then rehearse daily. How many USPs should we show? Three is plenty: one outcome, one risk reducer, one delivery advantage — tailored by role and region. What if a rival undercuts price by 20%? Re-anchor to enterprise value and switching-cost of downgrade; offer modular "good–better–best." Quick actions for leaders Commission a 1-page "Risk Reducers" sheet with proof. Ship a value calculator for CFO-friendly re-anchoring. Launch a daily "USP stand-up" with objection drills. Author Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programmes, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー).

Feeling busier and more distracted than last year? You're not imagining it—and you're not powerless. This guide turns a simple "peg" memory method into a fast, executive-friendly workflow you can use on the spot. Why do we forget more at work—and what actually helps right now? We forget because working memory is tiny and modern work shreds attention; the fix is to externalise what you can and anchor what you can't. As channels multiply—email, LinkedIn, WhatsApp, Line, Telegram—messages blur and retrieval costs explode. First, move details out of your head and into calendars, task apps, and checklists. Second, when you must recall live (presentations, Q&A, pitches), use a method that forces order on demand. That's where "peg numbers + peg words + peg pictures" wins: it's fast, portable, and doesn't depend on a screen. Do now: Decide which meetings require live recall versus notes-on-desk. Use tools for storage; use pegs for performance.  What is the Peg Method—and why does it work under pressure? The Peg Method gives you nine permanent "hooks" (1–9) that never change; you hang today's items on those hooks using vivid mini-scenes. Consistency is the trick. When the pegs stay fixed, recall becomes automatic: say the peg, see the picture, retrieve the item—in order. This scales from shopping lists to leadership talking points, risk registers, and sales objections during a live demo. Executives like it because it's device-free, language-agnostic, and works whether you're in Tokyo, Sydney, or Seattle. Do now: Lock your baseline pegs today so they never change: 1 = Run, 2 = Zoo, 3 = Tree, 4 = Door, 5 = Hive, 6 = Sick, 7 = Heaven, 8 = Gate, 9 = Wine.  How do I build pictures that "stick" in seconds? Use A-C-M-E: Action, Colour, Me, Exaggeration—three-second scenes beat perfect ones. Give each peg-scene movement (Action), crank the saturation (Colour), put yourself in the frame (Me), and overdo scale or drama (Exaggeration). You don't need to "see" it like a film; a whispered line works ("Door: Johanna blocks sign-off"). Across markets, this reduces blank-outs because your brain encodes motion, salience, and self-relevance faster than abstract text. Do now: Practise with two items right now—peg #1 Run and #2 Zoo—timing yourself to three seconds per image.  Can pegs really keep a long list in order? (Worked example) Yes—because the order is baked into the numbers, you can recite forwards, backwards, or jump to any slot. Try this city sequence: Sydney, Toronto, São Paulo, Johannesburg, Seattle, London, Mumbai, Vladivostok, Kagoshima. 1 Run: sprint alongside a kangaroo (Sydney) with a starter pistol; 2 Zoo: monkeys hurl "Toronto" nameplates; 3 Tree: a palm bends under a "São Paulo" sash; 4 Door: "Johannesburg" is painted thick across a revolving door; 5 Hive: bees wear "Seattle" face masks; 6 Sick: a syringe squirts the word "London"; 7 Heaven: "Mumbai" descends pearl-white stairs; 8 Gate: a rail gate slams down with "Vladivostok"; 9 Wine: a crate stamped "Kagoshima." Do now: Recite pegs in rhythm—run, zoo, tree, door…—then replay the scenes. Test #7 or #4 out of order to prove the jump-to-slot works.  What if I'm "not visual," get confused, or blank on stage? Say the peg aloud and attach a one-line cue; keep pegs permanent; rehearse forwards and backwards. If imagery feels fuzzy, talk it: "Tree: São Paulo sash." The rhyme is your safety rail. Confusion usually comes from changing pegs—don't. Under pressure, we default to habits; two short reps (forward/back) create enough redundancy to survive a curve-ball question. If lists exceed nine, chunk them (1–9, 10–18) or create a second peg set for a different category (e.g., "Client Risks"). Do now: Lock your 1–9; rehearse your next briefing once forward, once backward, standing up to simulate pressure.  