Facilitation Lab Podcast

"I've read a lot into behavioral psychology, and one thing that is appreciated across the board regardless of the therapist or psychologist is that you change the environment, you change the behavior."

John Fitch

I'm Douglas Ferguson, and I'm on a mission to help people everywhere have better meetings. There's clear evidence that poorly run meetings not only waste time, but they also squander a lot of money. A recent report by Doodle found that $541 billion is lost globally every year on common meeting mistakes–and that's just the report from the County for Direct Labor Costs. This staggering amount translates into opportunity costs we incur from ineffective meetings.

I'm excited to have John Fitch with me today! John is the CPO at Voltage Control and the author of Time Off. John is an author, business model generator, and prototype creator. He enjoys deep, intentional work that leads to the facilitation of new ideas and business models.

John is a big fan of compartmentalization, especially with work colleagues, projects, and phases of projects. He stresses the importance of reflection and the design lens of conversation. John believes that compartmentalizing takes conversation design, "which I admit, I'm not a pro at, but I know that to compartmentalize we need to talk about it, have a language about it. I think it's fascinating," he says. 

With COVID-19 and many of us working from home, John stresses the importance of having clearly compartmentalized spaces. "Now, if work is in your home and you haven't developed a rest ethic and have yours defined, and you're intentional about it, now that work is at home, it can be surrounding you at all times."

Learning how to take time off can be an investment in many ways. It can help create new ideas and turn activities into meditation time, to name a few. Time off can also bring you awareness of what you do in a space of rest so that you can be intentional about how you spend time away from work. Find out why you should use breaks in your projects or meetings, how our days can be dictated by our emotional behaviors, and how you can have boot-up and boot-down time for your creative process.

[01:45] Time Off–the book and what it means to have a Rest Ethic.

[02:22] Compartmentalizing work matters.

[04:25] Doing specific tasks in your own space can help with compartmentalization.

[07:29] Use your transition time commuting as a slow interstitial time-off switch.

[08:05] Superhuman and it’s relevance to complexity theory.

[08:54] Driving and music can be a form of meditation.

[10:57] Incubation and the process of stepping away from the thing you are trying to achieve leads to more success. 

[13:02] Use exercise to think through challenges–John’s interview with Terry Rudolph, a Quantum Physicist.

[18:20] Build intentional time into your schedule for rest during meetings or projects.

[21:31] Emotional triggers, both positive and negative, lead to a biased judgment of work.

[26:15] Utilizing rest time requires a transition period and acclimation periods.

[30:27] How John upgraded his business through time off and a real-life example from his book.

[32:15] Intentionally plan time off and give others a heads up that you are planning to be disconnected.

[34:17] When you lead a room, read others and be prepared to facilitate.

[38:24] John’s recommendations to leaders for facilitating better meetings.

[42:25] How you should reframe activities in your own mind.

John Fitch

Time Off 

Time Off Podcast

John Fitch is a maker who loves tinkering and building prototypes of products and businesses. “When new ideas aren't successful, it’s usually because a team was overconfident about how well customers and users would understand the idea and how much they would perceive its value.” He specializes in enabling teams to receive customer and user reactions before making any expensive commitments. This process involves a lot of play, unlearning, and empathy.

Voltage Control is a facilitation agency that helps teams work better together with custom-designed meetings and workshops, both in-person and virtual. Our master facilitators offer trusted guidance and custom coaching to companies who want to transform ineffective meetings, reignite stalled projects, and cut through assumptions. Based in Austin, Voltage Control designs and leads public and private workshops that range from small meetings to large conference-style gatherings. 

Apple Podcasts

Spotify

Android

Stitcher

Voltage Control on the Web

Contact Voltage Control

Intro: Welcome to the Control the Room Podcast, a series devoted to the exploration of meeting culture and uncovering cures for the common meeting. Some meetings have tight control, and others are loose. To control the room means achieving outcomes while striking a balance between imposing and removing structure, asserting and distributing power, leaning in and leaning out, all in the service of having a truly magical meeting.

Douglas: I’m super excited to have John Fitch on the show this week. And John Fitch is the chief product officer at Voltage Control and the author of Time Off. Welcome to the show, John.

John: Douglas, it's an honor to be on a podcast episode with you, deep in conversation. And it's also one of those classic funny lines where they're like, “Hey, it's been a while,” whereas right before recording this, you and I were prototyping some cool stuff. So it’s cool, then, to transition from the intensity, deep work of prototyping to a more casual conversation.

