Podcasts about Pygmalion

Nos croyances d'enseignants deviennent des prophéties autoréalisatrices positives ou négatives. Dans cet épisode, Cathy et Gaëlle explorent l'effet Pygmalion et l'effet Golem Vos attentes envers vos élèves changent-elles vraiment leur façon d'apprendre ? La réponse est oui ! Au programme : on colle des étiquettes à nos apprenants sans s'en rendre compte, comment éviter de « mâcher le travail », le rôle du non-verbal en classe, la neuroplasticité et le droit à l'erreur, et comment créer un contexte qui donne envie de prendre des risques à l'oral.Un épisode concret, ancré dans les recherches de Carol Dweck et Stanislas Dehaene, pour tous les enseignants de langues qui veulent sortir des méthodes toutes faites et redonner du sens à l'apprentissage sans tomber dans le syndrome du sauveur.

Welcome to week two of Zine Month! Today Amy, Justina, and Payton are joined by friends of the pod Gemma Neall and Shona Edwards. These wonderful guests are zine experts AND classicists — just about the coolest cross-section of interests a person could possibly have. So in this episode we make a journey from ancient poetry to Shakespeare and then all the way to Ronald Reagan, Spockanalia, and Riot Grrrls. But mainly we will find out how zine-making can cut through imposter syndrome, strengthen communities, and challenge the calcified practices of academia. Just don’t forget rule #1: Always make the zine. This month, in lieu of setting a ‘book club pick’ we’ll be making zines, and we want you to create along with us! We hope these episodes inspire you to get crafty — please do send us your zines over on Instagram (@amyandbookclub) and follow along to see whatever unhinged ones we come up with (we’ll be sharing ours in our ‘book club’ episode on July 23). MENTIONS Poetry/booksAeneid by VirgilHeroides by OvidIliad by Homer, translated by Emily WilsonMetamorphoses by Ovid, translated by Stephanie McCarterNox by Anne CarsonOdyssey by Homer, translated by Emily WilsonPygmalion by George Bernard Shaw (play)Pygmalion by OvidSong of Achilles by Madeleine Miller FilmMy Fair LadyPretty Woman Authors/poetsGallusHoraceNatalie HarkinOvidPropertius Sources:Barthes, Roland. ‘The Death of the Author.’ In: Newton, K.M. (eds) Twentieth-Century Literary Theory. Palgrave, London. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25934-2_25Halberstam, Jack. The Queer Art of Failure. Duke University Press, Durham and London. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822394358Haraway, Donna. ‘Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.’ Feminist Studies, vol. 14, no. 3, 1988, pp. 575-99. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066Harkin, Natalie. Archival-Poetics. (Archival-Poetics; No. 1 Colonial archive), (Archival-Poetics; No. 2 Haunting), (Archival-Poetics; No. 3 Blood memory). Sydney, Vagabond Press. 2019.Harkin, Natalie. ‘Weaving Blankets of Story and Hearts of Gold: An Archival-poetics Praxis.’ Cordite Poetry Review. 2021. https://cordite.org.au/essays/weaving-blankets-hearts-of-gold/2/ Zine resources:Mental health: madzines.orgRiot Grrrls: riotgrrrlarchive.commons.gc.cuny.edu/zines/Spockanalia: archive.org/details/SpockanaliaV1404 Media Zine about ICE Surveillance: www.404media.co/icezine/International Ronald Reagan Fan Club: https://yaf.org/news/reagan-ranch-center-unveils-new-exhibits-featuring-reagan-letters-photographs-and-memorabilia/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/from-ronnie-to-a-fan-more-than-100-reagan-letters-for-sale/ https://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/blogs/memorabilia/ronald-reagan-document-archive-to-sell-at-profiles-in-history?srsltid=AfmBOorlAUDuM-y6ioA1GeIhFvWNc_ADvhjys-nA25KiMF-E3tAt0aew LINKS

If you're an experienced leader, founder or consultant, there's a particular kind of quiet risk you might not be tracking. The world you built your career in is being rewritten, and the tools that used to belong to well-funded companies now sit on your laptop for free.This week I'm joined by Jay Samit, author of Disrupt You, Future Proofing You, and his latest book, The Second Act Advantage. Jay was in the room when Reid Hoffman launched LinkedIn, helped monetise Facebook, ran EMI through the Napster years, and has been a futurist for more than half a century. He is not a hype merchant. He is someone who has watched every major technology shift up close, and he thinks this one is different.Our conversation is a wake-up call, but not a doom scroll. It is about where the real opportunity sits for people who are already good at what they do, and how to move before the ground shifts under you.✳️ Why AI is not another industrial revolution. It is closer to fire, and this time it comes for knowledge workers first.✳️ The illusion of job security. The original Fortune 500 has lost 90% of its members, and the safety net you think you have is thinner than you realise.✳️ How ordinary people are building global businesses off the "crumbs" the trillion-dollar companies leave on the ground, using tools they never had to pay for.Jay's Amplifiers✳️ Speak to yourself in the mirror every morning. Two lines only: "Today can be better than yesterday. And I have the power to make it so." Your brain does not know you are talking to it. It just responds.✳️ Do not retire, in any sense of the word. Keep learning something that requires muscle memory, protect your purpose, and treat autophagy and sleep as seriously as you treat your calendar.✳️ Be unique on purpose. Everything else is already taken. Whatever you create, think or build is now being absorbed by a system that will outlast you. That is a legacy opportunity no previous generation has had.If this is your first time here, hit follow so the next episode finds you automatically. And if you already listen, thank you. It genuinely matters.Timestamps00:01 - Sponsor: Granola01:15 - Cold open with Jay01:59 - Welcome and why this episode matters03:02 - Introducing Jay Samit04:14 - Jay's story, from nerd to billionaire whisperer07:41 - Why this AI shift is different from every other one10:00 - Playing Pygmalion with a young millennial13:05 - The illusion of corporate security20:41 - AI as amplifier, not replacement23:05 - The difference between chasing AI and mastering it27:33 - Why most people freeze when it is time to reinvent35:19 - Vibe coding explained without the jargon39:45 - Competition is not the enemy you think it is41:28 - What actually drives Jay's decision to move on47:47 - Curiosity, effort, belief, and the right tools49:19 - Amplifier 1: The mirror trick and the Pygmalion effect53:06 - Amplifier 2: Longevity, purpose and the lazy nerd's guide57:21 - Amplifier 3: Be unique, because everything else is taken01:02:00 - Where to find Jay and the Second Act Society01:03:31 - Close and the Personal Brand Business Roadmap----Get your copy of my Personal Brand Business BlueprintIt's the FREE roadmap to starting, scaling or just fixing your expert business.www.amplifyme.agency/roadmap----Subscribe to my Youtube!! Follow on Instagram and Twitter @bobgentleJoin the Amplify Insiders Facebook Community : www.amplifyme.agency/insidersPlease take a second to rate this show in Apple Podcasts. ❤ It will mean a lot to me.Mentioned in this episode:Signature StudioGet started today - signtaturestudio.me

durée : 00:02:04 - par : Emilie Munera, Rodolphe Bruneau-Boulmier - Pour un été en musique, Emilie Munera vous conseille Das Jahr de Fanny Mendelssohn par Marie Vermeulin, la Passion selon Saint-Jean de Bach par l'ensemble Pygmalion, et les disques "Gracias a la vida" et "Spiritillo Mediterraneo". - équipe : Pauline Boisaubert Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:02:04 - par : Emilie Munera, Rodolphe Bruneau-Boulmier - Pour un été en musique, Emilie Munera vous conseille Das Jahr de Fanny Mendelssohn par Marie Vermeulin, la Passion selon Saint-Jean de Bach par l'ensemble Pygmalion, et les disques "Gracias a la vida" et "Spiritillo Mediterraneo". - équipe : Pauline Boisaubert Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Hello, and welcome to Entangled! The podcast where we explore the science of consciousness, the true nature of reality, and what it means to be a spiritual being having a human experience. I'm your host Jordan Youkilis, and today I'm joined by Fiona Barnett, survivor of CIA MK-Ultra & the MK-Delta child soldier program.Fiona describes growing up in a multi-generational MK-Ultra family and how her Nazi step-grandparents fled Europe to Australia after World War II. She describes how the Nazi's perfected systematically, trauma induced dissociated identities, and how these mind-control programs were continued by the CIA via MK-Ultra. Fiona describes how her memories of child sexual & Satanic ritual abuse started flooding back after the hanging of her step-grandfather, Peter Holowczak.Fiona goes on to describe the crimes perpetrated against her, including by Leonas Patrauskas & Antony Kidman, and how she worked with a researcher to identify her perpetrators. She describes the military training she underwent at the underground base at Holsworthy near Sydney.From there, we discuss MK-Ultra & the countercultural revolution of the 60s and 70s. Fiona describes the use of unethical hypnosis in MK-Ultra and the MK-Delta child soldier program. She explains how Josef Mengele continued his Nazi research post WWII and the significance of hybrid genomics programs. Fiona describes how MK-Ultra operatives use interdimensional programming via the Kabalistic Tree of Life, and why most psychologists and psychiatrists aren't qualified to work with victims of RAMCOA – ritual abuse, mind control, and organized abuse.Next, Fiona describes how her MK-Ultra perpetrators followed the Order of the Eastern Star configuration to trauma-induce Fiona's alters. She explains how Michael Aquino was Josef Mengele's son, and that both were Rothschilds. Fiona describes why every trauma must be novel, and then shares her experience from the ceremony in which she assumed her Grande Dame position in the Luciferian hierarchy.From there, Fiona describes how Jesus Christ provided her the path to escaping the cult. We discuss the Pygmalion project in changing children's gender in utero & the transgender/Azazel agenda of The Order. Fiona explains how Antony Kidman died days after she reported him for her child sexual abuse & how his daughter, Nicole Kidman, leveraged her public relations machine to suppress the story. Fiona describes the “Fight to Remember” and gives advice on working through trauma and fractured consciousness.We then discuss the life and death of Isaac Kappy, and Fiona explains that he was used by Michael Aquino as an unwitting MK-Ultra asset. Fiona explains how Isaac never betrayed her and her family, having found Jesus Christ in the weeks before his suspicious death. We consider Tom Hanks and Phoenix Enigma's role in the suspected murder of Isaac Kappy, and Fiona explains why she believes QAnon was an MK-Ultra psychological operation led by Michael Aquino and Jim Watkins.Fiona explains the Importance of healing attachment trauma. We conclude this interview discussing how someone can come to know God. Fiona recommends that we seek the truth, and that it will be revealed through your heart and mind.Outros available for this and all episodes at entangledpodcast.substack.com, with supporting exhibits and footnotes. Music from the show available on the Spotify playlist “Entangled – The Vibes”.If you like the show, please drop a 5-star review and subscribe on Substack, YouTube, Spotify, Rumble, X, or wherever you listen to podcasts.Happy 250th birthday, to the United States of America. May the next 250 years represent a world where all of God's children are freed from enslavement. Where our country finally lives up to its ideals of one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.Please enjoy the episode. Music: Intro/Outro: Ben Fox - “The Vibe”. End Credits: Isaac Kappy – “The Present”.Outro: “Rest in Peace, Isaac Kappy.”Recorded: 6/20/2026. Published: 7/4/2026.Check out the resources mentioned:- Fiona Barnett's Website: https://fionabarnett.org/- Eyes Wide Open by Fiona Barnett: https://tinyurl.com/mr4xc4s3- Fiona Barnett's ITNJ Testimony: - Candy Girl (Pt. 1): - Candy Girl (Pt. 2): - The Genesis 6 Conspiracy: How Secret Societies and the Descendants of Giants Plan to Enslave Humankind by Gary Wayne: https://a.co/d/0cBAJnVo- The Genesis 6 Conspiracy Part II: How Understanding Prehistory and Giants Helps Define End-Time Prophecy by Gary Wayne: https://a.co/d/0brXpHcl- Secret, Don't Tell: Encyclopedia of Hypnotism by Carla Emery DeLong: https://www.secretdonttell.com/limited-special-sales/ This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit entangledpodcast.substack.com

Have you ever wondered how our expectations can impact the way we perceive and interact with others? Well, it's actually been demonstrated that beliefs and attitudes can lead to outcomes that align with those beliefs, due to what's known as the Pygmalion effect. 20th century American psychologist Robert Rosenthal coined the term in 1968. He had teamed up with San Francisco elementary school principal Lenore Jacobson to conduct a groundbreaking experiment. It showed that teacher behaviour and attitude could actually influence their students' achievements.  Where does the name come from? What did Rosenthal and Jacobson's experiment consist of? In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions! To listen to the last episodes, you can click here : ⁠⁠What are the alternatives to air conditioning?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠What is misogynoir?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Can I reuse sunscreen from one year to the next?⁠⁠ A podcast written and realised by Joseph Chance. First Broadcast: 2/11/2024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Not long ago we talked about the Pygmalion effect in an episode of Do You Really Know? Well today's subject is pretty much the exact opposite! The Golem effect is the idea that negative words or assumptions can influence behaviours and transform those assumptions into reality. It's another type of self-fulfilling prophecy, which sees lower expectations lead to poorer performance and behaviour in individuals. And just like the Pygmalion effect, the term was also coined by Robert Rosenthal, this time in a 1982 paper after having conducted research along with Elisha Babad and Jacob Inbar. The name comes from Jewish folklore, and more specifically the tale of the Golem of Prague.  What are the main areas in which the Golem effect can be observed ? What about in relationships?How can we overcome the Golem effect? In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions ! To listen to the last episodes, you can click here : ⁠Are women really more emotional than men?⁠ ⁠Why are celebrities dissolving their facial fillers?⁠ ⁠What is the Smurfette Principle?⁠ A podcast written and realised by Joseph Chance. First Broadcast: 27/8/2023 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

durée : 00:04:29 - par : Producteurs en alternance - Nous écoutons, ce matin, le premier chœur du motet "Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied" BWV 225, de Jean-Sébastien Bach, interprété par l'ensemble Pygmalion sous la direction de Raphaël Pichon. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:04:29 - par : Producteurs en alternance - Nous écoutons, ce matin, le premier chœur du motet "Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied" BWV 225, de Jean-Sébastien Bach, interprété par l'ensemble Pygmalion sous la direction de Raphaël Pichon. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Lux Radio Theatre - PygmalionBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/harold-s-old-time-radio--4206392/support.