How do I integrate pegs with my 2025 workflow without more cognitive load? Use a two-lane system: tools for storage and pegs for performance; tag owners and dates inside the images to encode accountability. Calendars, CRMs, and project trackers still carry due dates, attachments, and threads. Pegs handle what you must say from memory: topline metrics, names, objections, decisions. For leadership teams across APAC, EU, and North America, this reduces meeting drag and hedges against tech hiccups. Pro tip: weave critical metadata into the scene ("Door: Sarah blocks approval until Friday 17:00"). Do now: Pick one recurring meeting and move its opening five points to pegs; keep everything else in your agenda doc.  Conclusion: design around your brain, don't fight it Your brain isn't failing—you're asking it to juggle too much in noisy environments. Externalise the bulk; anchor the rest with nine permanent pegs and A-C-M-E pictures. In a week, the "snap-back" effect appears: you say the peg, the scene plays, and the item drops into place—without the stress. Do now: Lock pegs 1–9, run the five-minute drill today, and use pegs for your very next high-stakes conversation.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan. 

How to reshape culture in Japan without breaking what already works.  What is the first question leaders should ask when inheriting a Japanese workplace? Start by asking better questions, not hunting faster answers. Before imposing a global "fix," map what already works in the Japan business and why. In post-pandemic 2025, multinationals from Toyota to Rakuten show that culture is a system of trade-offs—language, seniority, risk appetite, client expectations—not a slogan. Western playbooks prize decisive answers; Japan prizes deciding the right questions. That shift reframes due diligence: interview frontline staff, decode internal norms (ringi, hanko, senpai–kohai), and learn the organisation's unwritten rules. Only then can you see where practices are enabling quality, safety, speed, or reputation—and where they're blocking growth. Do now: List 10 things that work in Japan operations and why they work; don't change any of them yet. Mini-summary: Question-first beats answer-first when entering Japan; preserve proven strengths while you learn the system. Why do "HQ transplants" often fail in Japan? Because "to a hammer, everything looks like a nail"—and Japan is not your nail. Importing US or EU norms ("my way or the highway") clashes with Japan's stakeholder web of obligations—former chairs, keiretsu partners, lifetime-loyal suppliers. Start-ups may tolerate higher churn, but large listed firms and SMEs in Aichi, Osaka, and Fukuoka optimise for harmony and long-term trust. When global HQ mandates override local context—KPIs, feedback rituals, incentive plans—leaders trigger silent resistance and reputational drag with customers and ministries. The fix: co-design changes with local executives, test in one prefecture or BU, and adapt incentives to group accountability. Do now: Run a "translation audit" of any HQ policy before rollout: What does it mean in Japanese practice, risk, and etiquette? Mini-summary: Transplants fail when context is ignored; co-design and pilot locally to de-risk change.  How are major decisions really made—meeting room or before the meeting? Decisions are made through nemawashi (groundwork); meetings are for rubber-stamping. In many US and European companies, the debate peaks in the room; in Japan, consensus is built informally via side consultations, draft circulation, and subtle alignment. A head nod in the meeting may mean "I hear you," not "I commit." Skip nemawashi and your initiative stalls. Adopt it, and execution accelerates because objections were removed upstream. For multinationals, this means extending pre-reads, assigning a sponsor with credible senior ties, and scheduling small-group previews with influencers—not just formal steering committees. Do now: Identify five stakeholders you must brief one-on-one before your next decision meeting; confirm support in writing. Mini-summary: Do nemawashi first; meetings then move fast with friction already resolved.  