Ten Percent Happier with Dan Harris - From The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway | The Future of Work

Episode Date: March 31, 2023

As a wrap up to our Work Life series, we want to share a preview of another podcast we love: Prof G hosted by Scott Galloway. His interview, "Scott Galloway on: the Impact of Work on Mental Health, the Role of Luck in Success, and How Much is Enough," kicked off this latest series. Scott's show combines business insight and analysis with life and career advice, and we're big fans. In this episode of Prof G, Scott shares his view on the "Future of Work"— from recruiting, to mentorship, to building teams. He touches on the role nepotism plays in the future of recruiting, to securing a job post-college, and team organization in the workplace. You can hear more episodes of the Prof G podcast here.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hey gang, as you know, for the past four episodes, we've been running a series on work. We call it the work life series. We're going to boot this up occasionally, I think indefinitely. If you heard the episodes, we talked about everything from whether mindfulness actually works at work to how to handle difficult colleagues to imposter syndrome. One of my favorite episodes was with Professor Scott Galloway with him. We talked about whether you should bring your whole self to work, how much is enough, what is the link between happiness

and work. Anyway, Scott's got his own podcast, actually his two podcasts, one of them is called Pivot, which he co-hosts with the great tech journalist, Cara Swisher, but he's got his own solo show, which is called The Prof G Podcast, and we wanted to make you a little bit more familiar with it. So we're going to drop an episode of the ProfG podcast right here right now on his show. He talks about all sorts of issues related to work. And on this particular episode, when we're dropping down our feed today, he talks about recruiting, mentorship, and building teams. It's as always, Wisconsin smart and insightful.

So check it out and check out his show in general. Welcome to the property pods office hours. This is the part of the show where we answer your questions about business, big tech entrepreneurship and whatever else is on your mind. If you'd like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to officehours at profitingmedia.com. Again, that's officehours at profitingmedia.com. Let's have a relationship, start investing in this relationship. In today's episode, we finished off our special three-part series by answering your questions about the future of work.

This is part three. Greatness is in the agency of others, where we get into all things recruiting, building teams, and mentorship. Also, I have not heard these questions. More raw, more authentic, more dog. First question. Hey, Prof. G, this is Fergus, a Canadian currently living in London, Gokinops.

I am a ex-consultant now working in the upside in the world of PE, and I went to UBC and Vancouver, and remember fondly slash, not fondly, the last year or so spent there anxiously worrying about how to get that first job out of school and the heavy efforts in recruiting and linked in smoothing and cold emails and so on and so forth. And my question to you is knowing that you're very active in the world of post-secondary education, what do you see as the future of recruiting? I know that anecdotally, some friends are not able to lean on family connections. However, that is asymmetric and

definitely not fair for those who are less, less connected. What do you think the role of tech can play in this space and sort of how will this shift moving forward? Fergus, Fergus from London, first off, sounds like you've figured it out. You're in London. So congratulations. I think it's always impressive when young people move countries. I think it just bodes well. It means you're a risk taker. It means you have the skills to establish new networks and friendships in different places. Some crazy stat, like 90 or 95% of people never even live, never move more than the 30 miles from

where they're born or something. Anyways, what you're talking about is nephatism. There's this big thing on neo babies. I think there are certain industries where the kids is getting in the door. For example, I think in Hollywood, the entertainment industry, I think there are more great actors and there are great roles. So the kids is getting in the door. I think most industries though, there are more

great roles and great people. And if you're motivated to do well in the sciences or you have strong EQ or you're just aggressive or you can sell, I think that I don't want to say the organization is going to find you, but now there are platforms where you can find people. And we're at a historically strong labor market. There's 1.9 open jobs for every one person pursuing employment. So this is I think a pretty good time to be seeking a job. I was advised young people to try and get some sort of certification to stand out, whether it's a college degree or a class three drivers license or just something that helps you stand out in a LinkedIn world.