"I'm not here to teach you anything new. I'm here to make you see things that you normally would not see." — Dr. W. Edwards Deming In this episode, Deming educator Balaji Reddie reveals the practices that are hiding in plain sight within most organizations. Practices that feel normal. That get celebrated. And that quietly undermine everything you're building. One example: arbitrary targets. An employee collected 2 million rupees in a single day — four times his target. He told no one and did nothing for four days. Because he knew his manager would just raise the bar. That single moment of silence cost the company a genuine breakthrough. This is what Deming called a "faulty practice." And there are many more where that came from. Host Andrew Stotz and Balaji dig into Chapter 2 of The New Economics — Deming's most overlooked chapter. They cover why ranking employees is built on a mathematical illusion. Why chasing quarterly results destroys long-term value. And why the best leaders, from Steve Jobs to Walt Disney, ignored the pressures that trap most organizations. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussions with Balaji Reddie. He's an educator and a trainer in the teachings of Dr. Deming and quality management generally. And the topic for today is becoming aware of faulty practices. Take it away, Balaji.   0:00:26.0 Balaji Reddie: Good morning. Thank you, Andrew. So part three of our series, what we're looking at. So last time we met, we spoke about essentially Point number 14, because we outlaid his profound knowledge. And then I always said that he gave us a lot of clues as to what needed to be done. So I started out by reading some of the excerpts from the book, which we tend to ignore. And then he said, "Here's what I expect." So he expected leadership, a critical mass to be created, and then he gave attributes of a leader. So we listed 17 of those points, which we said principles of leadership. And now once you've created that critical mass and there's someone who's taken the lead and there are a bunch of leaders, maybe, so what do we do next? So when you start becoming aware that you are now in a prison, so to say, because that's what he said here, that they feel it's a fixture, and this is the way things are, this is how things always have been. So he says, "No, you need to understand that these things are wrong." Right? And you first need to become aware, and then we need to look at what needs to be done, perhaps. So he's given some suggestions, and you could always adapt and adopt this. So most of this would be taken from the book, The New Economics, chapter two, which he has titled as "The Heavy Losses." Now, remember, when he wrote this book, it was after the other book, Out of the Crisis, where he had listed his 14 Points. Yes, but he also listed diseases and obstacles. And people tend to ignore that.   0:02:18.9 Balaji Reddie: In fact, I remember having a chat with Bill Bellows on this, and I said, "Diseases and obstacles." And he said, "Obstacles?" I said, "Yes, he has listed 16 obstacles in Out of the Crisis." And he said, "Oh, wow." And he took his copy and he said, "Oh, yeah, you're right. There are 16 of them." And so sometimes you see things that you normally would not see. So when he wrote this, initially, I think many people thought that it was just an extension of those Diseases. But when you start looking deeper, you'll find that he became more elaborate in what he listed as the heavy losses. So he says here that these are things that you start observing and you say, "This is not normal." So the language that he's used is pretty, pretty clear. Present practice, so faulty practices. The present practice, and he says these are only reactive. You only need certain skills and not nearly any theory of management. Whereas when you opt to go to a better practice, you need a theory. So let's start with the very first faulty practice. And this stems from his 14 points too. He says, "Lack of constancy of purpose, short-term thinking, and emphasis on immediate results. Think in the present tense, no future tense." And then he becomes more elaborate and says, "Keep up the price of the company's stock and maintain dividends."   0:04:02.0 Balaji Reddie: Which, well, okay, it seems like you should not do that. No. He says here, you fail to optimize through time. Make this quarter look good, ship everything on hand at the end of the month or quarter, never mind its quality, mark it as shipped, show it as accounts receivable, and defer till the next quarter repairs, maintenance, and orders for material. Just a word here, in the new edition of The New Economics, there's been a spelling mistake there. So if anyone's listening, you can just correct it in the next edition that comes out. Instead of "defer till the next quarter," he's written "defer toll the next quarter." So we need to correct that in the next printing. Now he says here, a better practice...   0:04:52.1 Andrew Stotz: And before you go to there, can we just talk about this for a second?   0:04:56.1 Balaji Reddie: Sure.   0:04:57.8 Andrew Stotz: One of the things that, having been a financial analyst all my career, we get quarterly results from companies in the stock market. And in my own business, of course, I look at monthly results because we close the books every month. And it's definitely one... Donald Trump recently came up with the idea of telling companies not to report quarterly results. And I believe the Singapore Stock Exchange also came up with the idea of maybe we'll reduce the amount of reporting to maybe half-yearly, because we do have half-yearly reporting in some countries, right?   0:05:39.6 Balaji Reddie: Right.   0:05:40.9 Andrew Stotz: But having learned the teachings of Dr. Deming many years ago, long before I became a financial analyst, I always thought, I never really got this one because I thought, what an idiot you would be if you're running a company and all you could see was the market's demand for quarterly performance. And I've always admired those people, I think Jeff Bezos was one that really made it very explicit. "If you're here for quarterly performance, you're not gonna get it." And so I always have said to CEOs, having seen analysts and fund managers, I've visited, taken fund managers more than 1,000 times to meet with CEOs, and CEOs ask me, "What's your advice from seeing all that?" And I said, "Don't listen to this too much." Take it on board, what the discussions are about, but you're the CEO. Your job is to optimize the value of this business. And that means, that doesn't mean making quarterly numbers, manipulating things to make quarterly numbers. So part of what I've said to people is, "Get a backbone. Don't come and complain to me, 'Oh, yeah, but the pressure of the market's quarterly.' Come on." You know and I know that the job of a CEO is to maximize the value of the business, not the quarterly result. So anyways, that's my little pet peeve.   0:07:13.6 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. Yeah, that's right. And if you look at even Jobs, Steve Jobs, when he came back as Apple CEO, he had the nerve and the spine, like you said, to tell the board, "Don't judge me on this. It's gonna take time. And believe me," he said, "someday you will see results." Now, unfortunately, he was not there to see what he's created, but I think anyone in Apple can safely say that they're growing because of the foundation that he laid so long back, right? And I think that was one of the major reasons why he did not make Jonathan Ive as the CEO, because he wanted him to focus on the product and the customer rather than the quarterly results. And I don't think Apple ever played it by quarterly results.   0:08:04.9 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And here's a good book called Competition Demystified by Bruce Greenwald. And there's a passage in here that's interesting because he published the book back in 2005, so it was long before Steve Jobs really made the company profitable. And he had basically gone through and explained the situation at that time as a strategist looking at the company. And what he said, it says, he just said that "Jobs had managed to restore operating margins, but Apple survived, it had hardly prospered, its future does not look bright." And I use this as an example in my strategy class to help people understand that when you're building strategy, you're thinking long term. And the ecosystem that Steve Jobs created, the value of that ecosystem didn't really truly appear until many years after he was working on it. So anyways.   0:09:06.6 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, so that's a classic case here.   0:09:11.1 Andrew Stotz: Let's keep going. You're on a roll.   0:09:14.5 Andrew Stotz: Oh, that's okay. So now better practice, he says, theory of management. Now see what he writes here. He says, "Adopt and publish the constancy of purpose." Now, that's one of the things that he also changed in his 14 points in the 1990 edition, which he never really published in a book but he gave as handouts in his seminars. Earlier on, it was "Create a constancy of purpose," but he says now, "Publish it." And it should be a proper statement, right? And he also said not just for the company, but for other organization. Now, he perhaps was envisioning or he already saw what is happening in the world today, that it's not one company against another, it's a family of companies against another family of companies, if I may say so. And these companies are globally dispersed, so there has to be something that binds them together, and that's the constancy of purpose. And purpose is why we exist, right?   0:10:13.4 Andrew Stotz: And I want to ask about this.   0:10:15.3 Balaji Reddie: Right.   0:10:16.2 Andrew Stotz: Professor, can I ask you about this?   0:10:18.4 Balaji Reddie: Sure. Right.   0:10:21.0 Andrew Stotz: Because if we go to Out of the Crisis, he has his section, and this for me is on page 24, but I don't know what edition I... Maybe I have an old edition, but it's the chapter "Principles for Transformation." He's gonna talk about the 14 Points, and I want to talk about the first point. And the first point is "Create constancy of purpose for improvement of product and service."   0:10:45.8 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. This is the old edition, 24.   0:10:48.6 Andrew Stotz: And the question that I have is that was he saying... Because now you've said in The New Economics he says constancy of purpose. He just states constancy of purpose. He doesn't say "for improvement of product and service." So my question to you is, is he saying that the constancy of purpose should be about improvement of product and service, or is he saying your constancy of purpose could be any purpose, but you just need a long-term purpose?   0:11:22.8 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. And he says that anything that help people to live better and have a market. That's on page 25. So whatever you do, your purpose should be to make life better, right?   0:11:40.2 Andrew Stotz: Right.   0:11:40.7 Balaji Reddie: And the product is just the manifestation of that. It's the outcome, correct? For example, if you talk about Walt Disney and his statement of purpose, he made a very telling statement, right? And how he came to write that down as a very fascinating tale. But he said, "I'll do anything to make a child smile. I'll do anything to make a child smile." So all that you see was aimed at the child, right? Whether it was the merchandise, whether it was the animated films, whether it was the actual non-animated films, if I may say so. And then, of course, coming out with Disneyland and then Disney World. So whatever he did was for the child. And then after he passed away, they lost that. I think they wanted to just sustain what they had attained, but there was nothing new coming out of Disney. And slowly people started encroaching on their turf, so to say. You had someone like a Steven Spielberg who made ET, and that really pulled the rug under their feet. And before they knew it, there was Goonies and Gremlins, and they were really crumbling. And they thought, "Let's join hands with the devil," and so they hired him to make a film. And that did very badly.   0:13:01.9 Balaji Reddie: We also know that Hook, which was supposed to be on Peter Pan, et cetera. And then they were in a crisis and said, "What do we do now?" And most of the top people were just washing their hands of everything. They were the employees who were left, many of them who had worked with Disney, and they said, Sony was very keen to buy them out. And they said, "We need to keep them out, and how do we do that? The only way we can do that is to make a comeback and let's make another film. And we've not been doing anything original, so let's go back to the drawing board." But they said, "We need something to guide us." And that's when they discovered what Walt Disney had written, "I'll do anything to make a child smile." And they said, "What a shame. We forgot the child. We hired the best, but we didn't do anything for the child." And they added one more sentence there. "Anything to make a child smile, and there's a child in every adult." That's how they created Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. Unique idea.   0:14:03.0 Andrew Stotz: Right.   0:14:03.9 Balaji Reddie: You can see it's a statement of purpose that brought them back.   0:14:07.6 Andrew Stotz: Okay. That helps me to understand that what he's talking about, according to what you're saying, is come up with your purpose.   0:14:14.4 Balaji Reddie: That's right.   0:14:15.3 Andrew Stotz: Okay.   0:14:15.6 Balaji Reddie: And he of course also added the word "aim" later on, which is that direction, because he says there, "Where do we wish to be? And then by what method?" So you should know whatever you do should go in the right direction. So that's the first faulty practice, and also giving us a theory of what we need to do. So go back and try to rediscover your purpose if you don't have it, or maybe just come out with something and see what really ignites you, what really drives you forward. And he's given some bullet points here. No number of successes in the short-term problems will ensure long-term. Short-term solutions have long-term effects. So that's that statement where he said cause and effect are not closely related in time and space. Of course, management must work on short-term problems as they turn up, but it's fatal to work exclusively on short-term problems. So he tells us that there has to be some place where you need to stop and start focusing on the big picture. So that's the very first faulty practice. Now the next one is a real, real bucket of water on your face. "Present practice, ranking people, salesmen, divisions. Reward at the top, punishment at the bottom. The so-called merit system." At the top and bottom. It's an artificial creation because no matter what scale of measurement you use, there will be an average measure and there will be 50% above the average and 50% below the average. That's exactly what the word average means. So making these stupid claims that this is an above-average person or a below-average person does not really mean anything.   0:16:07.8 Andrew Stotz: Because what you're really doing is rewarding or punishing common cause variation?   0:16:14.9 Balaji Reddie: Well, that's one. But when you're artificially creating something which doesn't even exist, right? You're saying top half, bottom half. In fact, that funny statement where there's a headlines in England, this happened in England, which said studies have shown, and they spent half a million pounds on carrying out the study, that 50% of the children in England are below average nutrition level. You don't need to spend half a million pounds to figure that one out. That's the law of averages. And using that to judge people is crazy on some arbitrary scale that you've invented. And he goes on to...   0:17:06.7 Andrew Stotz: So the first question I asked was, is this just a frivolous or tampering with common cause variation? Or the other question that... Or is this part of psychology and the idea of demoralizing people through this type of behavior? Where does that fall in from the System of Profound Knowledge, let's say? Is it variation, psychology, or is it both?   0:17:34.5 Balaji Reddie: It's a bit of both.   0:17:36.4 Andrew Stotz: Yeah.   0:17:36.6 Balaji Reddie: Because if you talk about understanding psychology, what he meant, I think I used the word empathy, that we need to be empathetic. When you're talking about employees, what do you mean by empathy there? Well, we need to understand their learning processes. Each one of us has a learning process, but we have a different kind of a learning process. And then when you understand the learning process of a person and then put that person in the right job, you'll have to stop that person from working. That's joy in work. He says that when you... And that takes time. And the ranking system or the merit rating system is an excuse for not having understood or making an effort to understand your employee. You're becoming lazy. You put the onus on them when actually the onus is on you. You have to find out what makes that person tick, if I may use the word resonates. What resonates with that person, right? And then put that person in the right job. He's been saying this from the beginning. It's fascinating that he said this in Japan when he was teaching the control charting there.   0:18:42.3 Balaji Reddie: He said if you draw the control chart for performance of a worker and then it's all within limits for a long period of time, despite all the training and all the lessons that he or she has been given, then he said, "I think it's time to move that person out from that job and give them some other job." Because they've reached statistical control. Any amount of effort put in will not result in a better output. You're gonna get the same thing. And if you want something else, then you need to shift them or maybe give them some better job, whatever it is. So he always had this, that we need to use these in tandem. And in any case, it's a System of Profound Knowledge, so all the four sciences work together, right? And if you want to ask me, when a person understands their purpose, I'm extending the statement of purpose here to the person, when a person understands why they're doing something, they always do the job better. So that statement of purpose needs to come in here too. Instead of ranking them, sit down with them and have a heart-to-heart with each one of them. This is back again to the 17 principles we discussed last time, that you have to spend some time with them.   0:19:57.9 Andrew Stotz: Okay.   0:19:58.3 Balaji Reddie: And understand what makes them tick. So he says "the better practice is to abolish the merit system and manage the company as a system. The function of every component, every division under good management contributes towards optimization of the system. That is, it's not compromise, it's optimize." We don't say either-or, it's and. And he says "differences there will always be, but the question is, what do the differences mean?" So that's where you can use control charting to figure that one out. And I told you how I did this in my company and I got the HR lady to finally say, "I think we need to remove performance appraisal." Performance management, yes, of course you need to have a system in place because I need to know where I am. Even when we later on come to the 14 Points, one of his most, according to me, most misunderstood points is point number three, cease dependence on inspection. But that doesn't mean you stop inspecting.   0:21:02.8 Balaji Reddie: And we will read that when we come to that as to what he meant. So you need to know what is happening, definitely. For that reason, you do need to have some system in place, but you cannot judge a person based on that. And so he says here that "ranking is a farce. Apparent performance is actually attributable mostly to the system." And a simple equation, that's my favorite, that's what we discussed last night too, Tim Higgins, when he said x + (x * y) = 8. And you've gotta solve this equation when you don't even know both. Both are unknowns. Then how can you figure out what is x and what is y? So the other factor, the Pygmalion effect, right? I think for those who are not conversant with the Pygmalion effect, the play by George Bernard Shaw, Pygmalion, which was made into the movie My Fair Lady, where he picks up a lady from the streets who was a flower seller, a flower lady, a flower girl. And he accepts the challenge of teaching her how to speak good English rather than what they call as Cockney English. And then it's like an experiment and a challenge and he starts teaching her. And then to test himself, he takes her to a party. And there she has one drink too many and she gets a little bit tipsy and then goes back to her old way of speaking, which really shocks the guests in the party.   0:22:41.5 Balaji Reddie: And he's very upset when they come back home and he said, "You'll always be a flower girl." And then she makes a statement, "Treat me like a flower girl, I'll behave like a flower girl. Treat me like a lady, I'll behave like a lady." And that's the Pygmalion effect. You start treating people that they're failures and then they have to live up to that reputation, right? So they continue being failures. You treat them well, so the Pygmalion effect comes into play. And of course, he talks about his red beads. That's an excellent experiment in bringing out many of his principles. Though he did not design it originally for this, that came much later. In fact, in Japan when he carried out the red bead experiment, it was purely for sampling. He invented that experiment for sampling. And he said that he broke down barriers and made things so simple for people. I think the lessons of management came much later at Hewlett-Packard where while he was explaining sampling and then when he went to what he was trying to teach them about management, someone jumped up, I forget the name of the person, who said, "But this is... So this is what you're trying to teach us with that sampling experiment." And then he suddenly realized he could use this. And of course, the so-called, and then raises in pay, et cetera. Yeah, whom to raise? Everybody within the system, blah, blah, blah.   0:24:13.4 Balaji Reddie: So I think last time I explained this about the roles, responsibilities and objectives, right? I borrowed this idea from another company in India where I saw this happen. When we removed the performance appraisal system, we came out with something which was quite different. We used to sit down with the people and explain to them what we intend to do as a company for the next four or five years and what their role is and what we expect them to... How do we expect them to contribute? But then came the next question. We turned around to them, "What do you expect from us as a company to help you grow in this direction or anything else?" And so they would give us certain expectations. And so we negotiated, came down and wrote things down. And then came the best part. We said we're gonna meet not once a year, but every month and as often as possible to discuss. That's why I loved it when the Deming Institute came out and were doing it, I'm sure they're doing it even now, in the two and a half day, from "me" to "we". So when we met every month, we used to ask the question, "How are we doing?" Not "What have you done?" "How are we doing?"   0:25:33.0 Balaji Reddie: And so when I heard that, I wanted to tell Bill Bellows I've been doing this since 2004. And when I heard the "me" to "we" thing, which was around 2017, '18, I think I saw that happen and I was, "Wow. All right." So thinking on the same lines. So the faulty practice, all right, when he talks about this, the second one and what needs to be done. Yeah, he gives some other advice also that if you're faced with problems, cut the dividend, cut it out. And that's, of course, when you're having hardships in the company. So he's given us a set of steps there too. And he says finally, if necessary, cut pay, but nobody loses a job. So, of course, those are extreme cases that we need to do, but he gives us advice what needs to be done. Now, the third faulty practice is incentive pay, pay based on performance. And I think that this has a lot to do with the arbitrary numerical targets that are set, right? And then, "If you do this, I'll give you that." So he says that the performance of an individual cannot be measured except maybe on a long term.   0:27:04.7 Balaji Reddie: He said reward for a good performance may be the same as reward to the weatherman for a pleasant day. He's got no control over it. And he says, "Abolish this incentive pay and pay based on performance. Give everyone a chance to take pride." I think you were talking about this last week too when we said about these arbitrary targets that lead to all of this, where somebody made a statement to me that, "The targets were a distraction to me from what my actual job was. My job is this. The target is just distracting me from my job." So very often people feel that way, right? And pay for performance, "I'm supposed to do this," right? And he gives an example. The top salesman may be a heavy loss to the company by overselling, selling to a customer a bigger copying machine than he, the customer, needs, right? And selling a bigger or fancy insurance policy than the customer can handle, promising immediate delivery, promising unauthorized discounts, et cetera, et cetera, right? It's the same thing, when one of my students was doing this, his internship project, he found that there was excessive inventories that were stocked up at an automotive company, at the authorized service stations and the sellers, and they had excessive stocks of components and that's why the sales had dipped over a period of time.   0:28:42.3 Balaji Reddie: Why were they holding so much of stock? Because the previous purchasing guy, or rather sorry, the marketing guy, forced these guys to buy extra, saying that, "I'll give you a discount," and things like that. And so they overstocked themselves to a point where they did not need anything because he had to meet a target. So he pushed it down their throat without really understanding what repercussions this would have. All right? And the problem with that pay for performance, it sounds good. Get what you pay for, pay what you get for. But the funny thing is you'll get only that much. Another case which I can tell you is how this student of mine was... His job during the internship was to collect receivables from the shops that were buying stuff. This was in the appliances, home appliances industry. And after they trained him to do that, how to call up the retail outlets and outstanding statements and then go collect the money, and his target was 500,000 rupees a day. 500,000 rupees a day collection. Now, one day he collected 2 million. My question is, do you think he reported it? Well, he did. And for the next four days he did nothing.   0:30:22.6 Balaji Reddie: Now, there's also a reason why he didn't report it. Because when you don't have Profound Knowledge, if he reported that he collected 2 million, immediately the manager would have said, "From tomorrow, your target is 2.1 million." Now, this is what happens when you don't understand variation. If you drew a control chart and you said that, "Okay, the average is so much, so I'm telling him to collect 500,000," and he's collected 2 million, he's done something special. As a manager, I'd call him and ask him, "Could you please tell me what exactly you did? Because you've not done what I taught you, otherwise you wouldn't have gone to this extent." Sometimes you don't know why you've been successful. The theory comes from the outside, right? So a manager with Profound Knowledge would sit down and have a talk and say, "Okay, you did this right. Now try doing this again." And he goes the next day and collects 2 million again, and then the next day and 2 million again. And then he comes and says, "Okay, boss, I'm ready for a new target. Raise the bar." Now what have you done? You've improved the system.   0:31:24.9 Andrew Stotz: We have new knowledge.   0:31:26.3 Balaji Reddie: We have new knowledge. And that's why, answering the same question what you asked me, it is a bit of both. So you need to understand that it's beyond... And we need to help the people understand why they've been successful. So better practice, here you go, is "abolish incentive pay, give everyone a chance to take pride." So when they start realizing, like this child, this student of mine, why he hit 2 million rupees that day, it would have been great. Instead, he just kept quiet. So see, you've lost an opportunity to really learn, to find a leverage point in a process which can take the process to another level. The next one he talks about is failure to manage the organization as a system. Instead, components are individual profit centers, everybody loses, right? And I think we have these separate business units, and he says here that they don't optimize for the aim of the whole organization. I think this is again, if you look at his Points number 9, 10, and 11, he very clearly mentions these because one thing leads to another, right? Break down the company into silos, each one focuses on what they're doing, and there's no communication, and they don't know their understanding the relationship of their work with the work of others.   0:32:54.9 Balaji Reddie: They don't even talk to each other. And he says here that "enlarge the boundaries of the system," but that comes when you understand your companies much better. And the system must include the future. Definitely, you start with theory. If this is what's happening in the world right now, this is how the world is going to change. Now he says, encourage communication. Now this part, a lot to do with Point number eight, drive out fear, where he says make physical arrangements for informal dialogue between the various components of the company regardless of level of position. That's a very telling statement. Encourage continual learning and advancement. Some companies have formed groups for comradeship in athletics, et cetera, all right, which provided facilitation for study groups. The company can well afford to underwrite the cost of social gatherings in outside locations. I can give you my personal example here. One of my college friends, and this was the time in the '90s when she came to America to do her Master's and then eventually started working in Ford, right? She did her Masters in applied electronics and she joined there as a design engineer. And that time, the world was a different place, and we Indians from India, we tend to be very, very conservative about a lot of things. We don't want to step on people's toes. So when someone says something, we, instead of opposing it, we keep our mouth shut.   0:34:32.6 Balaji Reddie: And so in meetings when they used to discuss and somebody brought up something and she said, "No, I think there's a problem," and they said, "What's the problem?" and she decided not to say anything, but eventually it turned out that she was right. And so the team members had a grouse against her that she doesn't share and she doesn't talk, she doesn't open up. Now what had happened was the HR lady in Ford, when she'd given her resume, when she asked about her hobbies and activities, one of the things she wrote there was dancing. Now she was learning a form of classical dancing here in India and obviously she could not continue pursue that in the United States at that time. So when that lady read dancing, she said, "You know, Ford sponsors ballroom dancing classes. So would you like to go for that?" So she said, "Oh wait, I learned a classical dance form in India. This has nothing to do with this." So she said, "Well, dancing is dancing. Why don't you just go? And we're paying for it, so why don't you go for it?" So she said, "I just enrolled in that class." Now, the first day when she went for the class, I don't know if you've seen the movie Shall We Dance, Andrew, but Richard Gere and Jennifer Lopez, and if you remember the first day, they tell you to hold your partner's hands and you're blindfolded and you follow your partner. It's about trusting the person in front, right? So she said when she went through that and she had to hold a stranger's hands, the whole barrier was broken.   0:36:08.2 Balaji Reddie: And she said, "I don't know, I had a different kind of a feeling when I came back to work." And she started trusting a lot more and it had an impact. Now, who would have dreamt that a ballroom dancing class could have changed my friend like this? That's Point number 13. You just have a theory that this will make that person a better person. You don't really do things to get a return on investment, but it works. So I think this is a beautiful paragraph by Deming where he says that there are ways and means of doing it and give it a shot. You have nothing to lose, right? Now he comes to the next one. Now this one, I think a lot has been spoken about this, MBO. But very clearly, he says "MBO as practiced." He does not blame Peter Drucker at all. In fact, he says Peter Drucker was clear that the objectives are interdependent and they're not mutually exclusive. He says, "Unfortunately, efforts of the various components do not add up. There is interdependence. Thus, the purchasing people may accomplish saving of 10% over the last year and in doing so raise the costs of manufacture and impair quality.   0:37:31.3 Balaji Reddie: They may take advantage of high-volume discount and thus build up inventory, which will hamper flexibility and responsiveness to meet unforeseen changes in the business." Peter Drucker was clear on this point. It's unfortunate that many people do not bother to read his work. In fact, let me just make a note that it was even Juran who said this, that having these kind of disjointed objectives can lead to a lot of problems. He said, of course, you can't be devoid. And that's why I think Deming has been very clear in chapter one of The New Economics where he says there are some things called as facts, right? Facts of life. So giving an arbitrary target is not a fact of life. He says here how he needs to improve that. So setting numerical goals, arbitrary numerical goals, I would say, right? Work on a method for improvement of a process. By what method? I think even Brian Joiner says that when you set this arbitrary goal. And now he goes on to explain that even further where setting a goal beyond the means of the process, they either distort the systems, distort the data, or distort both. Then management by results.   0:38:56.7 Balaji Reddie: Okay. Take immediate action on any fault, defect, complaint, action on the last data point. I think this again brings to the fore the understanding of variation where you need to look and ask questions and where you say, "Okay, I know this normally happens." So understand and improve the processes that produce that. Understand the distinction between common causes and special causes and understand the kind of action to take. So common causes, most of the time you need management to take action. There's a change in system. Yeah, there are some times when it is when a person close to the process can take that decision. Likewise, a special cause can be taken care of by the person closest to the process, but sometimes you need management action too. So that will always be the case, but it's rare, right? And so he talks about Sears, Roebuck, et cetera, and working on improvement of the process. The other one was buying materials and services at the lowest bid, right? Which he goes back to his Point number four, where he says here that it does not take brains to work with the cheapest. It takes brains to choose the best. Right?   0:40:23.4 Balaji Reddie: And estimating the total cost of materials and services, purchase price. Don't go by purchase price alone. And if I know right, Andrew, this was a point he was working on till the end of his life. You see the lady who was actually looking into the publication, the second edition of The New Economics, Elizabeth DiLorenzo. I was in touch with her because in my early days of my introduction to the Deming world, because I was quoting a lot from Out of the Crisis and The New Economics, and she was working for MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study that used to originally publish his books. And she told me a very funny tale of how she was expecting her twins and at the same time she had to release this book. So the joke at MIT was, "What's gonna come out first, the twins or the book?" And since Deming was no more, she had to release that very quickly. So March '94 is when she released the book, and she said her twins were born some weeks later. So they are as old as this book. Now, she was telling me that till the end, the one aspect of what he was working on was, if you see the notes in the appendix and purchase of supplies and service. So continuing purchase of supplies and services, World 1, World 2, World 3 and World 4. He made this so clear. I think nobody has made it clearer. Okay, World 3, sorry, there's no World 4. So he talks about this and he talks about how practical you need to be about this, right?   0:42:18.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, and I underlined something in there from a long time ago that said, "Sudden jump to a single supplier is inadvisable."   0:42:28.8 Balaji Reddie: Right. He says there's a method of doing that.   0:42:32.5 Andrew Stotz: Yep.   0:42:33.2 Balaji Reddie: And I teach that method, by the way, where you start with the product, then go on to the process, and then go on to the system. And that takes time. You just can't get up one fine morning and say, "You're my sole supplier." It doesn't happen that way. It takes a lot of effort and a lot of doing, right? The next faulty practice is delegate quality to someone else or some group. And this is, I remember my interaction with Dr. Juran on this, right? I had just received my certificate for ISO 9000, I became a lead assessor, and I quite liked the new standard that had come out at that time in the year 2000 because it had a lot of Deming flavor to it. Plan-Do-Study-Act had come in and things like that. I was quite happy, the definitions and this. I said, "It's better than what it was." It's not, they had a long way to go, no doubt about it, but I said at least they've broken away from the defense mode where they copied the whole document from, right? And when he asked me the question that, "What's the status of quality in India?" and I said, "Well, earlier on it was a lot of standards-oriented and ISO 9000 played a huge role in that," and he just raised his hand as to tell me to stop and he said, "I am very disappointed with the ISO." And then he made this statement, "The ISO 9000 is a standard for mediocrity splendidly marketed by the ISO." And I just stared at him. I said, "What?" because I had just received my certificate, so obviously I was very touchy about it. And I said, "Dr. Juran, a little harsh." He said, "I've just begun."   0:44:26.4 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And the problem is, is there's a lot of money to be made from it and it's an ingrained system.   0:44:30.5 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. So I just asked him, why would you say that? They made a lot of changes. He said, "Yes, but two things are missing." And one of them, he said, is something about leadership. Go back and read it. And then I went and read the standard again, and I realized what he was trying to say here. There was a lot of work that they were delegating to a person called the management representative, and he says, "Sorry, you can't delegate this to someone else. It begins at the top." Ed Deming also said that. He said, "It begins at the top. Only they can do this."   0:45:10.5 Andrew Stotz: I have a little story on that.   0:45:13.5 Balaji Reddie: Sure, sure, sure.   0:45:14.8 Andrew Stotz: In my coffee business, maybe 15 or 20 years ago, we got a big, big customer, and overall, they were a very good customer. But they picked us over all of our competitors. And then they told us, "Okay, in a month we're gonna come and inspect your factory, and if you get below 80%, then you're not gonna be our supplier." And so we said, "Well, I study with Deming, and I know quality, and we've never had a problem with quality ever." And my business partner, Dale, is very focused on the principles of quality. So they came, we were quite proud, and then by the end of the day, they had 600 questions they went through. And by the end of the day, we were like, "Yeah, what's our score?" And they said, "65. You're fired." They said, "You have 10 weeks or five weeks to fix these top 10 things." And then at that moment, we had a revelation, which is, oh, to them, paper is quality. And what I've always said, what I learned from that, was that it wasn't a big deal. We did the paperwork that they asked for, and then we got the job. And they were a customer for 16 years and a very good customer. But what we learned, one of the things I say, is that we had the heart of quality. They asked us for the paperwork that they thought represented quality. That's not such a big deal. But could you imagine having been trained that paperwork is quality, and then you have to try to develop the heart of quality? Very difficult.   0:47:01.9 Balaji Reddie: Very difficult. And now I come to this picture that he's drawn on page 37 of The New Economics, the old edition. I think the new one, let me just see what that is. Okay, that's on page 27. So he says here that unique processes that produce figures, all these principles have been applied to just 3%. Now, I have my own version of this particular picture that he's put here. Imagine an X and a Y axis, all right? And on the X axis, you can put down measures that are known. Close to the origin, you can write "known", and then as it goes away from that, "unknown", right? And then you have on the Y axis "measurable", and as you go up, "unmeasurable". So because he said that most of the things are unknown and unknowable, and among the known, you have only some fraction of those which are measurable. So the 3% deal with those factors or those parameters which are known and measurable. There are many parameters, he says 97%, which are unknown and unmeasurable, but you still need to manage them.   0:48:26.5 Balaji Reddie: And that's where he gives us a lot of advice that comes after this. Okay, when after this diagram, beautiful paragraphs in his book. "Beware of common sense," he says. And of course, he gives the example of Gallery Furniture, salary instead of commissions. Also goals, aims, hopes, facts of life, futility of a numerical goal. And a picture may help, where he talks about the goal being beyond the capability of a system. And will the goal be achieved? And he says redefinition of terms and distortion, et cetera. Gives a lot of examples there. And then he goes on to give even more examples. Okay, if you say merit pay, et cetera. Need to manage by results, wrong. And the last bit, the note where he says America 2000 was originally put together in December 1989 at the educational summit between the President and the governors of the 50 states. These goals were published in February 1990 by the White House, later incorporated into America 2000. This job may be an example of an enlargement of a committee. We shall learn in chapter four, he says, that the enlargement of a committee is not a way to acquire profound knowledge. How could they know?   0:49:57.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, and so what's happened to education since then in America?   0:50:00.6 Balaji Reddie: Oh, no comments. And we in India are almost going the same way. Of course, in some cases they've gone back to the roots saying that, no, we need to get back to our original way of educating people, right? We had this thing of exposing a child to all the different kinds of subjects, right? Like you have history, geography, languages, mathematics, science, just about everything. But the idea was to very quickly identify which child is resonating with what, because we need these different kind of people to work together. Some people are good at memorizing, some people are good at analyzing, some people are good at imagination. And so you throw all this out and then you cast the net and then you say the job of the teacher is to identify, okay, you're good at this, you're good at this. The problem is when you start saying if you're good at this, you are intelligent, and if you're not good at this, you're not. There are different kinds of intelligence. I would say the problem is more with the teachers and not with the system.   0:51:16.5 Andrew Stotz: We should wrap up at this point.   0:51:18.9 Balaji Reddie: Absolutely.   0:51:19.6 Andrew Stotz: How would you summarize what you want people to take away from this discussion?   0:51:24.0 Balaji Reddie: Sure. Go back and read chapter two in The New Economics. Dr. Deming has very clearly shown us why we need to do what we need to do. You're gonna be seeing things differently. As he used to say towards the end of his life, "I'm not here to teach you anything new. I'm here to make you see things that you normally would not see." And now he's just shown us what we thought was normal in the working of a company is actually detrimental to the running of a company over the long term. So my advice is go back, read this. You could watch some of the videos of the Deming Institute, especially on the 14 Points. We will be covering the 14 points later, but I would say that this is a real elaboration of his Diseases and he's given us what needs to be done. Not just pointing out what was wrong, but he tells us what needs to be done. That's why the heavy losses form an integral part of the preamble to actually what is the next step that you're taking your foot off the brake, so to say, trying to identify things that are pulling your company back.   0:52:37.8 Andrew Stotz: Well, Balaji, I want to thank you for this discussion. And recently I have been reading chapter two and I saw a lot of new stuff. It's funny how you just keep rereading. And then today you've just made me realize I gotta go back and read that chapter two because he does really the way he did the tables. I kind of forgot all about that. When I went back to it about three or four weeks ago, I was like, oh, this is really great. I kind of forgot about it. And now as you go through it, it's the tables was what I was focused on, but now I'm also seeing the text in between that you're highlighting that's valuable. So for everyone out there, grab your book, go to New Economics, go to chapter two. It's just gold. It's gold.   0:53:30.7 Balaji Reddie: It's gold.   0:53:31.0 Andrew Stotz: So, and for listeners out there, remember to go to deming.org and jump into DemingNEXT to continue your journey.   0:53:37.7 Balaji Reddie: Absolutely. Absolutely.   0:53:39.9 Andrew Stotz: Yep. And this is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and that is, "People are entitled to joy in work."   0:53:52.2 Balaji Reddie: Absolutely.