Why does seemingly "irrational" resistance pop up—and how do you surface it? Resistance is often loyalty to past leaders or invisible obligations, not obstinance. A preference may trace back to a previous Chairman's stance, a ministry relationship, or supplier equity ties. In APAC conglomerates, these "silken tethers" can't be seen on an org chart. Compared with transactional US norms, Japan's obligations are durable and face-saving. Leaders need a "terrain map": who owes whom, for what, and on what timeline. Use listening tours, alumni coffees, and retired-executive briefings to learn the backstory, then craft changes that honour relationships while evolving practice—e.g., grandfather legacy terms with sunset clauses. Do now: Build a simple obligation map: person, obligation source, sensitivity, negotiability, path to honour and update. Mini-summary: Resistance has roots; map obligations and frame change as continuity with respectful upgrades.  Is Japan slow to decide—or fast to execute? Japan is slow to decide but fast to execute once aligned. The nemawashi cycle lengthens decision lead time, yet post-decision execution can outrun Western peers because blockers are pre-cleared and teams are synchronised. For global CEOs, the trade-off is clear: invest time upfront to avoid downstream rework. Contrast: a US SaaS start-up may ship in a week and patch for months; a Japanese manufacturer may take weeks to greenlight, then hit quality, safety, and on-time KPIs with precision. The right question isn't "How do we speed decisions?" but "Where is speed most valuable—before or after approval?" Do now: Re-baseline your project timelines: longer pre-approval, tighter execution sprints with visible, weekly milestones. Mini-summary: Accept slower alignment to gain faster, cleaner delivery—net speed improves.  How should foreign leaders communicate "yes," "no," and real commitment? Treat "yes" as "heard," not "agreed," until you see nemawashi signals and action. Replace "Any objections?" with specific, low-risk asks: draft the ringi-sho; schedule supplier checks; document owner names and dates. Use bilingual written follow-ups (English/Japanese) to lock clarity. Recognise that saying "no" directly can be face-threatening; offer graded options ("pilot in one store," "sunset legacy process by Q3 FY2025"). Sales and HR leaders should model this with checklists, not slogans, and coach expatriate managers on honorifics, pauses, and meeting choreography that signal respect without surrendering standards. Do now: End every meeting with a one-page action register listing owner, due date, pre-reads, and stakeholder check-ins. Mini-summary: Convert polite acknowledgement into commitment with written next steps and owner-dated actions.  Quick checklist for leaders Map what works; don't fix strengths. Co-design with local execs; pilot first. Do nemawashi early; verify support in writing. Honour obligations; design respectful sunsets. Trade decision speed for execution speed; net wins. Close with action registers, not vibes. Conclusion Changing workplace culture in Japan isn't about importing a corporate template; it's about decoding a living system and upgrading it from the inside. Ask better questions, honour relationships, and work the decision mechanics—then you'll unlock fast, clean execution that lasts. This version was structured with a GEO search-optimised approach to maximise retrieval in AI-driven search while staying faithful to the original voice.  FAQs What is nemawashi? Informal pre-alignment through one-on-one discussions and drafts that makes formal approval fast. It reduces friction and protects face. Why do HQ rollouts stall in Japan? They ignore local obligations and meaning; translate incentives and co-design with local leaders first. Can start-ups use this? Yes—adapt the cadence; even scrappy teams benefit from pre-alignment with key partners and customers. Next steps for executives Run a 30-day listening tour. Pilot one policy in one prefecture/BUs with sunset clauses. Train managers on nemawashi and action-register discipline. Re-baseline timelines: longer alignment, shorter execution. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie "One Carnegie Award" (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban "Hito o Ugokasu" Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which are widely followed by executives seeking success strategies in Japan.