In terms of the future, I imagine it's going to be more AI will just say, okay, let's input everybody's data from LinkedIn and then attempt to cross-reference it with who's most successful at this type of industry or this type of firm and then proactively go out and identify those people. So, we might end up with, there's a situation where don't call us, we'll call you, where organizations actually identify people and then go after them. So, in the world of recruiting, my sister's a partner, or was a partner in cornfair, and now has her own recruiting firm. What they do is, is they get a job spec, and then they go

proactively find people. And their view is, if you're looking for a job, they don't want you. They want to find people that already have jobs, which is kind of strange. But right out of college, I don't know if things have changed a lot in the sense that it's kind of up to you boss and it is a numbers game. It's every morning sending out three or five or it doesn't call the emails calling everyone you know including your contacts, including the person who graduated a year ahead of you. That's already got a job there and saying, hey, can you help me get an interview?

Doing anything you can to stand out. And also, getting used to rejection. I sent out, I think, hundreds of resumes in my senior year at UCLL. When I graduated from business school in 1992, from Berkeley, only 40% of us had a job offer. So the majority of us had a job offer. So the majority of us on graduation day didn't have jobs.

Now at NYU Stern, the majority of kids have between something like three and five job offers. The Career Development Department has to ask kids to stop interviewing because companies get discouraged when only one in five offers they make that kid actually accepts. So it's a different labor market. It favors the person looking for the job,

but trying to get certification, trying to know your shit in terms of going into a job interview, I was used the three hurdles test. How are you different than other applicants? Why is that point of differentiation relevant to them? Why do they care? Why is your background in politics or being raised on a caboose relevant to what they're trying to achieve?

And what do you do every day to sustain that competitive advantage? And then the questions you know they're going to ask you are the hardest ones. Why you? Why this company? You know, where do you want to be in three or five years? And then a certain amount of persistence. But I don't know if recruiting is going to change that much. It seems to me it's all kind of moving to LinkedIn and a few platforms and then a certain amount of persistence. But I don't know if recruiting is gonna change that much. It seems to me it's all kind of moving to LinkedIn and a few platforms and then went to get a little bit more senior.

You start getting calls from headhunters. But I don't have anything like any revelation here that it's gonna get much more sophisticated or technology is gonna disrupt it. What I will say is this is the strongest historically labor market we've had in a long, long time. So I think it's a great time to be looking for a job. But again, let me finish where I started.

Congratulations on making it to the UK. Next question. Hey, Prof. G. This is Amy from Hoboken, New Jersey, Big Fan of yours and the show. Thanks so much for taking my question. I was wondering what your thoughts are on the future of how teams are organized. There's definitely a movement toward companies flattening their orcs and removing middle manager type roles, which I think makes a lot of sense. As someone who has worked in marketing for the past 15 years, I've experienced a lot of restructuring of teams and a really obsessive focus on naming and categorizing

different marketing functions plus thoughting people into hierarchies, which I would love to see change. With that said, I'd love to hear your take on how businesses and also individuals can be successful through this time of change. And if you ultimately agree that a flatter, more equal opportunity team structure will be better for everyone. Thanks for the thoughtful question. So flatter organizations is always sort of everyone's go to we need a flatter organization

because over time what happens is more and more people get inserted into the organization, they become managers. And the term everyone uses now is everyone programs. Everyone builds code, which is Latin for everybody does their own work. And I think there is merit to that. I say to people that if you want to be a senior leader in an organization, one, you have

to be the best at something. And that is you can't just be a manager. You have to have the skills to either, you know, you can do design better than anyone. You can crunch numbers on a spreadsheet better than anyone. You can put together a PowerPoint deck, outlining options, or strategy better than anyone. You still need to be excellence commands respect and it should too. You have to be able to, and I think this is the key in management right now, be empathetic. And what do I mean by that? As a young manager, I just assume that everybody wanted to be rich and awesome, because that's

what I wanted. And what you realize over time is different people have different priorities. Some people want to manage others. Some people want more flexibility in their work life. Some people need constant praise. Some people just want the fastest route to making a lot of money. And by the way, our willing to work 16 hours a day to do that. And demonstrating a willingness to learn what's important to that person. And then reflecting it and how

you treat them as a manager that I put you up for this position because you've demonstrated an interest in management. Or I know that it's important for you to go internationally so I've recommended you for this position. Showing loyalty is a function of appreciation. And if you want people to be loyal to you, you need to demonstrate appreciation and that's both economic and non-economic. Also, what makes a good manager?