Romance novels—especially historical romance novels—thrive on heroes and heroines who don't match in terms of social class. There must be conflict, after all, or the novel would end before it began. But not even George Bernard Shaw's mismatched couple in Pygmalion (later My Fair Lady) can claim quite as much distance as Shana Galen's Tamsin Archer and the Honourable Garret Kildare, the main characters in A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord (Berkley, 2026). Tamsin's once comfortable if never opulent life took a sharp downward turn when a Royal Navy press gang hauled her father off to unwanted service on a seagoing vessel, service from which he never returned. By 1813, when we meet her at age twenty-three, she's doing her best to support her injured mother and two much younger siblings by selling flowers in the street. A young man named Garret speaks kindly to her and pays her a shilling when she's expecting far less, and as a result she remembers him fondly, but it's not until two years later that she meets him again. By then, a chimney sweep has taken her younger siblings and holds them hostage to payments she can never make and that he might not honor even if she did. She's desperate to get them back. In 1815, Garret's life also makes a dramatic turn. His father, the Earl of Glenister, announces that the family has run out of money and must sell its ancestral lands in Ireland. Not exactly poverty, especially by Tamsin's standards, but still uncomfortable. Garret and his three brothers—Liam, Killian, and Daire—make a bet that one of them will secure the hand of an heiress, thus sparing their younger sister, Mariah, from having to marry an elderly and decrepit duke. But as Garret sets out to woo his heiress, he encounters Tamsin somewhere she's not supposed to be … Shana Galen, a former English teacher, has written more than fifty romances. A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord, first in her The Heiress Hunters series, is the latest. Find out more about her and her books here. C. P. Lesley is the author of two historical fiction series set during the childhood of Ivan the Terrible and four other novels, including one co-written with P.K. Adams. Her next book, Song of the Silk Weaver, will appear in the summer or fall of 2026. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Romance novels—especially historical romance novels—thrive on heroes and heroines who don't match in terms of social class. There must be conflict, after all, or the novel would end before it began. But not even George Bernard Shaw's mismatched couple in Pygmalion (later My Fair Lady) can claim quite as much distance as Shana Galen's Tamsin Archer and the Honourable Garret Kildare, the main characters in A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord (Berkley, 2026). Tamsin's once comfortable if never opulent life took a sharp downward turn when a Royal Navy press gang hauled her father off to unwanted service on a seagoing vessel, service from which he never returned. By 1813, when we meet her at age twenty-three, she's doing her best to support her injured mother and two much younger siblings by selling flowers in the street. A young man named Garret speaks kindly to her and pays her a shilling when she's expecting far less, and as a result she remembers him fondly, but it's not until two years later that she meets him again. By then, a chimney sweep has taken her younger siblings and holds them hostage to payments she can never make and that he might not honor even if she did. She's desperate to get them back. In 1815, Garret's life also makes a dramatic turn. His father, the Earl of Glenister, announces that the family has run out of money and must sell its ancestral lands in Ireland. Not exactly poverty, especially by Tamsin's standards, but still uncomfortable. Garret and his three brothers—Liam, Killian, and Daire—make a bet that one of them will secure the hand of an heiress, thus sparing their younger sister, Mariah, from having to marry an elderly and decrepit duke. But as Garret sets out to woo his heiress, he encounters Tamsin somewhere she's not supposed to be … Shana Galen, a former English teacher, has written more than fifty romances. A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord, first in her The Heiress Hunters series, is the latest. Find out more about her and her books here. C. P. Lesley is the author of two historical fiction series set during the childhood of Ivan the Terrible and four other novels, including one co-written with P.K. Adams. Her next book, Song of the Silk Weaver, will appear in the summer or fall of 2026. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literature