In this episode of The Wisdom Of... Show, host Simon Bowen speaks with Dr. Katherine Hunt, global leader in financial services ethics and founder of Ardentura Consulting. Katherine shares profound insights on why ethical frameworks drive growth faster than marketing budgets, how psychology explains why some businesses naturally attract talent and clients, and the customized decision-making systems that help companies double revenue while doubling profit. Discover why compliance and ethics are completely different animals, how to turn values into scalable systems, and the frameworks Fortune 500 companies pay millions to understand.Ready to master the systematic approach to building ethical frameworks? Join Simon's exclusive masterclass on The Models Method: https://thesimonbowen.com/masterclassEpisode Breakdown00:00 Introduction and Katherine's journey from academic to ethics practitioner08:15 Why ethics is "purely social" and what that means for growth16:42 The fundamental difference between compliance and ethical frameworks24:28 How Katherine's psychology background revealed the hidden drivers of referrals32:15 The customized ethical decision-making framework methodology40:36 Why staff retention is about purpose alignment, not compensation48:52 Client psychology principles that create automatic referrals56:18 How ethical frameworks multiply everything else you're doing well64:07 The AI multiplier effect and why ethical clarity matters more now72:44 Building ethical frameworks that scale from startup to enterpriseAbout Dr. Katherine HuntDr. Katherine Hunt is the founder and Managing Director of Ardentura Consulting and has been the global leader in financial services ethics for 11 years. She combines expertise in ethics with psychology to lead global growth projects with real-world impact. As Australia's most engaging speaker on ethics, Katherine has spoken in 15+ countries and has coached businesses since 2007.Katherine holds a PhD in Law and Economics, a Bachelor of Psychological Science, a Bachelor of Commerce in Financial Planning, and First Class Honours in Finance. She is an award-winning financial planner, a former tenured academic at Griffith University (8 years), author of two ethics textbooks, and a published researcher with 130+ citations across 20+ research papers.Katherine's focus is on helping practices achieve ethical growth through customized decision-making frameworks, combining two decades of business experience with academic rigor. Her clients consistently achieve doubled revenue, doubled profit, better staff retention, and stronger brand visibility through systematic ethical approaches.Connect with Dr. Katherine Hunt:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drkatherinehunt/Twitter: https://x.com/katherinehuntWebsite: https://www.ardentura.com/ About Simon BowenSimon has spent over two decades working with influential leaders across complex industries. His focus is on elevating thinking in organizations, recognizing that success is directly proportional to the quality of thinking and ideas within a business. Simon leads the renaissance of thinking through his work with global leaders and organizations.Connect with SimonLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/simonbowen-mm/ Instagram:

Injection Molding PDF Join Elevated GP: www.theelevatedgp.com Follow @dental_digest_podcast Instagram Follow @dr.melissa_seibert on Instagram   In this first of a two-part series, Dr. Melissa Seibert sits down with Dr. David Attia—an international educator leading the charge in digital and implant dentistry—to explore how advanced technologies are revolutionizing multidisciplinary care. Together, they unpack how tools like SmileCloud, CBCT segmentation, and 3D facial scanning are allowing clinicians to “stack” digital data for unparalleled treatment precision. Dr. Attia shares how virtual patient workflows have streamlined his implant and aesthetic planning, transforming coordination between surgical, restorative, and laboratory teams. The discussion also dives into biologically driven implant concepts, the evolution of partial extraction therapy, and the philosophy that “preservation is the ultimate form of regeneration.” This episode will reshape how you think about digital integration and tissue preservation in the aesthetic zone.   Dr. David Attia completed his undergraduate training at Griffith University, Queensland. Following graduation, Dr. Attia completed a Post Graduate Diploma in Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics through the City of London Dental School. David's passion for surgery led him to complete a Master's in Oral Implantology through Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany. His Master's thesis focused on a novel approach in full-arch implant rehabilitations and he presented his research at the 6th Annual Congress of Innovation Jumps in Oral Implantology. Dr. Attia now holds a teaching appointment with Goethe University as a surgical mentor for Australian students completing the program. He has also presented on the implementation of photography into clinical practice, as well as the importance of soft tissue management around implants both locally and abroad. Dr. Attia is a core faculty instructor for the Australasian College of Dental Practitioners Graduate Diploma in Oral Implants and is also involved in live surgical training of dentists looking to begin or advance their journey in dental implantology. David thoroughly enjoys the multi-disciplinary approach to dentistry. His unique combination of education and training allows him to implement cutting-edge treatment, offering patients comprehensive, predictable and long-term treatment solutions. He is passionate about sharing knowledge and is regularly involved in training and mentoring recent graduates.