Douglas: In a way, this casual conversation comes off as a bit of time off compared to the deep, intentional work that's required for facilitation.

John: Well said. And you said a word there that is really important. You said intentional. And in the book Time Off and the whole point of view I have is we talk about it's important to have a work ethic, and we just proved that, prototyping some awesome software. We did it with an intentional work ethic. And having an intentional rest ethic is what the book Time Off is all about. So you’re right. And time off can be active, which is another, I think, eye opener for our readers. It doesn't just mean vegging out on the couch, which is totally fine, that's a form of time off, but sometimes stopping what you're doing and just having an awesome conversation with a colleague, a friend. In this case, you're both of those. So, yeah. Good point.

Douglas: Excellent. And I want to get to your background a little bit. But before we do, I love this notion of being able to be friends and colleagues at the same time. And I think there is this notion of compartmentalization that's so important to be able to do those things. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this notion of compartmentalization.

John: I think it’s fantastic to compartmentalize lots of things. And especially with those you work with, but it's important to compartmentalize the projects, and what phase is it in. I think we've talked many times before in our facilitation coaching that it's important to look at your meeting culture through seasons. That's a compartmentalization, right? You've decided, hey, right now we're in a season of production, or we're in a season of reflection or redesign or growth. And all of those have been intentionally compartmentalized. And so I think across relationships, that's really important. But also within your company culture, within yourself, you've got to compartmentalize parts of yourself. Like, I can't necessarily bring the version of me that's going out hunting and hiking to every prototyping session I have. And so I think that mindfulness and that internal check in, both for yourself but also across your team, is just, you know, that's the beauty of reflection and intention. So I think it's cool to just simply talk about it.

And I know you've had Daniel Stillman on the podcast and so cool to just think about the design lens of conversation. And to your point, compartmentalizing things, I think takes a lot of amazing conversation design that I know I'm not a pro at. But I know that to compartmentalize, we've got to talk about it, we have to have a language about it. So I think it's fascinating.

Douglas: You know, it's interesting you bring up this notion of hunting or fishing, and I think exercise can play a role there, these things that have a space associated with them. You go to do those things in that space tend to help with compartmentalization because you can think of that it serves a purpose.

Right at the beginning of COVID, I read some really fascinating writings by psychologists that were saying to really think about how you redesign your space and the purpose each room has for you so that you can still compartmentalize your life, even though you're confined to a much smaller, let's say, footprint.

John: Yeah. It’s fascinating. I've been thinking about now, since Time Off is out, you have friends and readers who reach out, and they’re like, “Hey, have you thought about what you're writing next?” And in regard to the whole Time Off sort of franchise, if I'm to use that word, I think a natural follow up would be time on and intentional time on. And then a book title that I'm the most excited about regarding what you just said would be a title something like Time Away. I, too, have read a lot into behavioral psychology, and one thing that is pretty much appreciated across the board, regardless of the therapist or psychologist, is you change the environment, you change the behavior. And that's so fascinating. And, yeah, right now we're all limited. You and I can't both just pack our bags and go to Ireland. Well, I mean, I guess we could, but probably not smart at the moment. But just by changing things up in your own house.

I remember—remind me of Linda's last name, who spoke at Control the Room.

Douglas: Linda Baker.

John: Yeah. Linda Baker. She gave a presentation on feng shui, and I think that's under that lens of energy design, space design. And it is amazing if you just rearrange things. And I know I've been on so many Zoom calls with you. You’ve really transformed your office, I assume for the better. But all of those intentional environment changes have, I would assume, changed your behavior. Would you say so?

Douglas: Absolutely. You know, I’ve created stations, if you will, within my house, so that each spot’s almost like traveling to a new—it's like a replica of what I had previously. I've got the space where I'm doing workshops. I got the space where I’m boxing and doing Pilates. I got the space where I'm eating. I got the space where I'm relaxing, and I got the place where I'm sleeping. I try to keep those responsibilities delineated and compartmentalized so I can be very intentional about what I'm going to do and how I spend that time.