Romance novels—especially historical romance novels—thrive on heroes and heroines who don't match in terms of social class. There must be conflict, after all, or the novel would end before it began. But not even George Bernard Shaw's mismatched couple in Pygmalion (later My Fair Lady) can claim quite as much distance as Shana Galen's Tamsin Archer and the Honourable Garret Kildare, the main characters in A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord (Berkley, 2026). Tamsin's once comfortable if never opulent life took a sharp downward turn when a Royal Navy press gang hauled her father off to unwanted service on a seagoing vessel, service from which he never returned. By 1813, when we meet her at age twenty-three, she's doing her best to support her injured mother and two much younger siblings by selling flowers in the street. A young man named Garret speaks kindly to her and pays her a shilling when she's expecting far less, and as a result she remembers him fondly, but it's not until two years later that she meets him again. By then, a chimney sweep has taken her younger siblings and holds them hostage to payments she can never make and that he might not honor even if she did. She's desperate to get them back. In 1815, Garret's life also makes a dramatic turn. His father, the Earl of Glenister, announces that the family has run out of money and must sell its ancestral lands in Ireland. Not exactly poverty, especially by Tamsin's standards, but still uncomfortable. Garret and his three brothers—Liam, Killian, and Daire—make a bet that one of them will secure the hand of an heiress, thus sparing their younger sister, Mariah, from having to marry an elderly and decrepit duke. But as Garret sets out to woo his heiress, he encounters Tamsin somewhere she's not supposed to be … Shana Galen, a former English teacher, has written more than fifty romances. A Shop Girl's Guide to Wooing a Lord, first in her The Heiress Hunters series, is the latest. Find out more about her and her books here. C. P. Lesley is the author of two historical fiction series set during the childhood of Ivan the Terrible and four other novels, including one co-written with P.K. Adams. Her next book, Song of the Silk Weaver, will appear in the summer or fall of 2026. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/historical-fiction

What happens between the ears drives what happens on the forecourt. That is not motivational filler. That is the core argument from Dr. Tharaka, a consultant psychiatrist and TEDx speaker who has spent 15 years studying how the mind affects performance, and now brings that science into the working world. In this episode, he and Simon Bowkett dig into the real psychology of why salespeople go from the Midas touch one week to the SADIMS the next, what manager expectations actually do to the people they lead, and why visualisation is not hocus pocus. If you have ever watched a salesperson fall apart after one bad deal, or wondered why your team's belief level is so hard to shift, this episode gives you something practical to work with.   What's covered: • Why winning needs redefining beyond cars sold and commission earned, and what the 11 growth areas have to do       with sales performance • The Mind-Action-Profit framework: why getting the mind right comes before the action, and the action before the     profit • How to help a salesperson climb out of the SADIMS when deals keep collapsing around them • Why self-compassion is a performance tool: the science behind talking to yourself like a friend rather than an     enemy • The Pygmalion effect: how a manager's high expectations directly and measurably improve team performance • The Golem effect: what consistently low expectations do to the people you lead, and why it matters on a sales floor • The neuroscience of visualisation and why athletes, actors and top performers all use it for the same reason • The 'what went well' huddle: a simple team meeting tool to retrain the brain to hunt for good data instead of     problems   Dr. Tharaka is a consultant psychiatrist, TEDx speaker and high-performance coach who spent 15 years in clinical medicine before bringing the science of the mind into business and leadership. He has appeared on Channel 4 and works with senior leadership teams across multiple industries. His central argument is that when you manage the mind, you manage the bottom line.   If you manage people in the trade and want to understand what is actually driving performance on your floor, this episode is worth your time. About Symco Training: Symco Training was founded in 2000 by Simon Bowkett and it was his belief that the business had to offer its clients something different. That difference was clear to Simon from his days in the dealership when he experienced many sales trainers who had all the answers, but were unable, unwilling or both to actually show the delegate how they could be implemented. It remains the ethos of the business today. You see, Symco only employ trainers that are committed to delivering not only in spiring and insightful training, but are equally as happy to demonstrate these skills and techniques with real customers in your own showroom. We believe in order for sales training to be effective and in Simon's words 'real world', it needs to be tried and tested in the only place it matters the showroom floor. There is no room for theory when your goals are for your team to sell more cars, hours or parts and retain more profit. In dealerships around the world the focus applied by many of the sales executives is to try and sell a deal. Symco specialise in getting your teams to focus on selling themselves, the product and then supporting this with the deal. To find out more visit: www.symcotraining.co.uk

Today, Jill explores the Pygmalion effect—the psychological principle that high expectations lead to better performance—and how it applies to coaching, team leadership, and even parenting. Treating people as more capable than they believe themselves to be is one of the most powerful tools a leader has. The opposite is also true: named the Golem effect, having low expectations of someone can tank performance or create client dependency through overly prescriptive meal plans or 24/7 availability. The bottom line is, whether you're leading a team, coaching clients, or raising kids, believing in people before they believe in themselves is what gives them permission to rise.   Get on the waitlist for FBA: https://jillfitfree.com/fba-waitlist/   Listen to Harnessing Your Authentic Voice to Make More Sales with Tracy Goodwin   Jill is a fitness professional and business coach who effectively made the transition from training clients in person and having no time to build anything else to training clients online and actually being more successful. Today, Jill helps other coaches to do the same.   Connect with me! Instagram: @jillfit | @fitbizu Facebook: @jillfit Website: jillfit.com