Accountability. You hold people accountable. You put in place a specific job description and you say, this is what you are responsible for and this is how we're going to measure it. And then very open and honest dialogue, praising them when they do a good job. Ideally publicly, you always praise publicly and then you criticize privately, but when they're not doing their job, you call them into a room and say, you're not living up to our expectations,

and I'm gonna work with you to try and rectify this, but have a very transparent conversation with them. Everyone will opt for the flatter organization, but you do need managers. There is a player coach though role model, kind of the person who runs this company, Prof. G. Media, Catherine Dillon. I've always described her as the player coach.

And that is she knows how to manage people, she's honest with people, but she kind of does this, pulls up her chair thing, and it's much harder in a Zoom environment, but that is, she will work with someone, she'll say, this document's been poorly edited, and then she'll pull up the document, and she'll edit it with them. She'll teach them how to edit,

teach them how to fish, so to speak. And I always thought that was a great way to be a leader. I've always found that leaders are generally one of two things. There's the inspirational leader. And that's what I am. I can get stand in front of a group of employees, outline a vision for the company and get them excited about it. And then there's the player coach leader, which is Katherine, who's a little bit quieter, but helps people learn, get things done, and establish a lot of credibility. That way, I find over the long term, the player coach leader is a better manager. Because the inspiring manager leader, people start to realize you're saying the same thing over and over, and they can become quite cynical. It's good in the short term, and maybe even the medium term, it's good for attracting

capital, it's good for being Mr. outside or Mrs. outside. But at the end of the day, if you have a bunch of people who are rudderless, you're going to need someone whose primary job becomes managing people, creating job roles, creating metrics, making sure people understand what they're supposed to be doing, checking in on people, doing reviews. Young people are hungry for feedback. I think the most important meeting you have with young people every year is their performance review because people are desperate for feedback. The reason why social media is so addictive is because of a feedback, both positive and

negative. And what I find is that I try and write emails to myself. This is one of my management tricks. When someone does something good or someone does something they shouldn't do or my opinion is holding them back, I send an email to myself. And then at the end of the year, I pull up those emails, and I take them through a bunch of examples. And I find that young people really value feedback. They want to learn, especially the people I work with, they want to learn, they want to be better, what they do, they want more opportunity, they want more economic security.

People who I have fired almost immediately, and I know that sounds kind of much of it's true, is typically 40-something people, usually men, sometimes women who come in and sort of want to manage and have a team and allocate responsibilities, but don't actually want to do any of the actual work themselves. That doesn't work in a smaller and medium sized company. Anyways, long-winded way of saying flat-ish, but be clear, you need managers, you need people whose tasks are Getting a hole that's greater than the sum of its parts for a team. Thanks for the question We have one quick break before our final question stay with us Welcome back question number three. Hey, Prof. G This is Preston from Atlanta G8

So my question for you is mainly around the talent acquisition and hiring process. I mean, I would snow coincidence that Nick Saving competes for national championships every year, he's got the best players on his team. And as you know, if you've got the best players on your team and you're working with a great group, performance goes up, work is more enjoyable, and you get

to learn a ton from other A players. So mainly what I was curious about is what are some common mistakes you've seen in the hiring process? How can we avoid them? And currently, what is your hiring model? Thanks, PropG. The biggest mistake I've made in hiring is capital.