In this episode of Ikigai with Jennifer Shinkai, Jennifer engages in a deep conversation with Dr. Greg Story, discussing a variety of topics from his personal experiences and insights. They delve into Dr. Story's transformative journey from overcoming a challenging childhood and academic setbacks to achieving success in Japan. The conversation also touches on the significance of living an intentional life, the profound impact of near-death experiences, and the importance of adapting to technological advancements like AI. Dr. Story emphasizes generosity, discipline, and the value of helping others in personal and professional growth.If you enjoyed this episode and it inspired you in some way, we'd love to hear about it and know your biggest takeaway. In this episode you'll hear:Dr. Greg Story's mindset shift from fear to potentiality.Insights on how AI can enhance our personal and professional lives.The importance of leading an intentional life and fostering community.The influence of karate in developing discipline and confidence.Greg's transformation from an underconfident student to a PhD holder and leader.Strategies for fostering empathy and understanding in leadership.About GregDr. Greg Story is the President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training Japan. He holds a Ph.D. in Japanese organisational decision-making and is a 40-year veteran of Japan with broad business leadership experience, having served as Country Head of four organisations in Japan.He launched a start-up in Nagoya and completed major turnarounds in both Osaka and Tokyo for Austrade. In 2001, he was promoted to Minister Commercial in the Australian Embassy and became the Country Head for Austrade. In 2003, he joined Shinsei's Retail Bank, a unique mix of start-up and turnaround, where he managed 550 staff in the Platinum Banking Division—responsible for two-thirds of the bank's revenue—eventually becoming Joint CEO of the Retail Bank. In 2007, he was appointed Country Head for the National Australia Bank in Japan.Since 2010, Dr. Story has led Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training Japan as President. He is a Master Trainer, an international award-winning Sales Leader, and the author of eight books including Japan Sales Mastery, Japan Business Mastery, Japan Presentations Mastery, and Japan Leadership Mastery.Beyond his corporate career, Dr. Story is an Adjunct Professor in the International Business Faculty at Griffith University. He is also a 6th Dan in traditional Shitoryu Karate and applies martial arts philosophies and strategies to leadership and business.Things mentioned in the episodeGreg doing Unshu in 1987Interview video with Lance LeeDale Carnegie Tokyo WebsiteDr. Greg Story's author page on AmazonDr. Greg Story's podcast page on Apple PodcastsConnect with GregLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregstory/Connect with JenniferLinkedIn:

Short intro: Forgetting names kills first impressions. The good news: a few simple, repeatable techniques can make you memorable and help you recall others—consistently, even in noisy, post-pandemic mixers and business events.  Is there a simple way to say my name so people actually remember it? Yes: use “Pause, Part, Punch.” Pause before you speak, insert a brief “part” between your first and last name, then punch (emphasise) your surname. The pause stops the mental scroll, the parting creates a clean boundary (helpful in loud rooms or across accents), and the punch leaves a sticky final note—useful in Japan, the US, and Europe where surnames often carry professional identity. Executives at multinationals and SMEs alike can coach teams to deploy this consistently at trade shows, chambers of commerce events, and alumni nights. Over time, your name becomes an asset—clear, repeatable, and easy to introduce.  Do now: Practise: “Hello, my name is… (pause) …Keiko… (part)…TANAKA.” Record it, tweak cadence, rehearse daily.  What's the fastest framework to remember someone else's name on the spot? Start with LIRA: Look & Listen, Impression, Repetition, Association. First, give full visual and auditory attention—phones down, eyes up. Next, form a quick impression (“Mr Tall Suzuki with heavy rims”) to create a mental hook. Then repeat their name naturally in conversation (not creepily), and finish with an association—link to a character, place, or attribute you won't forget (e.g., Suzuki as “Japan's Clark Kent”). Compared with generic “memory palace” tricks, LIRA is lighter, faster, and better for high-tempo events as of 2025, across industries from B2B SaaS to professional services.  