How can horror writing help readers — and writers — work through psychological trauma? Why does cross-genre fiction take longer to find an audience, but pay off in the long run? Is running a direct sales store actually worth the inventory, postage, and learning curve? And how can SubStack work for fiction authors? With psychotherapist and award-winning author P.D. Alleva. In the intro, thoughts on why in-person conferences are still worth it, even when they are a challenge for sensitive introverts! and tips for making the best of conferences [Self-Publishing Show]. Today's show is sponsored by Draft2Digital, self-publishing with support, where you can get free formatting, free distribution to multiple stores, and a host of other benefits. Just go to www.draft2digital.com to get started. This show is also supported by my Patrons. Join my Community at Patreon.com/thecreativepenn P.D. Alleva is the award-winning author of horror, sci-fi, thrillers, and fantasy books. He's also a psychotherapist. You can listen above or on your favorite podcast app or read the notes and links below. Here are the highlights and the full transcript is below. Show Notes Why horror puts the human condition on display better than any other genre Emotional trauma as the silent psychological killer most people overlook The pros and challenges of cross-genre writing and finding your audience Practical lessons from running a direct store, including integration and signed-copy fulfilment How a 3 a.m. writing routine keeps the writing separate from the marketing and admin Serialising fiction on Substack, multiple newsletters, and avoiding paid subscriber promotions Why Facebook groups, TikTok Lives, and the three-to-one rule are working right now You can find P.D. at PDAlleva.com or on Substack. Transcript of the interview with P.D. Alleva Jo: P.D. Alleva is the award-winning author of horror, sci-fi, thrillers, and fantasy books. He's also a psychotherapist. So welcome, Paul. PD: Thank you very much. Thank you for having me. This is a great opportunity. I love doing interviews, and I love talking to great people. Jo: Oh, good. Well, first up— Tell us a bit more about you and how you got into writing and being an indie author. PD: So I've been writing since I was a kid, at least second grade and more than likely even before that. I've always had that creative itch. Getting into indie author publishing, I published my first book in 2011. At the time I was also operating my own business, which took up about 24 hours of my time every single day. Then I kind of got through that and sold that in 2016, and I'm like, you know what? The time has come. I'd always written books, poetry, short stories, but never really did anything with them because I just didn't have the time. So in 2017, that's when I really came out and said, all right, the time is now. Indie publishing was doing great. The one good thing I do love about Amazon is they allowed us to come out there and start showing our craft to people. So in 2017, I just started—let's do this. Let's write full time. Let's put books out there. Let's be creative. Let's really get those juices flowing. Plus, I was getting a little bit old, and I was like, now is definitely the time to do this. Since then I've been publishing consistently, and most of my books are horror books, but I dabble. I have a sci-fi series, and I'm starting to get into psychological thrillers too. I've got a new psychological thriller that'll be published in early 2027 called Girl on a Mission. For the most part, I'm definitely into the horror genre—books, short stories, all that good fun stuff. Jo: Right, so a couple of follow-ups. You said you're a bit old. Can you give us what decade you're in at least? PD: Well, I'm 51, so born in 1971. Jo: Oh, there you go. Same age as me. PD: All right, good. See that? So we're going head-to-head there. Jo: I don't think that's old at all. Also, you mentioned you sold your business in 2016. So what was your business before? Because I think business experience is so important. PD: Agreed 100%. So I'm a psychotherapist, and I had owned a treatment centre for mental health and addiction. That was started in 2011, and in 2016 is when it sold. Since then, my wife and I started a private practice. So I still, even to this day—well, about a year and a half ago is when I stopped. I specialise in trauma, PTSD, and addiction. Trauma mostly. Most of my caseload has always been trauma, PTSD, sexual abuse, psychological abuse, war-type trauma. I was doing that mostly individually since 2016 in private practice, and I'll still go into treatment centres and see patients there too, specifically for trauma. About a year and a half ago is when I started wanting to do writing 100% full time. I thought about becoming a professor, maybe going to college, but then I wasn't sure if I wanted to get into that full time, as far as a caseload and school and everything like that. So I decided to just do group therapy, group facilitation, and I've been doing that consistently since then. It may be 15 hours a week. I do love to give back, and to me, it's more what I teach. I specialise in neuro-linguistic programming, bilateral stimulation or EMDR, hypnotherapy, science of mind concepts, psychopharmacology, biological bases of behaviour—which is pretty much how your brain works—ancient wisdom, quantum physics. I do this in a drug addiction treatment centre mostly, also mental health. And of course, just living an addictive lifestyle is traumatic, too, in and of itself. So pretty much I'm teaching them. Behaviour modification is a big part of what I'm teaching during that time. You'll see that, too, if you read my books. There's two things you can figure out from my books. You can figure out how to murder people and get away with it, and two, you can figure out how to overcome trauma as well. The whole “murder people and get away with it” comes from my upbringing. I have a very sorted past, let's put it that way. My upbringing was very different than what most people grow up in. Jo: Oh, can you give us any more than that? Now everyone's like, “Oh.” PD: “What's going on with this guy, right?” So I grew up, let's say, quote unquote, “in an Italian New York family.” Jo: Okay. All right. PD: That might give people ideas, right? Jo: That's going to give people a lot of ideas. PD: If you've ever seen the movie Goodfellas, I kind of grew up in that atmosphere, and with even some of those people too. My family had connections to those people in that movie, which I find very funny. If you watch that movie with me, you get a very different perspective on what's going on in the movie. Jo: Wow. So you're an interesting guy with an interesting background, with a very interesting backstory job as well. Some people are like, “Well, of course he's writing horror because horror is just awful and full of slasher gore and all that.” I often have to say to people who don't read horror, “Look, it's not like that.” Maybe some of it is, sure. But most of it isn't. Could you talk about how reading and writing horror can also be psychologically healthy? How do these worlds intertwine for you? PD: Well, sure. It 100% can be healthy. Especially over the last few years, there's a trend going on out there right now where people are taking their trauma and putting it into a creative process through poems, short stories, and even novels. They're taking their trauma and giving it a face, like a monster, where people are overcoming that monster within the creative process. I always say that horror is the genre that puts on display, better than any other genre out there, the human condition. Why is that? When people are in a terrifying situation, you really see who they are. You get to the heart of the matter of who that person is by putting them in these horrific but undefinable situations where it's like, what are they going to come out as? That real true personality needs to come out, and that courage comes out. That's huge in horror, and I think horror gets such a bad name. Now, I know there's the extreme horror and the splatterpunk, and that has its kind of role too in what I'm saying, but that's where horror is getting its bad reputation out there with the over-the-top type of gore. For the most part, that's a small part of the horror genre. It's a subgenre for a reason. It has its readership, and that's fine. Nothing wrong with it. I read it all the time. I find a lot of joy in it, a lot of excitement. However, for the most part, any horror novel that is not completely with the gore and stuff like splatterpunk can be seen as a psychological thriller, and a lot of psychological thrillers can be seen as a horror novel. Look at books like The Silence of the Lambs, Red Dragon. That's horrific as well, but if you read the novel, it's in there. It just gets that bad rap right now, and it's not all gore. Most horror novels that I read today are psychological horror. It's tame on the gore, and the psychological aspect is there. I always see that psychological aspect—it's like psychological trauma. Most people, even in my industry, when people are out there and you mention trauma, PTSD, they're thinking about sexual abuse, physical abuse, or war-type trauma. The silent psychological one—I once wrote an article called “Emotional Trauma: The Silent Psychological Killer.” The one that's out there is the psychological trauma, the emotional trauma that is widespread. Most people go through that, and it could even be from parent to child, and most people don't understand that that's a traumatic experience. It's like a distortion of reality that you're experiencing that then creates a belief system in your brain, and you're constantly acting out that belief system. That's where the psychological component of horror really comes out. People breaking through that psychological belief system that was created through a traumatic experience by reaching courage and coming out through a horrific situation. Jo: Yes, it really annoys me, because with romance, of course people understand that romance is a huge genre. Something like a small town sweet romance is a world away from the bully romantasy, dark, or mafia. Mafia romance is a really big thing with very dark themes. I'm like, well, how can you understand that romance is a huge genre with all these different subgenres, and not think that horror or thriller or fantasy or sci-fi all have so many different subgenres within them? I personally read a lot of supernatural horror, but rarely the slasher gore kind of stuff. So I'm really glad you said that, and hopefully more people will open up a bit more. I did also want to ask you about what you write. You write all these different things. You write standalone—I mean, often horror is standalone—but you also have some series. How do you balance it? What are the benefits of cross-genre writing, but also the challenges of it? PD: Okay. So obviously I love cross-genre writing. To me, I use fantasy to explain the supernatural elements. I blend mostly a tad of fantasy to help explain the supernatural components in my supernatural novels. When I write sci-fi, specifically sci-fi, that has the fantasy element in it too, but there's also a tad of horror in there as well. It's just who I am. When I grew up, I had a lot of different influences. I had Star Wars on one side, and then I'm watching B-rated '80s slasher films on the other side. Those two mixes just kind of followed me throughout my life, and that's why I like putting them into my novels. As I tell my patients, don't limit yourself. Never limit yourself. If you're just limiting yourself to one genre, you're missing out on so much more that's out there. So I love the blend of mixing genres. It just gets my goat each and every time. It is a challenge though. I remember when I first started getting into indie publishing, I was never big into Facebook and social media up until I started becoming an indie author. Before that, with my type of upbringing, you don't advertise yourself. You don't advertise where you're going. That's a big no-no. So I always had this aversion to social media. I'll tell you a funny story. It was the late 2000s, probably 2006. I was a full-time single father at that time, and I was living in Florida. My family—brothers and sisters-in-law—were living in New York, and my sister-in-law said, “Get a Facebook account so we can see pictures of the kids.” I said, “Oh.” I didn't want to do it, but I said, “Okay,” so I did it. And I'm thinking, looking at this Facebook thing, “How do I put pictures on here?” So I figured out how to put pictures in folders. Then I phone called her, and I'm like, “Okay, so they're on there.” And they're like, “Well, where are they?” I'm like, “I put them in these folders. You can go and look at them.” She's like, “No, you've got to post them.” That to me was like, “I'm not posting pictures of my kids.” That was a big no-no. It didn't click. When I got on there finally in 2016, 2017, I'm like, “Okay, so I need to figure out social media. As an indie author, I need to be on there, so I need to get through this aversion and get on there.” I started noticing how people are so particular with their genres. If they're reading a romance, it had to be very specific with that exact type of romance, and if you deviated from it, they're not going to like it. So that was the challenge. I was like, “All right, number one, I'm not going to dilute myself” and say, “All right, take things out of my writing or out of my novel just so I could cater to a certain type of audience.” I'm like, “I'm not going to do that.” I know with me, myself, as a reader, I'll read everything. I don't limit myself to a specific genre. I'll read psychological thrillers. I'll read romance. I've been doing that all my life. So I'm like, if there's a person like me out there—and look at this, I just met like four other people who also read cross genres—then I know that there's at least another 30,000 people, and I know that at least then there's 300,000, then there's three million people out there. So just write the books that you're writing and find your audience. Now, that takes longer. So you've got to chip away. Chip away. You're going to find readers here and there, and then that reader kind of tells a few people about you, and then you've got a few more readers. Then you keep going, and you go on these Facebook groups, and you do a whole bunch of different things, and then you gather a few more readers. Then they're telling some friends, and then you've got more. The process takes a lot longer, yes, 100% agreed, but I would say be true to yourself and you can never go wrong. Jo: Yes, I agree. I write cross-genre as well, and I've browsed your collection. Golem was the one I was like, “Ooh, yes, I like that one.” I haven't read it yet, it's on my list. I think when you're cross-genre, my people come to my store as well, and it's like, “Okay, I'm interested in lots of things, but this is the one by this author that I'm interested in.” Whereas with other authors who only write one type of thing, then I might not like any of their stuff. So I think there are definitely pros and cons and different ways into our world. I also wanted to ask you about the differences in business. Obviously you ran this treatment centre and there were physical humans on all sides, and now you've got a business as an author. So what have you learned in business from what you used to do and what you do now? PD: Okay. You're right. The treatment centre industry is very different from what I'm doing now, but it's still people. Treat those people right, have integrity. If you say you're going to do something, follow through with it. My word is my bond type of thing. That definitely has fed into the writing and publishing industry that I'm in now in a huge way. Just connecting with people is, to me, the biggest part of it. I mean, treatment centres, you've got to connect with people. When I would market the treatment centre, where would I go? I would go to hospitals, residential facilities, detoxes, and talk to them about my programme and why they should be referring clients there. It's the same thing here. Why should you be reading my books? You get there through interviews like what I'm doing here with you. Other podcasts. You get there by doing Facebook Lives, TikTok. I haven't started TikTok Lives yet, but I actually love that platform. I'm falling in love with it. IG Lives, anything like that where you're talking to people and you're making a connection with those people. Through that, I've gathered so many different types of readers who are like, “Yes, I'll give this book a shot.” And then they read it and they're like, “Hey, this is really good, and I'm going to read another book.” With my books, I have very different books. Golem is my psychological horror novel. It's my slow-burn psychological horror novel, heavily inspired by Frankenstein and the Pygmalion myth. It's my first true horror book that I published. Then there's Jigglyspot and the Zero Intellect, which is inspired by B-rated '80s horror movies and the old grindhouse movies of the '70s, and it's mind manipulation. It's just wild and bizarre. And then The Sleepy Hollow Incident is my Gothic tale—it's like a dark romance mixed in with Gothic horror. So I always try to put something for everyone that's out there. To me, when I'm writing, it's got to be about depth, psychological depth. I always refer to my books to be like peeling layers off a Texas-sized onion. The more you read, the more in-depth you get into not only the characters, but the story. It's just something that comes out of me. It's part of me. That's the way I always have to do it. I always have to put that depth in there. To me, that's good storytelling. When I grew up, I read a lot of classic literature. Yes, Edgar Allan Poe, but also Dante's Inferno, Milton's Paradise Lost, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, the Brontë sisters. Keep going. Ray Bradbury, Ayn Rand, Daphne du Maurier, Shirley Jackson. Those to me are my books that I absolutely love. So there's a sweet science in today's fast-paced, social media type of world in marrying the depth of the old classic literature and the entertainment value that is required today for being an author. There's that sweet science behind it, and I love just hitting that nail on the head every time. Jo: So did you ever pitch traditional publishing, or have you thought about going that way? Because I also find that a lot of horror actually sits very close to literary. Like, I read a lot more literary horror than I do in some of the other genres. PD: Correct. So in the beginning, yes. Not in a long time. I maybe went to a couple of indie publishers, but as far as traditional, the Big Five publishers, I have an aversion to them for a big reason. I know people who have worked in that industry that have told me some pretty bad horror stories about those places. So I haven't sent anything to that type of place in a very, very long time. Maybe close to 20 years. Indie publishers, the small presses, yes, here and there, but even then, I'm always moving at a fast pace. So if I've got a book and I'm sending it out as a query letter, by the time that query letter is even read, I'm almost done publishing. I love that aspect of it. The control of my story, where I know where this character's going. And listen, I've got my beta readers, I've got my ARC readers. They're there to tell me, “Hey, maybe you should change this or change that.” Whether I take that advice or not, of course my editor too, is really up to me. I always put out the book that I know is the one I want to read. And to me, I haven't gone wrong in doing so. I know with traditional publishing, you sometimes get too many thoughts in the pot there. Let's put it that way. Jo: Okay, so coming back to being indie then. You mentioned Amazon earlier, but you have a store where you sell direct. Many authors are doing this now, but it can be a challenge. So what have you found are the pros and cons of your direct store? What's working? Any lessons there? PD: Okay. So I use a place called Big Cartel. They're the platform where the books are on. They're hosting my website, PDAlleva.com. The big challenge was actually just starting it. It was so overwhelming. How do I put this on there? At the time, I've got all these books, so how do I present them? I'm even going to be doing another revamp with it too, because I want better pictures—taking pictures of the books, stuff like that, instead of just having the covers on there. I also have a lot of shirts that I'm selling. So I think the biggest challenge is just getting on there and starting it. Then of course, you've got to learn a whole new platform, and the mechanics, and how people are going to be downloading, and how that's done on an e-book versus a print version of the book. So it's a huge learning curve that you've really got to put your focus on and give it time. What most people like in indie publishing is signed copies. It's a huge part of indie publishing, selling those signed copies. People love a signed copy, and that's primarily what my website is for. You can order signed copies from me. I also use a place called IngramSpark, and they're more like a distributor. They're used by everyone. They've been around for a very long time. Traditional publishing uses them too, and they're just distributing your novel. I'd say about a year ago, maybe two years ago, they started where you can sell your books on discount through them as well. So I have that on my website too, where you're just clicking on the book and you're pretty much going directly to their site and you're buying paperbacks and hardbacks at a discount. That's going well too. For the most part, people are definitely coming to my site because they want the signed copies. A good thing with indie publishing is limited editions, first print copies, special editions. That type of stuff really just takes off. People love to see that, especially in the indie community. You can sell them too. I go to a few different book conventions during the year, and the limited editions are there. Like I said, people love the signed copies. They love being a part of that and getting that signed copy. They treasure it, just like I treasure my books too. I'm not referring to my books that I've written, but books that I have as well. I love my e-reader, don't get me wrong, but I still prefer the physical copy—the paperback, and even more so than the paperback, the hardback. So people love those signed copies, and that's why I created the website, to sell on there for them. Jo: Yes, I mean, we're getting to a point now though where I think some people are questioning the pros and cons of it. For example, you doing the signed copies—I don't do that from my Shopify store because I don't want to hold stock and I don't want to deal with postage. So I only do it when I do a Kickstarter. I've just finished one recently, Bones of the Deep, and I'm going up to the printer, and I'm going to sign a couple of hundred copies and then they do the postage. That's the only way I'm willing to do it because of the pain of getting books to your house, signing them, getting them in the post. So how do you manage that practically? PD: Okay, so the inventory's there. I don't go and sign everything right away. I just keep the inventory. Once somebody buys the book, then I'll pull out the book, log it and all that good fun stuff, sign it, and then ship it out immediately. Here in my country, we get discounts at the United States Post Office because they're books. So they pass that shipping cost over to the reader too, so it's a little bit cheaper for shipping. I'll just take books once or twice a week over to the United States Postal Service and ship those books out. I don't sign them until I actually get that order. Jo: How many do you have in your house? It's the holding stock of all the backlist that is the problem. PD: Ooh, gotcha. All right. That's why I have a two-car garage. But here's the thing, I won't order 500 at a time. I'll order 20 at a time. Jo: Okay. Right. PD: When I see that inventory's getting low, I'll order another 20 at a time. Jo: And you get those from IngramSpark? PD: Correct. When the new one comes out, maybe at that time I'm just selling those, bringing those to conventions that I go to. Or maybe doing a sale on those books at that time to get rid of the inventory so it's not sitting around anymore. Jo: I think that's so important. Then like you mentioned, you do T-shirts or shirts. That is also really hard because of sizing. So is that all print on demand? PD: Yes. So I don't really hold the stock on the shirts. When I get an order, whatever the size is at that time, I go directly to the place and order it. I use a place called Sublimation Station that's here in Orlando. They do great all-over print T-shirts. They're fantastic. I just did one for The Sleepy Hollow Incident. So The Sleepy Hollow Incident is one long story, and it's broken up into four books. Each book has its own. The covers are fantastic. I use a lady named Cherie Foxley. She's a phenomenal cover designer. So the shirts are, like, book one is on the front of one shirt with book two on the back, and then the second shirt is book three on the cover and book four on the back. However, I can customise those. I just did a giveaway in my Facebook group and I let people know I could customise them, and she wanted book one and book four, so I just got that and sent it out to her. Now, if people go ahead and order that on the website, I can just order it right away from them, boom, and that place will get it shipped right then and there. Jo: Right, so they do the shipping. These are all sort of practical things that people need to answer because I feel like sometimes it's like, “Oh, yes, having a direct store is great,” but there's actually quite a lot of work that goes into it, isn't there? PD: There is. There's a lot of work. You're pretty much opening almost like your own brick-and-mortar store at that point. You just don't have walk-in traffic coming in—your traffic is all coming online. So there is a lot to it, but it's worth it. If you're a self-published author or even a small indie press, it's good to have. Because like I said, people love the signed copies. Jo: When you say it's worth it, is it worth it financially or just because you like to serve the customers in that way? PD: Both. Jo: Right. So it is financially worth it for you? PD: Yes. Jo: I was talking to a friend of mine and saying, are you valuing your time in terms of things like taking the books to the post office and stuff like that? Do you find it eats into your writing at all, or do you just manage it all separately? PD: No, I manage it separately. So I'm an early morning riser. I get up at 3:00 in the morning, and that's when I write my books or do editing or brainstorming. I'm about to write a new novella now called The Adam and Eve Story, which is actually based on a little-known CIA shelved book from the 1990s called The Adam and Eve Story as well. So I've been brainstorming that, and I was doing that this morning. I get up at 3:00 a.m. and I do my writing, and by the time the kids are up and by the time the wife is up, it's like 8:00 a.m. is rolling around and I'm pretty much done at that point. Then I have my days. Tuesday I'm completely working from home and I do my thing in the morning, and then the rest of the day is marketing, fulfilling orders, stuff like that. On the days when I'm going to do group facilitation, I'll of course still get up at 3:00 o'clock in the morning, and then I'll plan out the day. I've got an hour between this group and I can go ahead and do that, and I'm already there so it's not a problem. The post office is right around the corner. You kind of figure out all the logistics for yourself. There are some days, like on Monday, I don't facilitate groups until the afternoon, so I've got the whole morning to work on marketing and do other things, and fulfilment. Then of course Saturday's a big day for that too. Jo: Oh, that's good. I feel like people always need to know how to balance their time, but it sounds like you manage, because at 3:00 a.m., as you say, there's not much else to do other than write. You mentioned marketing, and you have a Substack, pdsalternativefiction.substack.com. Talk about that and serialising fiction and how Substack works. Because I feel like a load of people are jumping in but might not necessarily know how it works, especially for fiction. PD: Correct. It is becoming quite popular out there. I think the one before that was Patreon, and Patreon is pretty big for that too, kind of the same thing. I wanted to start something and just get the work out there. I was very interested when Amazon came out a few years ago with what was called Vella. They kind of started that. I was like, “This is kind of cool.” Couple chapters at a time. I'm writing the books anyway, so why don't we kick this off and see how it goes—a type of experiment. I had a lot of fun doing it. I started on October 4th, 2024. I've done four novels so far. One is still going, which is Volume 3 of my Dark Veil serie— that's a sci-fi series. I wrote three other novels. The Hypnotist, which is a thriller, heavy on the sci-fi and a tad of horror in there too. And then I wrote Girl on a Mission, which is my psychological thriller, and then Cat Fight, which is a horror novel—all within that time. I think I finished all three of those novels in January, and then the first week of February they were all pretty much done. Now what I'm doing is, I went paid recently on the Substack. It's like everything else that's out there—chip away, chip away. I fell into that hole where they say, “Hey, we can promote you and get people to sign up for your newsletter.” And I'll be honest with you, don't do it. It's not worth it. You spend money, and what happens is they're what I refer to as dead leads. They don't click. You wind up shuffling them off after three to six months, because they're just not clicking. Everybody gets a star rating, so you know—are they clicking, are they staying on, are they not? So I got rid of pretty much all of those people, and I'll never do that again. It's got to be done organically. That's why when you read my books, especially the new books, towards the end it'll say, “Sign up for my newsletter.” I do more with that newsletter too. If you're on the free tier, every month I do a monthly newsletter, which is just me talking about updates, things going on in the publishing industry, things going on with me. My daughter puts together a weekly Horror and Sci-Fi Chronicles newsletter, which gives what's going on in new releases in the industry—sci-fi, horror, books, movies, television. She does deep dives into industry tropes, historical tidbits, and a weekly quiz. I also do a monthly Terrors and Tales newsletter. I started this last year, and it was a quarterly newsletter. It's other authors who are new, upcoming, never been published before, looking to get published. It's a chance for them to be on the newsletter where they have a flash fiction story or poem or even a short story that I publish for them. It's called the Terrors and Tales newsletter. What happened is I would put out calls for submissions. And a place called Duotrope—I don't even know who these people are, but all of a sudden I got an email from them stating, “Hey, we found that you're looking for submissions, and we posted your link. We hope you don't mind.” I'm like, “No, of course I don't mind.” I got so many submissions from that one link. I'm like, “Okay.” Do I really want to deny people? I'm not like that. I want to help promote other authors. I know what it's like when you're new and upcoming, no matter what age you are, to say, “Hey, here's a platform for you to see your stuff in print.” Obviously, I read through them just to make sure they're up to a certain standard, but for the most part, if you submit, you're getting in there. With Duotrope, I'm like, I have enough here to put out one a month. So in May 2026, the first one goes out, and then I'll have one each month until December, and then who knows? In 2027 I might go back to quarterly. I might get enough submissions to just keep it going once a month. So that's the Terrors and Tales newsletter, and it usually comes out towards the end of the month—the last two weeks. I have nothing to do with it in terms of content. None of my stories are on there. None of my poems are on there. None of my flash fiction. It's all other authors, just for them to see their name in print, see their work in print, share it with their friends, and put something on their resume, and to encourage people to keep reading and keep the craft going. Jo: When you say in print, you don't mean in physical print? PD: Oh, I mean in the newsletter. I'm sorry. Jo: I think that's important, or you're going to get a lot more submissions, and you will need to do publishing contracts and all that kind of thing. I think that's the difficult thing with a Substack newsletter approach—it's difficult to know where to categorise it. Is it marketing? Is it publishing? It's all of these things, I suppose. A bit like this podcast, it's all kinds of things. In terms of Substack actually making money on its own or leading to book sales that make money, do you think it does serve that purpose? PD: I think I've gotten more book sales through it, and also ARC readers who are enjoying the books and giving reviews. As far as the paid tiers, that's kind of a little bit slow, and that's where I'm saying chip away at it. Keep it up there. Keep it going. Over time, you're going to build that type of audience where it's going to be like, “Hey, this is financially feasible for me to continue to do this.” That's the response that I'm getting out there. Jo: Yes. Before, you mentioned you were doing Facebook Lives and you're looking at TikTok, but— Is anything else working for you in book marketing? If people have a few books and they're like, “What is working for book marketing right now?”—what do you recommend? PD: Okay. For me, the thing that has made the most sense is making sure the reader knows the book is out there through some sort of social media. I've had really good success on TikTok since the beginning of this year especially. I started it about a year ago, year and a half ago, but then my father got sick and passed away, and it was a new venture and I put it off to the side. I really got the flavour going at the beginning of this year. February, March of this year. It seems to be going really well, and I've noticed an uptick in sales from just getting the videos out there and getting it in front of people's eyes. There's an event I'm going to in August called ShiverCon, which is a pretty big event. After that event, I'm going to look to see what type of inventory I have left over from the event, and I'm going to start doing TikTok Lives. I'm very comfortable being on camera. So I'm like, “Yeah, that seems like a good way to go.” I know there's a few other horror authors who are doing it and having good success with TikTok Lives as well. A guy named Jason Davis is doing really well with TikTok Lives, and a few other authors too. I'm like, “Yes, I could definitely do that.” I want to get up to a certain number of people, and I want these events. I'm going to one in July, and then ShiverCon in August. Once those are done, I'm going to have more time to do the TikTok Lives. As far as Facebook is concerned, what I've had really great success with on Facebook is being in the groups and meeting other authors. That's not always about my book per se, but whatever books I'm reading, I'm posting my reviews about those books in those groups and meeting readers. Then obviously, they always say the three-to-one rule. Post about three different books and then post about your own book, whether you're doing a sale or a new release or a re-release or whatever. I've found success through that just by interacting with readers. When they post a book, I'll comment, “Hey, I've read that book,” or, “Hey, that book looks really cool. I like the review.” Commenting on it so you start these relationships with people who are out there in these Facebook groups. I've recently started my own Facebook reader group. I kind of go with the same thing. Last night, we did a live reading for another author. I like other authors to be on there. I always like to think, what does the reader need? What do I want to see as a reader? I would love to hear live readings from authors. So I kind of learn about them, learn about the book, and get a live reading. To me, that's a good way to go. So I started that recently, and it seems to be going well. I've got a new folk horror coming out soon, and I put out a call for ARC readers and got a fantastic response from that. That kind of drives the sales anyway, because when you get those reviews, then people see it gives credibility to the book, and then other people see it, and then they're buying it too. So that comes from the groups. There's so many wheels to spin in this industry as an indie author when you're doing this, especially when you're doing 99% of it on your own. You've got to get out there. No one's going to know your book exists if you don't get out there and tell somebody about it. Jo: Brilliant. Well, tell us— Where can people find you and your books online? PD: All right. Perfect. So obviously I'm on Amazon like everyone. Most of my books are worldwide, so you'll find them in Barnes & Noble as well. And of course, if you want the signed copies or discount print books, I always lead people straight to my website, PDAlleva.com. Then, of course, if you go to my Substack, you'll get all the updates, and you'll get all the links to purchase or find out where they are on Amazon and Barnes & Noble and things like that too. Jo: Brilliant. Well, thanks so much for your time, Paul. That was great. PD: Thank you very much for having me. It was great chatting with you. The post Writing Cross-Genre, Selling Direct, And Serialising On SubStack With P.D. Alleva first appeared on The Creative Penn.