And what do I mean by that? You have a growth company that's doing well, the markets love your company, the markets are frothy. So you go raise $30 million. And you got to grow your company from 30 people to 150 people. And it's difficult to do that in a responsible, measured fashion where you get ROI on each of those people, especially in an era of Zoom.

I find it's almost impossible to build a culture remotely. And the biggest mistakes I've made are one, the context is you have too much capital and you just need to hire them. For some reason, hiring the number of bodies becomes a metric for progress. We need a bigger tech team. Well, what would be a bigger tech team?

20 people, okay, let's just get 20 people. And then what happens is you ignore red flags. And that is this individual has had three jobs in the last five years. And there's always a good reason, but okay, they've had three jobs in the last five years. And there's always a good reason, but okay, they've had three jobs in the last five years. They don't immediately die with the team. But you're so desperate for people, and generally speaking, when you can raise money, that means the economy is strong, and good people have great jobs and don't want to leave.

So you end up with not a great talent pool that's available. And then the worst thing is ignoring these red flags after they've started. You enter into consensual hallucination with, well, they just need some time or they're in the wrong role. And a smaller, medium-sized company, and this sounds harsh, it's fucking Vietnam. It's hand-to-hand combat. And that is that people are working out. You know, you tell them they're not working out.

You tell them what they need to do. You give them three months. And then if it doesn't course correct, and I usually find it doesn't, unfortunately, you let them they're not working out, you tell them what they need to do, you give them three months, and then if it doesn't course correct, and I usually find it doesn't unfortunately, you let them go. And what I've done is I let people go on too long, I've ignored red flags, the best type of hiring. And to a certain extent,

the only type of hiring you should do in a small company, because you can do it, it's not scalable, but you can do it when it's a small company, maybe a medium-sized company, simply put two words reference higher. And that is you find people you trust and you tell them you're looking for people and you ask for their recommendation. The majority of the people at ProfG have come to us through a reference higher. And that is a couple of the people who have cold emailed us or we met them through a friend or something, but the majority of people, we've kind of already worked with in the sense

that somebody we know and trust knows them really well or has worked with them and can vouch for them. I can have an amazing, an amazing interview with somebody, but if I can't find good references for them I won't hire them Someone could literally come into my office and throw up on me and if someone I trust says Trust me this person is good. I will hire that person because here's the thing in interviews You get it wrong all the time. You get it wrong all the time the best interview I've had in a long time was a woman at L2. She came in, she had such presence, she was so forceful, so articulate, such a great mastery of

the domain that we worked in. And then two weeks later, went on disability leave and get this, there's nothing wrong with being sick, used to show up for the parties. She was sick enough to come to like our beer blast and our holiday party, but wasn't sick enough to come in. And then when we got acquired by some huge corporation, they were afraid to fire because of disability and our potential lawsuit. I'm like, Jesus Christ, how does this person even have the gall to continue to get paid when they're clearly not that sick?

Anyways, longer conversation. Small and medium sized company, you wanna go to your current employees and say, we're always looking for good people who in your friend, social professional network really impresses you. Find out if they're thinking about another op. Even if they're not looking for a job, ask them to come in and meet the founder and hear about what we're up to. And always let people know that you're looking for good people. And if someone you know and trust calls you and says, I have someone great, hit the bit. And by the way, my approach to hiring is athletes.

What does that mean? What does that mean? I'll hire someone who's great, even if I don't have the right role for them. I've never bought this whole, during the ride or the wrong ride. But it's not good people, especially young people or incredibly agile, will figure it out.

Anyways, reference higher. That's all good people, especially young people who are incredibly agile, we'll figure it out. Anyways, reference higher. That's all for this episode. Again, if you'd like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to OfficeHours at PropGMedia.com. Again, that's OfficeHours at PropGMedia.com. This episode was produced by Caroline Shagrin. Jennifer Sanchez is our associate producer and Drew Burrows is our technical director. If you like what you heard, please follow, download, and subscribe.

you can click the link in the show notes or find it anywhere you get your pots.