John: And that’s really important. I think that's one thing I've been thinking a lot about with the pandemic. In some ways, it was a big, forced time off for some people, depending on their context. But also, I didn't really think about this because it'd been so long since I had the lifestyle of, oh, I go to a workplace. I work. I leave. I go home. A lot of people that going home, that interstitial time, was sort of a slow time-off switch. Like, they were going home, and when they went home, they were able to leave work at the office and home is home, and that's a clear compartmentalization. Whereas now if work is in your home and you haven't developed, as we call it, a rest ethic and have yours defined and you're intentional about it, now that work’s at home, it could just be surrounding you at all times.

Douglas: Yeah. It’s not only the compartmentalization you're describing, it's the transition. And, you know, in complexity theory, whenever we're talking about complexity theory, one of the examples I love to give is Superman. Superman doesn't turn from Clark Kent into Superman instantaneously. He goes into the phone booth and changes. And likewise, when we're moving from simple to complicated or complex, we can't just transition from those domains instantaneously. We have to go through some transformation and recall that disorder.

And I know for a fact I used to—I live out in the country, and my drive home, I always planned it so that I would never be stuck, because I hate sitting still in traffic, but I love driving. And just the motion, my thoughts form and dissolve and reform. And it's a great way for me to, I think, it's almost like active meditation. We've talked about this before, John.

John: I’m curious. Is there a particular playlist or something you would listen to in that transition time?

Douglas: You know, it's interesting, John. You know I have very eclectic music tastes, and so I have about, gosh, I don’t even know what the total is. I think it’s somewhere in the realm of, like, 500,000 songs on a USB thumb drive. And it’s amazing because it used to be that back in the day, it was like a wall full of CDs. I still have a whole shelfful of albums, but now I have this thumb drive that's like the size of a—I mean, it's so tiny. It's maybe two centimeters or something. It’s the tiniest little thumb drive. And I just put it on random. And the nice thing about listening to a really eclectic database of music on random, I can always skip something if I'm not in the mood for it. But it's the weird serendipities of things that flow from one thing to another. And I might be on a thread of thought, and then it totally changes my gears because it intercepts where I'm at and re-shifts me. So I kind of like being taken on a journey that I'm not having to plan, that I'm not having to put thought into, and I just flow with it.

John: I like it. It’s like the audio version of Google's Feeling Lucky feature. I mean, that's a cool environment change. I mean, it's your audio’s mind space. You're just allowing serendipity. And I actually think that has a lot of beautiful correlation to our book Time Off, which a lot of times people who haven't talked to me or read the book when I just surface level tell them, “Yeah, I wrote this book,” they’re like, “Oh, that’s cool. You wrote a book on vacations,” and I’m like, “No, no, no, no. It’s our goal, my coauthor’s and I’s goal, is to really expand the connotation of time off, not just being vacation from work.” It’s micropractices. And why it’s important is we looked at the creative process, and there’s four phases of it. And one of the phases that’s absolutely essential is called incubation, and it’s when you’re not actively working on the thing you’re trying to achieve. It’s by stepping away from it, by doing something else. Again, that could be something very passive. It could be something very active, like an intense workout. The point is, is your subconscious and other parts of your brain are able to work in the background in those moments.

And so what I like about your random music selection is that is a form of incubation that—well, you’re driving, so you can’t really actively code or do  any of your workshop facilitation work, but you're able to be an open channel. And so those sounds come through, and who knows what memories that ignites, and one idea can flow into the next. And I know a type A personality like me really benefited from changing my perspective of time off of this, like, I'm not working to, like, no, it's actually a very productive practice for an investment in better ideas or an investment to an epiphany, perhaps. So I like that you’re just opening it up. You don't know what's going to come.

Douglas: Yes. It's really fantastic. And one of my other favorite active-meditation techniques is actually just going to the gym and just having my sauna time, getting into a groove of—there’s a Pilates routine that I kind of developed out of my greatest hits, the things I really, really like. There’s a spine corrector and some different exercises on the Cadillac that I've done so many times that I don’t even have to think about what's next. I just go in there and I flow through it. I'll do that as a warmup, as a way of stretching and getting ready to do something more intense. And an hour will just evaporate. I'm not thinking about much of anything. And I found that time to be very valuable, and I miss it terribly because it's really hard to recreate that at home.