durée : 01:58:48 - par : Corinne Schneider - Au programme de cette 388e émission : Raphaël Pichon et Pygmalion sur les Chemins de Bach en Allemagne du Nord (Wolfenbüttel, Lünebourg et Lübeck) pour l'anniversaire de leurs 20 ans (18-30 mai), le reportage ; le nouveau CD « Pluncked Bach vol. 3 » du mandoliniste Aron Sariel (Pentatone, 8 mai) - réalisation : Anne-Lise Assada, Geneviève Cras Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Immerse yourself in captivating science fiction short stories, delivered daily! Explore futuristic worlds, time travel, alien encounters, and mind-bending adventures. Perfect for sci-fi lovers looking for a quick and engaging listen each day.

McKay explores Dolly Parton's philosophy of ‘finding the God-light in everyone' as a transformative leadership discipline. He argues that choosing to see potential rather than faults is a practical way to inspire growth and redirect lives.Our host highlights how belief in others alters history through the stories of Louis Armstrong, Walt Disney, and Abraham Lincoln. Detailing Nelson Mandela's healing of South Africa and John Wooden's UCLA coaching, McKay demonstrates that by applying the Pygmalion effect and defending the absent, listeners can foster trust and move beyond automatic negative thinking.Main Themes: Dolly Parton's "God light" philosophy The Pygmalion Effect on performance Lincoln's "Team of Rivals" strategy Louis Armstrong's reform school start Walt Disney and the power of affirmation Defending the absent to build character Mandela's use of rugby to unite a nation Overcoming self-centered "default settings" John Wooden's shame-free coaching Belief as a practical leadership strategyTop 10 Quotes:"I try to find the God-light in everybody.""If you see someone without a smile, give them yours.""Human nature tends to notice faults first.""When people are seen as capable, they often become more capable.""If you humiliate people, they resist; if you honor people, they change.""When you defend those who are absent, you retain the trust of those present.""Seeing the good in others is a discipline, not a feeling.""Remembering everyone is good makes a meaningful life possible.""Correct what can be improved, not what is wrong with you.""Seeing good in someone can redirect an entire life."Show Links:Open Your Eyes with McKay Christensen

Cet épisode vous est proposé par l'Agence Pixel.L'Agence Pixel crée des sites internet performants à des tarifs imbattables, sans compromis sur la qualité.Club, association ou entreprise : maquette gratuite et rapide avant tout engagement.

Příběhy, ve kterých člověk vytvoří umělou bytost a ta je posléze obdařena vědomím, fascinují lidstvo od starověku – Pygmalion pomohl oživit sochu, rabi Löw vytvořil Golema a spisovatelka Mary Shelley před dvěma sty lety Frankensteina. Ve 20. století, a Karel Čapek byl první, přišli spisovatelé s myslícími roboty.Všechny díly podcastu Názory a argumenty můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

durée : 00:05:55 - par : Corinne Schneider - Focus sur les deux concerts de cette fin de semaine. Les "Membra Jesu Nostri" de Dietrich Buxtehude à l'église Saint-Jacques, qui abrite les deux derniers orgues historiques de Lübeck, et la Messe en si mineur de Bach à l'honneur pour le grand concert anniversaire à la cathédrale. - invités : Corinne Schneider Productrice Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:06:16 - par : Corinne Schneider - En ce quatrième jour, retour sur les 17 kilomètres de marche ce mercredi de Pygmalion de Lünebourg à Lübeck, la traversée en bateau du Lac de Ratzebourg jusqu'à Rothenhusen et l'arrivée à Lübeck où se prépare le concert des Membra Jesu Nostri de Dietrich Buxtehude dans l'église Sankt Jakobi. - invités : Corinne Schneider Productrice Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:05:33 - par : Corinne Schneider - Les Chemins de Bach sont aussi l'occasion de visites patrimoniales : retour sur les manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Herzog August de Wolfenbüttel, avant une immersion au cœur du travail de Raphaël Pichon et de Pygmalion à l'écoute d'un extrait de répétition du concert « Vertigo »… - invités : Corinne Schneider Productrice Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:05:39 - par : Corinne Schneider - Pygmalion poursuit son périple en passant par Lünebourg, avec un concert dans l'Église Saint-Michel, où Bach fut pensionnaire adolescent, puis au Monastère de Lüne, à quelques kilomètres du centre historique de la ville, où le public a pu se rendre à pied en compagnie des musiciens… - invités : Corinne Schneider Productrice Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:06:41 - par : Corinne Schneider - Le périple en Allemagne initié au printemps 2024 par Raphaël Pichon sur les chemins de Bach se poursuit en ce mois de mai 2026 pour fêter les 20 ans de l'Ensemble Pygmalion. Une tournée au nord du pays qui démarre avec Vertigo, programme musical donné à Wolfenbüttel et Lünebourg ces 21 et 24 mai. - invités : Corinne Schneider Productrice Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

What happens when a doctor becomes the patient and discovers that everything she thought she knew about recovery was only half the picture? Dr. Olivia Ong was a second-year rehabilitation registrar when a car struck her in a hospital car park, leaving her with a spinal cord injury and a prognosis full of uncertainty. She went on to walk again, return to clinical practice, and build a career in pain medicine, but a decade later, doctor burnout brought her to her knees in a completely different way. This episode sits at the intersection of nervous system dysregulation, chronic pain, and sustainable medical careers, and raises a question every clinician will recognize: when the standard advice to "just meditate" fails, what actually works? Timestamps 5:00: On her 29th birthday, surrounded by friends in a rehabilitation ward, something happened to her body that shifted the entire trajectory of her recovery, though she had been deliberately trying not to hope for it. 11:00: As a rehabilitation registrar who had just become a patient, Dr. Ong experienced the healthcare system from the other side, and what she found there changed something fundamental about how she understood her own patients. 22:00: Her rehabilitation trainers in California did something her Australian medical team had not. The name for it comes from psychology, and once she understood what it was, it permanently changed how she shows up for her patients with chronic pain. 28:00: Being part of a team is not the same as being protected by one. Dr. Ong describes the specific working arrangement that put her at highest risk of burnout, and it is more common than most doctors realise. 37:00: It was not a colleague, a coach, or a clinical measure that finally forced her to act on her burnout. It was her three-year-old son, and four words he said to her at 7:30 on a weeknight. 45:00: Dr. Ong shares the non-negotiable physical maintenance routine that keeps her functioning with a spinal cord injury, and makes the case that busy doctors without a serious illness have far less excuse than they think. Three Key Takeaways 1. Meditation alone will not rescue a dysregulated nervous system. When burnout reaches the point of physical collapse, top-down cognitive approaches like breathing exercises and mindfulness may not land at all. Dr. Ong spent six weeks with a meditation teacher just learning to breathe properly again. What eventually made the difference was bottom-up nervous system regulation work, and understanding why that distinction matters may be the missing piece that explains why conventional burnout advice keeps failing. 2. The Pygmalion effect is a clinical tool, not just a leadership concept. When Dr. Ong arrived at a rehabilitation facility in California, her trainers held an unshakeable belief that she would walk again, something she had not encountered in her Australian clinical care. She credits that belief as the turning point in her recovery, and it permanently changed how she practices pain medicine. In a specialty where patients often arrive having already been told nothing will help them, a clinician's genuine belief in their patient's capacity to improve is itself an active ingredient. 3. Solo practice is one of the highest risk factors for doctor burnout. Dr. Ong's experience points to something more specific than patient overload: the absence of collegial support. Working as a solo practitioner within larger organizations, with no shared case load and no one to carry part of the emotional weight, is what preceded her burnout. Her path out involved deliberately choosing workplaces with genuine multidisciplinary teams, and she makes the case that for doctors designing their careers, this is a structural decision worth taking seriously. Dr. Olivia Ong Bio: Dr. Olivia Ong is a rehabilitation and pain medicine specialist based in Melbourne, Australia, whose own recovery from a spinal cord injury sustained early in her medical career reshaped her understanding of chronic pain, nervous system dysregulation, and what it takes to sustain a clinical life. Her memoir, Back On My Feet, is available now in Australia and forthcoming in the US and UK. Find her on Instagram at @drolivialeeong or at drolivialeeong.com. Would you like to view a transcript of this episode? Click Here Charting Champions is a premiere, lifetime access Physician only program that is helping Physicians get home with today's work done. All the proven tools, support and community you need to create time for your life outside of medicine. Learn more at https://www.chartingcoach.ca Enjoying this podcast? Please share it with someone who would benefit. Also, don't forget to hit “follow” so you get all the new episodes as soon as they are released. Come hang out with me on Facebook or Instagram. Follow me @thechartingcoach to get more practical tools to help you create sustainable clinical medicine in your life. Questions? Comments? Want to share how this podcast has helped you? Shoot me an email at admin@reachcareercoaching.ca. I would love to hear from you.

durée : 01:59:17 - par : Corinne Schneider - Au programme de cette 384e émission : une heure de piano avec Cédric Pescia, Maria Perrotta et Yunchan Lim ; l'inauguration de l'orgue restauré de la Cathédrale de Reims (13-17 juin) ; la tournée de Pygmalion, Raphaël Pichon (dir.) en Allemagne « Sur les Chemins de Bach #2 » avec des CD à gagner ! - réalisation : Noé Mignard, Geneviève Cras Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

What if the secret to building a truly great team starts not with strategy or systems, but with learning to genuinely put people first? This week, Jon Goehring and Coach Jim Johnson welcome back one of the Lounge's few repeat guests, Dr. Craig Nathanson, educator, author, speaker, and leadership coach with over 25 years of experience helping leaders build more human and sustainable organizations. Dr. Craig joins to dig into his powerful new book The Humanistic Leader, and the conversation is one of the most thought provoking the Lounge has ever had.Dr. Craig opens by drawing a clear and practical line between managing and leading, explaining why both matter deeply and why the best leaders never rely on one without the other. He then unpacks what a humanistic leader actually looks like in practice, why putting people first is not just the right thing to do but the smartest long term business decision a leader can make, and why the Pygmalion effect means your team will almost always rise or fall to match exactly how you treat them.The episode gets personal and surprisingly moving when Dr. Craig shares the story of his grandmother, who asked him the same question his entire life right up until the day before she passed. That question, and what it unlocked in him about self-leadership and happiness, forms the emotional core of everything his model stands for.From there, Jon and Coach guide Dr. Craig through some of the most practically useful ground of the episode. He breaks down his three part humanistic leadership model covering leading, managing, and coaching, walks through the eight different leadership styles and when to use each one, and shares his elegant framework for hiring the right people by asking three simple questions: will they, can they, and do they fit?Dr. Craig also delivers a masterclass on the power of asking great questions, both in one-on-one conversations and team settings, and makes a compelling case for why the best leaders talk only 20 percent of the time and listen the other 80. He closes with a story about coaching a resistant CEO back from the edge of being fired, and how one act of vulnerability in that first session changed everything.Whether you lead a team of two or an organization of two thousand, this episode will challenge you to look inward first and remind you that the most powerful thing you can do as a leader is make the people around you believe in themselves.Connect with Dr. Craig: drcraignathanson.com Grab The Humanistic Leader on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Humanistic-Leader-Leadership-Soul/dp/B0FW6FXQ61/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.X2tMFVaLSxN39AOck6X2eCK9y76QX_lB2g0oHz59Ft54ek90vevLyPVbtinxHv9pgisjB4PLlYYbskvoKSsHtuTPswuRqDR4jhkLH72rPvTaBjiuz0RTrVxJpBHboPjqGFPRQXPHT5deSnGGhugurg.vshpVK9L1rEGF1TDLAG9Oz7DIrNfBkII4DkuMpEpEXM&dib_tag=se&qid=1775579503&refinements=p_27%3ACraig+Nathanson&s=books&sr=1-1Email: craigathanson@gmail.com Phone: 707-774-6446 Follow Dr. Craig on LinkedIn for posts three times a week on humanistic leadership: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drcraignathanson/

The better you get at seeing opportunity, the worse you get at finishing anything. It turns out the same brain wiring that makes curious, growth-oriented people so interesting to talk to also makes them spectacularly bad at committing to one thing. In this episode, we explore the surprisingly rich psychology of focus — from what Taylor Swift's 16 dress changes per concert reveal about sequencing your ambitions, to a landmark study showing that how others perceive your potential literally changes what you become. It's equal parts neuroscience, life philosophy, and one man's genuine attempt to understand what wearing a dress taught him about staying focused. Why your potential is only as useful as your ability to narrow it The science behind why commitment feels like loss — and how to reframe it How to build a life with many chapters without living them all at once Funny, counterintuitive, and oddly practical — this episode might be the permission slip you didn't know you needed. SPONSORS

You don't have a people problem. You have a labeling problem. Someone misses a deadline… "procrastinator." Pushes back in a meeting… "difficult." Quiet on a call… "disengaged." Feels accurate. Feels efficient. It's also probably wrong. In this episode of Thoughts Unlocked, I break down how these labels are quietly damaging trust and leading you to solve the wrong problems. Because a label isn't an explanation. It's the end of curiosity. If you've ever felt frustrated with your team and nothing seems to change, this might be the reason why. Timestamps: 00:00 – Intro: The small habit quietly wrecking your team 01:14 – Why labels feel helpful (but aren't) 03:45 – Cognitive ease: why your brain jumps to labels 04:05 – The danger of misdiagnosing behavior 05:10 – A label isn't an explanation. It ends curiosity 07:30 – The Pygmalion effect: how labels shape performance 08:46 – A simple reframe to replace labeling Website: skotwaldron.com