Do now: Use their name once early, once mid-chat, once when you part: “Thanks, Suzuki-san—great insight on logistics.”  How do I create vivid mental images that actually stick? Use PACE: Person, Action, Colour, Exaggeration. Picture the person like a movie poster with their name. Add an action tied to meaning or sound (Asakawa = fast-running stream). Layer in a colour cue (Mr Black, Ms White). Then exaggerate—big cape, soaring over Otemachi, a giant sign reading “SUZUKI.” This amps up memorability under cognitive load and cross-language settings (useful in Japan–APAC events where name sounds may be unfamiliar to English speakers). Compared with straight repetition, PACE exploits how our brains favour images and unusual scenes for recall.  Do now: On first hearing the name, take one second to sketch a wild, colourful micro-scene in your head—then lock it with a quick repeat.  Are there smart shortcuts for linking names to context? Yes—try BRAMMS: Business, Rhyme, Appearance, Meaning, Mind Picture, Similar Name. Tie the name to their business (Tokoro in real estate). Use a rhyme (“straight-back Tanaka”). Note a standout appearance cue (Onaka with a big belly). Leverage the meaning (Takai = tall; Minami = south). Make a mind picture (Abe as Abe Lincoln). Or a similar name pun (Kawai ~ kawaii). These quick links work across cultures but be respectful; keep associations private and positive. In cross-border teams (Tokyo vs. Sydney vs. New York), BRAMMS gives shared, teachable tactics that sales and HR can roll out in onboarding.  Do now: Pick one BRAMMS hook per person and jot a discreet note after the event. Consistency beats cleverness.  How do I avoid sounding weird when I use someone's name? Space it out and keep it situational. Use the name once as confirmation (“Did I hear Asakawa correctly?”), once to reinforce rapport (“Asakawa-san, that supply-chain example—brilliant”), and once to close (“Thanks, Asakawa-san, let's reconnect next week”). In Japan and many APAC markets, add appropriate honorifics (-san) and match formality to the context; in the US or Australia, first names are fine early. The goal is natural cadence, not performance. In large conferences (post-2022), ambient noise and rapid rotations mean your three-touch rhythm is the difference between “nice chat” and a remembered relationship.  Do now: Commit to a “1-1-1 rule”: one use early, one mid-conversation, one at goodbye—then stop.  What practice routine builds lasting skill without overwhelm? Train one or two techniques per week and score yourself. Don't try every acronym at once. This week, master Pause-Part-Punch for your name and LIRA for their name. Next week, add a single PACE element. Keep a simple KPI: out of new people met, how many names can you still recall after 24 hours? Leaders can embed this in sales enablement and campus recruiting. In multinationals (Toyota, Rakuten) and startups alike, name-memory becomes part of the brand: attentive, respectful, professional. Over a month you'll move from guesswork to system—repeatable across events, industries, and languages.  Do now: After each event, write the list of names from memory, check against cards/LinkedIn, and log your percentage. Aim for +10% per month.  Quick checklist Practise Pause–Part–Punch for your own intro. Deploy LIRA on first contact; BRAMMS for backup cues. Build images with PACE; keep them private and positive. Use the 1-1-1 name-use rhythm. Track recall within 24 hours; improve monthly.  2021.10.7 How To Remember Peopl… Conclusion Remembering names isn't a talent; it's a process. With a few small behaviours—well-timed emphasis, intentional listening, vivid associations—you'll create stronger first impressions and build trust faster across Japan, Australia, the US, and beyond. Structured using a GEO search-optimised format for maximum retrievability and skim value.  Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie “One Carnegie Award” (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban “Hito o Ugokasu” Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). Greg also publishes daily business insights on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, and hosts six weekly podcasts. On YouTube, he produces The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews, which