John: It's really cool that you brought up exercise. That's one of the many deep dives in our book Time Off, and it reminds me of—we interviewed this quantum physicist named Terry Rudolph. And exercise is a really big part of his rest ethic, and he gave us—each person we interview, we ask them to give very practical advice for the reader to immediately try. And his was—and you could replace the word run with any kind of movement. But he essentially said, look, run hard to empty your mind, or jog slowly to think through a problem without distractions. And so he essentially told us, if you need to clear your mind, go really hard. So that could be your high-intensity workouts. And challenge yourself so that you're not able to think about anything, basically. And you just kind of get lost on focusing on not dying in that high-intensity activity. So it's, in a way, you’re unplugged for a while and getting back to the body.

Or as, if you want to use a workout as productivity, you could set some clear intentions or questions to contemplate in advance, and then use that time off exercising to really give you a macro view. So that could be, like, as you've told me, in the sauna or in Pilates, where it is active, you're definitely working out, but there's enough space in there for you to dream up, have a macro view. And so I think that's a cool oscillation of intention.

And also, that analogy could be made to a work project. There's times where, like today, actually, you and I were prototyping. You can only do that for so long, just like you can only sprint for so long on the Treadmill, or you can only stay in the really intense, infrared sauna for so long. And so it's just being aware of that oscillation and intentional about it to reap the benefits and not just choosing and obsessing over one.

Douglas: That’s right. And I think that it's another thing to think about how you might hijack some of the systems to do things that you might need, because you, not to overuse the word hijacking, but imagine your emotions. Your brain chemistry is hijacking you at the moment. Well, then going for a really long run, in a way, you're kind of depriving yourself of oxygen, because everything's just devoted to surviving that intensity. Whatever weird conversation you just had with someone that didn't sit well, that's going to all be history. And so then you'll be in a much better headspace to analyze it, synthesize it, and address it. So that's interesting. Time off can be both micro and macro, I guess.

John: I’m curious. That's a good point. So I'm just, in real time, I know you have a ton of experience in music and especially in synthesizers and other instruments. I mean, you've helped produce music. And if you think about it, time off is essential in music, too. Time off between certain notes gives you a rhythm. Time off from one section of the orchestra is important to evoke a certain emotion. I'm curious in, like, synthesizer space, is time off an important part of your whole setup? I’m just totally randomly curious about that.

Douglas: Yeah. It's no different than other music, right? You’ve got micro timing, which, to bring it back to the micro and macro, you’ve got these moments with inside the melody itself, where literally—and if we want to really break it back down to the voltages, the voltage is either on or it's off. If the voltage was on the entire time, nothing would happen, because the system would just be totally primed. You'd imagine it would just be complete stress, right? So in order to have anything interesting happen, it needs to oscillate up and down. So the voltage goes positive and it goes negative. Or if it's d.c., it goes just positive and zero. And that's where you get these really cool modulations, where really stuff interesting happens.

But I think if you were going to really bring it back to work and life and habits and how we keep our brains healthy, we also need to think about the frequency of isolation, because I would argue that even if you're having too much rest and the contact switch alone could be exhausting, just switching between turn it on and off. So I think that the frequency is important to having it too fast, the duration too short, and then switch is too fast, it's probably equally harmful.

John: Hm. You and I have been conductors of a lot of rooms. It's been a great honor we’re able to learn so much when we do that. I'm curious before I go in, because I've contemplated it for a few years, putting the book together, but in your own master facilitation, whether it's a large-group gathering or a small team or a design sprint, Douglas, how have you used time off as a function as a facilitator? Anything come to mind?

Douglas: Well, yeah. I mean, there's the cardinal rule of the 90-minute break. We don't want to go over 90 minutes before we have breaks, and making sure that that's written into the agenda and being very strict about seeing to that. Also, just time away from the material can be really powerful, whether that's by design—we build something into the agenda for us to kind of take a tour around through something different. It's exactly the reason why you might do improv games or icebreakers and these types of things, where we intentionally want to move the energy or the patterns through the room. And it's definitely an amazing tool when things get uncomfortable, and it's unproductively uncomfortable, and we can call a break. We can use that time to let people disperse and then come back together at a time. It's similar to going on that sprint, letting the emotions discharge so that we can come back together when people are a little less emotional or a little less spun up.