MOPs & MOEs is proudly sponsored by Teamworks — the performance operations platform trusted by elite military units and professional sports organizations worldwide. Teamworks brings your scheduling, communications, athlete monitoring, and readiness data into one unified system — so your leaders stay informed, your people stay connected, and your unit stays ready. No more scattered spreadsheets or missed messages. Just one platform built for organizations where performance is the mission. Learn more at https://teamworks.com/We are also supported by TrainHeroic — the coaching and programming platform built for strength and conditioning coaches who train serious athletes. Whether you're programming for a military unit, a tactical team, or individual athletes, TrainHeroic gives you the tools to build and deliver professional training programs, track athlete progress, and communicate directly with your people — all through one app. Your athletes get world-class programming on their phone; you get the visibility to actually coach them. Start your free trial at https://account.trainheroic.com/create-accountMOPs & MOEs delivers our training through ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TrainHeroic and you can ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠get your first 7 days of training with us FREE by clicking here.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠To continue the conversation, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠join our Discord!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ We have experts standing by to answer your questions.The New Army Combat Field Test — What It Is, What It Isn't, and What We Actually Think About ItThis week Drew and Alex break down the new Combat Field Test — the Army's second mandatory fitness assessment for combat arms soldiers that nobody asked for and everybody has opinions about.Spoiler: the bar might be set so low that it barely changes anything. But the conversation around why that keeps happening is worth having.What we get into:What the CFT actually is — seven events, one running clock, pass or fail. And why if you can run a 10-minute mile you're probably fine.Why the EIB standard is the same test, with body armor and a helmet, three minutes faster — and what that says about how easy the CFT bar actually is.The Pygmalion effect — every time the Army lowered the standard, it told the force exactly what it thought they were capable of.Why one soldier who enlisted in 2019 and served until 2023 only took one PT test in four years of infantry service. Because we kept changing things.The medic problem — combat is literally in their MOS name, and they're not on the list.Why 13 Bravo cannon crew members aren't considered combat arms but Army divers are, and what that says about how this list gets built.The case for publishing MOS-level fitness score averages so soldiers can see where they actually stand relative to their peers.Whether having the Pentagon direct fitness culture is a good thing — and why for some services it might be the only thing that's actually moved the needle.Mentioned in this episode:Secretary Hegseth's September 2025 memo — Military Fitness Standards for the Department of WarACRT — the earlier Army competitor to the ACFT that never made itDA Pam 611-21 — Military Occupational Classification and Structure, Alex knew the number off the top of his headAFT Insight — aftinsight.com, free AFT score interpreter and training programsBUSAR — their proposed fitness test that requires a picnic table and holds up surprisingly wellTyler Vargas Andrews — Whistling Death on Instagram, lost an arm and a leg at Abbey Gate and still goes harder than most people with all four limbsMelissa Stockwell — Paralympic triathlete, showed up to a climbing gym without a prosthetic and just climbed anywayThe Tyranny of Metrics by Jerry Mueller — referenced again, Jerry please come on the podcast

This week we sipped A to Z Wineworks Pinot Noir and watched Season 2 Episode 12: “Turnaround”. Cory learns “you dance with the one that brought you” in this Pygmalion-inspired episode about a Sadie Hawkins-style “Turnaround” school dance. This is the one where Shawn and Cory give a Swedish-American girl a makeover (a la “She's All That” or “Pretty Woman” or “My Fair Lady”) to make her “cool” so Cory, her date, can be cool-by-association—because according to Eric, the caliber of girl who asks you to the Turnaround determines who you are forever. We laughed, we unpacked gender norms, and we learned that “smorgasbord” is a Swedish word. Skol! 

Immerse yourself in captivating science fiction short stories, delivered daily! Explore futuristic worlds, time travel, alien encounters, and mind-bending adventures. Perfect for sci-fi lovers looking for a quick and engaging listen each day.

My guest today is Nelson Dellis. He is a memory athlete and consultant. Nelson is a six-time USA Memory Champion, holding the record for most wins of the national memory champion title. Nelson also runs Climb 4 Memory, a nonprofit which aims to raise funds and awareness for Alzheimer's disease research through mountain climbs around the world. The topic is his book Everyday Genius: Hacks to Boost Your Memory, Focus, Problem-Solving, and Much More. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Memory techniques as systems and frameworks Pygmalion effect and belief shaping performance Memory as foundation for faster learning and creativity Training the brain like a muscle and preventing cognitive decline Name memorization using visualization and association Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

My guest today is Nelson Dellis. He is a memory athlete and consultant. Nelson is a six-time USA Memory Champion, holding the record for most wins of the national memory champion title. Nelson also runs Climb 4 Memory, a nonprofit which aims to raise funds and awareness for Alzheimer's disease research through mountain climbs around the world. The topic is his book Everyday Genius: Hacks to Boost Your Memory, Focus, Problem-Solving, and Much More. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Memory techniques as systems and frameworks Pygmalion effect and belief shaping performance Memory as foundation for faster learning and creativity Training the brain like a muscle and preventing cognitive decline Name memorization using visualization and association Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

“Fiction has this unprecedented power in tech spaces. The more I started talking to engineers about their technical problems, the more I realized there’s so much more that humanities could offer.” –Nina Begus About Nina Begus Nina Begus is a researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, leading a research group on artificial humanities, and the founder of InterpretAI. She is author of Artificial Humanities: A Fictional Perspective on Language in AI, which received an Artificiality Institute Award, and First Encounters with AI. Webiste: ninabegus.com LinkedIn Profile: Nina Begus  Book: Artificial Humanities What you will learn How ancient myths and archetypes influence our understanding and design of AI Why the humanities—literature, philosophy, and the arts—are crucial for developing more thoughtful and innovative AI systems The dangers of limiting AI concepts to human-centered metaphors and the need for new, more expansive imaginaries How metaphors shape our interactions with AI products and the user experiences companies choose to enable The challenges and possibilities of imagining forms of machine intelligence and language beyond human templates Why collaboration between technical experts and humanists opens new frontiers for creativity and responsible technology What makes writing and artistic creation uniquely human, and how AI amplifies—not replaces—these impulses Practical ways artists, engineers, and thinkers can work together to explore new relationships and futures with AI Episode Resources Transcript Ross Dawson: Nina, it is wonderful to have you on the show. Nina Begus: Thank you for having me. Ross Dawson: You’ve written this very interesting book, Artificial Humanities, and I think there’s a lot to dig into. But what does that mean? What do you mean by artificial humanities? Nina Begus: Well, this was really a new framework that I’ve developed while I was working on the relationship between AI and fiction, and I started working on this about 15 years ago when I realized that fiction has this unprecedented power in tech spaces. So this is how it all started, but then the more I started talking to engineers about their technical problems, the more I realized there’s so much more that humanities could offer in this collaborative, generative approach that I’ve developed. I would say that now, as the field stands, it’s really a way to explore and demonstrate how humanities—as broad as science and technology studies, literary studies, film, philosophy, rhetoric, history of technology—how all of these fields can help us address the most pressing issues in AI development and use. And it’s been important to me that this approach uses traditional humanistic methods, theory, conceptual work, history, ethical approaches, but also that it’s collaborative and exploratory and experimental in this way that you can look back into the past and at the present to make a more informed choice about the future. You can speculate about different possibilities with it. Ross Dawson: Well, art is an expression of the human psyche, or even more, it is the fullest expression of humanity, and that’s what art tries to do. Also, I’m a deep believer in archetypes, human archetypes, and things which are intrinsic to who we are, and that’s something which you can only really uncover through the arts. Now we have arguably seen all these archetypes play out in real time, these modern myths being created right now in the stories being told of how AI is being created. So I think it’s extraordinarily relevant to look back at how we have depicted machines through our history and our relationship to them. Nina Begus: Yes, this is the reason why I started exploring this topic, actually, because there were so many ancient myths, these archetypal narratives that I’ve seen at the same time, both in technological products that were coming to the market and in the way technologists were thinking about it, and also in fictional products and films and novels in the way we imagined AI. I framed my book around the Pygmalion myth, but there are many, many other myths—Prometheus, Narcissus, the Big Brother narrative, and so on—that are very much doing work in the AI space. The reason why I chose the Pygmalion myth is because it’s so bizarre in many ways: you have this myth where a man creates an artificial woman, and then in the process of creation, falls in love with her. So there’s the creation of the human-like, and there’s also this relationality with the human-like. You would think this would not be a common myth, but quite the opposite—I found it everywhere I looked. It wasn’t called the Pygmalion myth, but the motif was there. I found it on the Silk Road, in ancient folk tales, in Native American folk tales, North Africa, and so on. So I think this kind of story is actually telling us a lot about how humans are not rational, how we have some very deeply embedded behaviors in us, and one of them is that we anthropomorphize everything, including machines.So I think this was a really important takeaway that we got already from the early days of AI with the first chatbot, Eliza. We’ve learned that that will be a feature of us relating to machines. Ross Dawson: So Joseph Campbell called the hero’s journey the monomyth, as in, there is a single myth. And I guess what you are doing here is—well, if you agree with that, which I’d be interested in—is that there are facets. The classic hero’s journey is quite simple, but there are facets of that monomyth, or something intrinsic to who we are, that is around this creation. And in this case, as you say, this relation we have with what we have created. Would you relate that at all to Joseph Campbell’s work? Nina Begus: I haven’t thought about it in this way, because I thought about myth and myths more and less of a storytelling issue, which here is definitely happening—the hero goes on a task, returns back changed, and maybe changes something in the community. The myths that I was looking into and the metaphors that I was exploring, primarily this huge metaphor of AI as a human mind, as an artificial reason—I think it works differently. It’s less of a narrative; it’s more of an imaginary of how or towards what we are building. I think this is a big problem, actually, because the imaginary around AI is very poor. What you get is mostly imagining machine intelligence on human terms, and a lot of people are bothered by that in the AI discourse—right, when you say the machine thinks, or the machine learns, or it has a mind, and some people go as far as to say it has consciousness. I think this kind of debate is actually not that productive. I think it’s more important to see how all these different AI products that we’ve created—and mostly when we talk about AI, people think of language models now—are very much designed as a sort of character, almost as an artificial human that, in literature, authors have been creating for a long time. So I think in that case, we can get back to a hero’s journey. But I think what I was looking at was actually more on the surface level of what kind of shortcuts we are using with these metaphors that we’re employing when building and using AI. I think the book makes a really good case showing that, yes, this is actually a very cultural technology. It’s very much informed by our imaginaries. One surprising part of it was really how hard it was to break out of this human mold. It was pretty much impossible to find examples of machines that are not exclusively human-like. I think Stanislaw Lem is one of the rare writers who can consistently deliver this kind of imaginary. Even looking at more recent works, like popular films such as Hollywood’s Ex Machina or Her, you can see how the technologists themselves would say, “Oh, we were influenced by this film,” in a way that it affirmed their product development trajectory. You can see it now, at this moment, with OpenAI launching companionship. So in many ways, not a lot has changed. Ross Dawson: Yeah, there’s a lot to dig into there. I just want to go back—in a sense, Pygmalion is a metaphor, but it’s also a myth. It is a story: creates a woman, and then falls in love with her, and then whatever happens from there. There is this, something happens, and then something else happens. That’s what a story is. I think that can impact the implicit metaphor, but coming back to the metaphor—so George Lakoff wrote the beautiful book Metaphors We Live By. I think the way the brain works is in metaphors and analogies to a very large degree. Some of those are enabling metaphors, and some of those are not very useful metaphors. I think part of your point is that some of the metaphors that we have for thinking about AI and machines are not useful. There may be, or we could create, some metaphors that are more useful. So, what are some of the most disabling metaphors, and what are some of the ones which could be more constructive? Nina Begus: Yes, So I think this main metaphor that I’ve mentioned—of AI as a human mind—is very limiting. I think it really limits the machinic potential to actually do something good with it. The fact that we’re still using the criteria that were made for humans, like different criteria developed on human language—the Turing test was one of them, right, a while ago. Now we have stricter ones. I think this tells you a lot about how we actually evaluate AI and how even these benchmarks that are supposed to be quantitative are actually often qualitative, often stories, like mini-narratives. But yeah, when we look at different metaphors in this space, there are other ones that also emerge from fiction. I mentioned the Big Brother, the AI as an Oracle, and we need to be aware that these ideas inform the very interaction we have with AI. If we think of it as a mirror, we’re going to use it differently—it’s almost as a bouncing board. If we think of it as a teacher, or as a coach, or as an assistant, it would again create a different use. So I think there are a lot of these metaphors that the companies themselves are trying to decide which one they will go with, because it completely changes the user and the interaction. I think they’re also very cultural, even though you might say, “Oh, it’s a categorical mistake to treat a machine as a human.” I think you can see this kind of treatment across, at least in part, and it doesn’t mean that we consider it human. It just means that we’re engaging with it on our own terms, as if it was human. Now, what could be productive? I do think metaphors, even if they’re not accurate, can be productive. My goal, really, with the book was to break out of this projection of what the machine could be, to find in this exploratory way other directions, other landscapes where we couldn’t go because we’re being limited by our imaginary, by our ideas. So in this way, I think humanistic approaches can be very helpful to designers, to technology builders, to artists, to explore the novelty that so many of these sectors are after. Ross Dawson: Yeah, and I guess people latch on to what they know. I think that’s part of the thing where with AI, “Oh, it’s like a human. Let’s treat it like a human, and let’s make it like a human.” It is, amongst other things, a lack of imagination. That’s where the humanities, the arts, can offer us—those who have the imagination to be able to envisage different possibilities or relationships. But I guess part of it is also that humans relate, and so we have learned to relate to other humans and also to other animals and hopefully to nature as well. But these are all established patterns of relating. So do we need to discover in ourselves new ways of relating to new categories—things which are not humans, not animals, and not nature? Nina Begus: Exactly, this is the exact problem we’re dealing with, and because we’re dealing with a yet unexplored, yet undefined relation, and we’re using old, outdated terms for that relation. This is why we don’t really have a good way of describing it and establishing it. It will take a while for this to develop, which is fine, but we need to realize that there are some concepts that we’re using that we better leave behind and go ahead by building new ones. This is why I think it’s really important to work in a more interdisciplinary collaboration, so that you can see what you can actually build from the technical perspective, so that you can see what these machines are actually capable of. Because you usually don’t know when you create them right?Machine learning is sort of exploratory by design. Ross Dawson: So, just to call it out more explicitly, what are the metaphors you think are the most destructive or most inappropriate, and what are some of the ones which you think are the most promising? Nina Begus: Well, I’m just writing on the Midas myth, which is sort of the opposite of the Pygmalion myth. With Pygmalion, you lean into that human imitation, but with Midas, you lean into the liminality that Midas presents as this sort of hybrid creature. I think leaning into the boundaries that we draw for ourselves—and now AI is not cooperating with them—this is where the productive part will be in actually creating something that has philosophical dignity, but also a kind of productive trajectory for the machines to go. I feel like we’re still in this first phase of developing AI, because when you look at it historically, we haven’t really moved from the conceptual and philosophical premises that were established in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s for this technology. We have now gotten the technology that caught up to the ideas from the 60s, but we’re still stuck in the same conceptual space. Ross Dawson: Yeah, very much so. And, you know, of course, what is AGI, which everyone talks about, is basically—the only way in which people seem to be able to frame it is as relative to humans, which is the only reference point we have. I mean, there’s, of course, animal intelligence, but that’s because of that. It is, again, that lack of imagination—saying, “Well, intelligence, oh, intelligence is what humans do, so let’s do something which is the same as that,” whereas there’s so much white space in what intelligence could be. I think this almost comes back to definition. When people say intelligence, the word, when they use the word intelligence, they are referring to what humans do. It’s not a general term, and so it all becomes a language problem as well, because we are so rooted to relating our language to human capabilities, as opposed to a more general potential. Nina Begus: Yes, I think you’re really on to something here, because I can see it also—because I work with animal communication researchers, and we’re finding things there that we didn’t find because we limited ourselves to thinking language is just a human production, that it needs a human subject. Now, as soon as we got rid of this presumption, we’re finding new things, things that are basically parallel to what we do in our language. So language is in a space of tension because it’s being attacked both from the animal side and from the machinic side, which is why I really focused on language in this book. It’s not a coincidence that we centered artificial intelligence in language as the interface, because this is how we relate to the world—this is our interface to talk to each other, to understand each other. I think the fact that language is coming under such pressure as an interface brings with it a lot of other concepts that are being challenged. Are only humans creative? Is there a natural creativity, machinic creativity? Is there a different kind of intelligence that’s maybe solely biological, embodied? How do we think about cognition? How do we think about culture? In AI and in the natural world, there’s so much that comes with it: agency, autonomy, freedom, community, which I think we will be grappling with for the next few decades, at least. Ross Dawson: I think you alluded before to the potential for AI to have its own languages.  Nina Begus: I’ts happening already. The reason why I like Stanislaw Lem so much is because he can actually think about a machine—back in the 1970s, he’s doing that—about a machine that’s not human-like, that’s not limited to human language. It is trained on human language, but then it goes its own way, where the human linguistic ceiling just cannot go anymore. We’re already seeing that in the models, in Berkeley’s Biological Artificial Intelligence Lab, in the models that are not large language models, but generative adversarial networks that are based on speech. We see that as they are learning the words, they are encoding some information into silences that we don’t know what it is. I think what’s really exciting to me are two things about language in machines. The first one is, what is this non-human production of language? We did not think that non-humans can produce language, even though we had parrots who had to crawl their way to us to speak in “humanese,” to show that they have some kind of intelligence—even if it’s just parroting, even if it’s just what we call imitation, which some people consider not to be intelligence. We’ve had these examples before, but now it’s gotten nuclear—on this scale that LLMs are performing, it’s really challenged a lot of our solely human attributes: creativity, storytelling. A lot of journalists come to me because there’s this existential fear of machines taking over their work and so on. So we’ve been thinking about those things, and now it’s actually happening. Ross Dawson: One of the other key points here, I think, is that humanity is—the arts—there’s so much, as you mentioned, in terms of fiction, in terms of films, in terms of visual arts, and many other artistic domains. We have reference points that we use, and the amount which people refer to the movie Her in the last years is pretty extraordinary, partly because it’s obviously coming very much true. I think the Ex Machina story is very interesting as well, as are many others in the past. But there is also this act of imagination. There are people who have written these books, who have crafted these films, who have created these things, and they are the ones who have been not just manifesting our human psyche, but also pushing that out and coming up with ideas which others haven’t had, to give us something. So one thing we can certainly do is mine and dig into what has been created. But is there a way to interface through this to this act of imagining, which can give us new artifacts and ways of thinking and ways of relating? Nina Begus: Yes, I think imagination and humanities in general are going to become more and more important, because AI will do a lot of technical work, but imaginaries—this is what we really excel at. It’s actually interesting to see how you think fiction is this unbounded landscape where you can imagine anything, and yet it’s really hard to find examples of machines that are beyond the human. Even these writers, like the screenwriters for Her and Ex Machina, create these completely Pygmalion-esque films, where you have an artificial woman leading a relationship with a human man, and so on. For the whole film, you have her act as a human-like entity. But then at the end of each of those films—well, particularly in Her—Spike Jonze really tried to break out of this and show her AI side. Basically, there was no language to describe it, so he resorted to a metaphor—the metaphor of a book, where Samantha, the operations assistant, explains that her world is falling apart, like the way words are floating further and further apart in a book. That’s how she’s able to describe it; that’s the closest she gets. And then in Ex Machina, Alex Garland really wanted to portray the world from the social robot Ava’s perspective in a visual way. He wrote down a scene, but he said, “I failed to execute it visually. I just couldn’t do it well.” So instead, he gave us a different scene that’s shot from afar, where Ava embarks onto a helicopter and she has to undergo her Turing test—the helicopter pilot cannot recognize her as a robot; he needs to think she’s a human woman. There have been attempts, I think even in Garland’s next film Annihilation, they’re trying to set the grounds for something that’s entirely new and hard to imagine. I think a big takeaway for us is this is very hard to do. Ross Dawson: Yes, well, given that context, I do want to—as in the human plus AI framing—given all of this, what is it that we can do or should be doing in order to amplify our humanity, our capabilities, the positive aspects of what it is to be human? How can we relate to or use AI in order to amplify the best of us? Nina Begus: Yeah, I actually had, while I was writing the book Artificial Humanities, this other dream project to work with writers—professional writers, creatives, people who live in a world of words—to see what they make of AI. I waited a little bit for the public’s polarized reactions to calm down a bit and gathered 16 writers, some of whom already made a space for themselves in the field, like Sheila Heti and Ken Liu and Ted Chiang, and then some of the more junior writers who I knew were thinking about that—a Netflix screenwriter, and so on. I gathered them to see—I think the creative people are really the answer here—I gathered them to see how they approach this very human part of the new human and AI collaboration zone. What was common across a lot of essays that are coming out in October under the title “First Encounters with AI” is this argument that, well, AI doesn’t have subjectivity, it doesn’t have emotions, it doesn’t have a body, it doesn’t have experience, it doesn’t have meaning—all of these things that really make us human, all of these parts that actually make art compelling and literature compelling. So Ken Liu’s argument, for example, was, let’s leave machines what they’re good at—they’re good at imitating and copying—and we’re good at interpreting, we’re good at creating and imagining. I think this is really a way to go with this. This catastrophizing that’s very present in the public discourse, I think, is a bit misleading. I wish we had a more nuanced approach to what’s actually happening, particularly in the space of writing. Obviously, AI is a groundbreaking technology that affects pretty much every one of us and all the sectors, but when it comes to writing, we just don’t think it’s killable. We think that there’s this perennial impulse that humans have to play with language, and that is not going to go away with AI. We’re just going to amplify it through AI, through this new possibility that has now opened in many ways. I like to think about AI as—you know, we’ve figured out how to fly. As soon as we figured out the physics of flight, we had planes and helicopters and drones and kites, and these are the new possibilities for human activities. In the same way, we figured out the machine learning principles, and now we have large language models and diffusion models, and we have GANs and so on, and there will be more. These are the new spaces of possibility that have opened for our activities, for our spirit to work on, but they do not replace the human in a meaningful way. It’s more about extension than it is about automation. Ross Dawson: Yeah, that’s a wonderful way of framing it. So where can people go to find out more about your work? Nina Begus: I have a pretty populated website with my name, ninabegus.com, where I write about my books, I write about my public work. I have videos on there, podcasts, links, and so on. I also have a pretty lively lab with a lot of collaborators and students, where a lot of what I imagined when writing Artificial Humanities—where a lot of collaborative projects happen. We have artists, we have engineers, we have philosophers that work on the same question, but come at it from very different backgrounds and with very different skills. I think this is becoming more and more important in the world of AI. Ross Dawson: Yes, yes, bringing all of those disciplines and frames and thinking together. That’s wonderful. I love what you’re doing—very important. I hope the messages ripple through, and obviously wonderful to be able to share this with the Humans Plus AI audience. Thank you so much. Nina Begus: Thank you, Ross, and thank you all for listening. The post Nina Begus on artificial humanities, AI archetypes, limiting and productive metaphors, and human extension (AC Ep38) appeared first on Humans + AI.