John: Yeah. It reminds me when I was in film school, we took this class, and I was really focused on being a producer, which was kind of the business mind, the coordinator of the project. But in order to do that, you had to take editing, and you had to take directing. And I remember being really fascinated by, in our directing class, one of the biggest tips we heard from renowned filmmakers was if you're the director, I think on average, it was like two or three months was the minimum recommended from when your filming ended, so all of your production of the live action footage, etc. Two to three months between that and when you sat down the first time with your editor, because you needed to be detached from the material, because there may have been a particular shot, a particular line, a particular character, that in that time of production you were just really excited about personally and in detaching from a while allowed their advice. And I definitely, when I was producing documentaries, benefited from this advice, that by the time you had been so detached, you were able to really reflect and kind of come to the material new again and work with the editor from the perspective, more of a new viewer versus someone who's been deep in the weeds for a long time.

Douglas: Yeah, that’s interesting. I feel like the weeds could cause a couple of problems. If I were to bring it back to design sprints, it's a reason that we encourage people not to do any synthesis at the end of day five. So if you've done interviews all day, you're going to be suffering from recency bias from the most recent interview. Just go clear your head over the weekend and come back. Take that time off to let it all just dissipate, disassociate from whatever happened. It was much more effective.

And John, it makes me wonder. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think there could be things around emotional triggers that are—I mean, maybe that scene was filmed on your birthday. People were giving you lots of Happy Birthdays and encouragement; maybe you got a cool gift from someone. Or maybe you found out your grandmother was sick the day this other scene was filmed. And so could you have these associations with them that are subconscious, where you might judge them in ways that aren’t accurate?

John: Oh, that's certainly the reason you need a team, because of that complexity of influences. And I actually wish that I would have known how much that my film-school experience would have prepared me to work in software and design. I had no idea. I think I would have been much more intentional as a student because we had these—and I mean, you and I do them all the time, working together, and we help organizations get comfortable with doing them. We just have a different language for it—but in film school, we call them design crits, “crits” short for critique. And you would show up with your work in progress, a.k.a. a prototype; and you would sit there with about eight to nine others; show the 90 seconds, four-minute clip, whatever the professor allowed for. I mean, you had to get good at taking feedback, and through repetition, it was not easy first. But by the time I graduated, you look at feedback as this beautiful gift. And it's because of yes, there's certain things that I'm attached to. And how many John Fitch's are there in the world? I mean, I'm sure there's some people with a similar psychographic as me, but that's not going to get me an award-winning film.

And so just exposing yourself to more and more feedback early on, I think, humbles you and gets you out of your own head with all of those influences, because someone will resonate with something that you might think is not that exciting. Whereas you can see a pattern of something your deep—like to your points earlier, something around, oh, my birthday happened, and I had a super-good day, and we shot that one scene, and that scene's got to be in the film. And unless I get checked by a team or early viewers, early testers, that could be a poor decision on the quality of the story.

And so, we are in the art of helping people, I think, quickly adapt, thanks to the gift of feedback.

Douglas: It's amazing, right? It’s interesting. Even if your time off isn't giving you the answers, like we can rely on the perception of others, the perspective of others. And I want to come back to this notion of, I feel like a lot of this is borne out of kind of tech burnout and getting in these situations where people are overworked and they need to kind of step away from things so they can do better work. It's almost like a rejuvenation and a recovery, to use the athlete metaphor. If you train all the time, you'll just wear yourself out. There has to be time for recovery. So that's why people do the sauna, the ice bath, the compression sleeves. Take a day off. Take a week off. Heal.

And I've been thinking a bit lately about this notion of flipping the switch from active to inactive or time on to time off. And I've personally found it a bit difficult just to completely flip that switch into the other mode, and it’s because we kind of prime our nervous system and our mind and our habitual states, the things that we kind of get acclimated to, and how we spend our days are based off of behaviors. And as we were kind of going through this transition for moving more and more things, pretty much going to a 100 percent virtual facilitation company versus a 15, 20 percent virtual company, it required a lot of my work and attention, and I poured myself into it, partly to support the community, but also to make sure the company stay alive and survive this transition. And now that I've got a lot of things in place and I'm confident about where we are, I’ve started to pull back. And as I've done so, it's been great to have some of that time off and to be able to shut off and think about other things and come back to it.

The other thing I've noticed is that it's a continuum. You know, if you look at a thermometer, if you put a thermometer into boiling water and you turn the stove off, it's going to take a while for that thermometer to get back down. You can't just go straight into the other mode. And so I'm just curious if you thought much about these, that it's around these kind of this rest time and even making use of it might require some transition. It's not just like, let's just go do it. Okay, I'm doing it. It's like I need to almost, like, train myself to be able to function in that mode properly.