In this conversation, we explore the cultural foundations of artificial intelligence with Nina Beguš, Assistant Professor at UC Berkeley and author of "Artificial Humanities: A Fictional Perspective on Language in AI." Nina makes a compelling case for an entirely new field—one that brings humanistic insights into the very creation of technology rather than treating humanities as critical afterthought or ethical guardrail.Nina's work emerged from recognizing patterns everywhere she looked: the same fictional scripts appearing in technology products, films, and Silicon Valley's imagination. When Siri launched as a feminized virtual assistant designed to build rapport, Nina immediately asked "why is it a woman?" and began tracing how deeply fiction shapes our technological reality—not as metaphor but as blueprint.Key themes we explore:The Pygmalion Template: How an ancient myth—male creator produces idealized woman, projects desire onto creation—persistently shapes virtual assistants and AI interfacesFrom Marble to Cockney to LLMs: Tracing evolution from Ovid through Shaw's "Pygmalion" to the "ELIZA effect" named after Eliza DoolittleLanguage No Longer Uniquely Human: The profound implications of machines using language eloquently without consciousnessMonolingual AI at Global Scale: How tokenization creates structural monolingualism beyond just favoring EnglishWriters Responding to AI: Nina's project gathering sixteen writers to reflect on what happens when language is no longer exclusively humanPlanetary Ontology: Collaborative work seeing human/nature/technology as sitting "in the same continuum of this planet"Nina Beguš is Researcher and Lecturer at the Center for Science, Technology, Medicine & Society at the University of California, Berkeley. She graduated with a Ph.D. in comparative literature from Harvard University. During her time at the Berggruen Institute and ToftH, she helped implement novel humanities-based consulting techniques for big tech companies.https://www.ninabegus.com

Raphaël Pichons Interpretation der "Johannes-Passion" mit seinem Ensemble "Pygmalion" ist nicht nur für Bach-Fans eine weitere Offenbarung in der langen Interpretationsgeschichte dieses Meisterwerks.

In our professional lives, just as in our personal ones, we all wear many hats. But how does juggling all those roles make us feel? For some, it can be a fulfilling challenge, while for others, it can lead to burnout and a loss of identity. This is especially true for managers, who often find themselves in the toughest spot. Think about your coworker who's always balancing the demands of their team and their boss, acting as the go-between for frustrated employees and anxious higher-ups. In today's business climate, it's no wonder that middle managers — those caught in the middle — are at high risk of burnout. What are they up against? How can you spot a ‘sandwich employee' in your company? Why is it called a ‘sandwich employee'? In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions! To listen to the last episodes, you can click here: ⁠⁠What is the Pygmalion effect?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠What is coffee badging in the workplace?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Could job enrichment make your work more rewarding?⁠⁠ A podcast written and realised by Amber Minogue. First Broadcast: 14/11/2024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The families gather for a game night, and shenanigans ensue. Henry pays a visit to Edmund's future home, which sparks some feelings in Fanny and Mary. Sir Thomas catches on to Henry's intentions with Fanny and decides to throw a ball. Mary gives Fanny an unexpected gift.Topics discussed include falling in love for the bit, Molly's competitive side, whether Henry can change, predictions for William's hotness, Sir Thomas's Pinterest board, our first male pre-proposal POV, and team Hanny vs. team Fanmund.Patron Study Questions this week come from Avi. Topics discussed include William's cross being modeled off a gift Jane Austen received from her own brother.Becca's Study Questions: Topics discussed include Sir Thomas's interest in Henry and throwing a ball, the discussion of Edmund's estate, Edmund's internal monologue, the purpose of the ball, and why Mary gave Fanny her chain.Funniest Quote: “No, I never inquire. But I told a man mending a hedge that it was Thornton Lacey, and he agreed to it.”Questions moving forward: Who will dance with each other at the ball?Who wins the chapters? Sir Thomas!Glossary of Terms and Phrases:Avarice (n): extreme greed for wealth or material gain.Glossary of People, Places, and Things: Ten Things I Hate About You, She's All That, Pygmalion, My Fair Lady, Cruel Intentions, Catan, Heated RivalryNext Episode: Mansfield Park Volume II Chapters 9-10Our show art was created by Torrence Browne, and our audio is produced by Graham Cook. For bios and transcripts, check out our website at podandprejudice.com. Pod and Prejudice is transcribed by speechdocs.com. To support the show, check out our Patreon! Check out our merch at https://podandprejudice.dashery.com.Instagram: @podandprejudiceTwitter: @podandprejudiceFacebook: Pod and PrejudiceYoutube: Pod and PrejudiceMerch store: https://podandprejudice.dashery.com/

durée : 01:58:24 - Le Bach du dimanche du dimanche 22 mars 2026 - par : Corinne Schneider - Au programme de cette 376e émission : la première partie de la Passion selon Saint-Jean par Pygmalion, sous la direction de Raphaël Pichon (Harmonia Mundi, 20 mars) ; un blues sur Bach par le Trio Gabriel Thomas (1999), Jean Guillou à l'orgue (1968) et Astrig Siranossian au violoncelle (2022) - réalisé par : Noé Mignard Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

Have you ever walked out of a usability session completely confident in your findings, only to ship something that quietly missed the mark? What if the signal was there the whole time, and your brain just decided it wasn't worth logging?This week on the Cognition Catalog, we tackle The Expectation Bias. This bias shapes what you notice before you've even decided what to think about it. Your brain has already generated a prediction before the first participant clicks a button or a teammate presents their work, and that prediction quietly shapes what registers as a signal and what gets explained away before you've made a single conscious decision about what any of it actually means.We get into the science behind why this happens, and trace the research back to psychologist Robert Rosenthal's work in the early 1960s. His experiments, including the landmark Pygmalion in the Classroom study with Lenore Jacobson, showed that expectations don't just color our perceptions; they can actually change outcomes. That's a sobering thought when you consider how many design decisions are built on research we assumed was neutral.We also dig into where this plays out on real teams: in usability sessions where hesitations get logged as "minor," in design reviews where leadership-championed features get a generous read while quietly doubted projects get interrogated at every turn, and in how we evaluate colleagues whose reputations have already done the evaluating for us. If any of that sounds familiar, this episode offers five concrete habits to help you catch the filter before it's already done its job. Give it a listen.Topics:• 00:00 - Perception is prediction• 02:04 - A UX research cautionary tale• 03:23 - Defining expectation bias• 03:42 - Prediction errors explained• 04:31 - Pygmalion effect origins• 06:03 - Expectation vs confirmation• 06:30 - How it warps team decisions• 08:31 - Habits to reduce bias• 10:47 - Wrap up and next steps—Thanks for listening! We hope you dug today's episode. If you liked what you heard, be sure to like and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts! And if you really enjoyed today's episode, why don't you leave a five-star review? Or tell some friends! It will help us out a ton.If you haven't already, sign up for our email list. We won't spam you. Pinky swear.• Get a FREE audiobook AND support the show• Support the show on Patreon• Check out show transcripts• Check out our website• Subscribe on Apple Podcasts• Subscribe on Spotify• Subscribe on YouTube• Subscribe on Stitcher

Immerse yourself in captivating science fiction short stories, delivered daily! Explore futuristic worlds, time travel, alien encounters, and mind-bending adventures. Perfect for sci-fi lovers looking for a quick and engaging listen each day.

For 30 years now, colleges have relied on the Learning Management System, or LMS, as a key portal for professors and students to teach and learn. It's a tool that has helped colleges adapt to online learning and bring digital tools to classroom teaching. But generative AI seems poised to disrupt the LMS. And it's unclear whether the LMS will evolve—or be replaced altogether. For this episode, Jeff and Michael talk with a pioneer of the technology, Matthew Pittinsky, about the lessons of past moments of tech disruption like the smartphone and cloud computing and about what could be different this time. This episode is made with support from Ascendium Education Group. Relevant Links The LMS at 30: From Course Management to Learning Management (At Last), by Matthew Pittinsky in OnTech. LMS at 30 Part 2: Learning Management in the AI Era, by Matthew Pittinsky in OnTech. “Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils' Intellectual Development,” by Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson “Two-Sigma Tutoring: Separating Science Fiction from Science Fact,” by Paul T. von Hippel in Education Next. Chapters 0:00 - Intro 1:34 - How the LMS Became Key Infrastructure at Colleges 3:04 - What Was the Sales Pitch When the LMS First Emerged? 5:15 - Why Blackboard Bought Up So Many Competitors 7:36 - AI Will Disrupt LMS Even Though Previous Tech Didn't 10:57 - Could AI Can Bring ‘Hogwarts Magical Study Aids'? 12:22 - Is the LMS Needed In an Age of AI? 14:14 - Should LMS Providers Build Guardrails to Prevent Cheat-Bots? 18:25 - What Lessons From the Past Can Help Respond to AI? 19:52 - A New Leader at Blackboard 21:06 - Sponsor Break 22:00 - How Faculty Are Key to Change 28:03 - Why Change From AI Might Be Discipline-Specific 34:50 - Lightning Round With Matt Pittinsky Connect with Michael Horn: Sign Up for the The Future of Education Newsletter Website LinkedIn X (Twitter) Threads   Connect with Jeff Selingo: Dream School: Finding the College That's Right for You Sign Up for the Next Newsletter Website X (Twitter) Threads LinkedIn Connect with Future U: Twitter YouTube Threads Instagram Facebook LinkedIn   Submit a question and if we answer it on air we'll send you Future U. swag! Sign up for Future U. emails to get special updates and behind-the-scenes content.

Listen. Stay with us on this one. This week, Rachael and Ansel are joined by local actor Robb Krueger to talk about George Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalion and its musical adaptation My Fair Lady, neither of which has anything to do with Sherlock Holmes.... or do they?Contact the pod! Linktree at: https://linktr.ee/sherlocksayspod?fbclid=PAAaalIOau9IFlX3ixKFo3lsvmq6U1pYn8m3cf7N6aOqkqUGCljCO0R00KZ3E

Dennis Versus the Movies month kicks off with a favorite from Mary's childhood, the Philadelphia-set romantic comedy about a department-store window-dresser and the five-thousand-year-old Egyptian mummy spends her days as mannequin and nights as Kim Cattrall. Forget the haters, it's Pygmalion on the Schuykill. Starring Andrew McCarthy, Kim Cattrall, James Spader, Meshach Taylor, G. W. Baily, and Estelle Getty. Written by Edward Rugoff and Michael Gottlieb. Directed by Michael Gottlieb.