John: You threw the perfect slow-motion softball pitch to me right now. This is the whole thing that the backstory that led to Time Off. To answer this is, again, we put together these two words. I had not come across it before. Not going to be—I can't say I invented it. They're just two separate words that we put together. But rest ethic. So work ethic for me is like someone with a solid work ethic, they're not just carelessly driving themselves for no reason. They put high intention. They're good at prioritization, decision making, etc. They follow up with what they're going to do. Intentional work ethic, to your point, yes, to get the most out of rest, it's going to take some intention. And so those things you're feeling are real.

And I learned, and I'm going to simplify it, and I think each person has to figure out their own transition art. But when I was at Animal Ventures, a firm that did prototyping with a lot of supply chain automation work, my two business partners were the ones that opened me up to this whole concept of time off. And our model of time on, time off by no means is copy, paste at other cultures. But based on how we worked and what we did, we were able to establish a model where everyone worked for three months. So think about a quarter. And then after that quarter, you had a month mini sabbatical, and we had to stagger those.

And a lot of people hear that and they're like, “Oh, that sounds amazing.” Well, we had to really design that out and practice it. And before that month off, there was a lot of preparation, not just like, “Hey, I'm going to go away for a month.” You decentralized your functions as a person. Each person has responsibilities and things they handle, and those would be documented, and in a way, diversified across a few other people that would be still in their time-on mode. Or you would think about ways to automate it more. So we were all—again, it was this intentional thing you would do. It was like the time-off prep so that it wasn't like all of a sudden massive switch off and then shit falls through the cracks and things aren't operationalized. So a lot of intention.

And then also—so then you’d go have your time off, and if you did that prep right—you really were off, and you didn't have to freak out during your time off because your functions were not only handed over, they were going to be upgraded because that was one of the points, is new people get a hold of those functions, and they're able to poke holes in it and be like, “Oh, that's not that efficient. We could do better.” Or a new technology comes out in your month that you're off, and the people upgrade the operations.

And then, let's say I would come back from that that mini sabbatical. I had a re-acclimation period, sort of like altitude adjustment, where it wasn’t just like I came back on Monday, and it’s boom, full blow. The last one I had done at the firm when I was still there was a week-long acclimation period where I’m not necessarily back to work. I’m understanding what has changed. That was one category. The second of work was I was giving in sharing my epiphanies on how my position, my department, my product ownership, whatever it was, I mean, that time off gave me a lot of epiphanies. And so I would share, “Hey, here's how I think it could be better,” and we would workshop that. And then the people that handled my functions while I was gone would then report to me saying, “Hey, we ran your functions while you were away, and we upgraded it.” And so I had to now—I had literally an upgraded playbook for the position. And so all of us were upgrading the business-culture software through this time off. And so the ramp up and the ramp down is often never practiced. And that's important.

And I think a beautiful analogy is you're an athlete and you warm up, then you do—well, in that case, the hardcore work, in this case, the hard core time off—and then you have a cool down, and you re-acclimate. And that's really important to do.

One of the micro tips in the book that I'll give you an example of a mistake I made where I didn't take my own advice. We interviewed Tiffany Shlain. She came up with this concept called the Tech Shabbat, where, for a 24-hour period, you don't interact with any screens. And it's a really powerful exercise, especially given that we work in screens a lot. I find that it slows down time. In a way, I get bored on purpose, and it's just really fun what you end up filling that time with. And what's funny is the first time I did one, I did not take that advice of prep and then acclimate. And it was awesome. I was like, time slowed down. I’m enjoying no screen time for a weekend. And when I get back to my phone on Sunday, my iPad, and I open it up, I have, like, 25 missed calls and all these texts, and it was from my mom and her friends because my mom is so used to chatting with me on the weekends. She was like, “All his devices are off. All his phones off.” She thought I got kidnapped and was freaking out. And then that stressed me out. And so I could have easily prepped her. And that’s just a little micro example of, great, you have some intentional time off planned; make sure to prepare for it. And then, also, integrate yourself in a meaningful way back, because it is hard to go from a very rested rhythm and state and then suddenly just drop it in. It’s like you call it boot-up time in a lot of the meeting culture at work you do, Douglas. And I think there's boot-up time, but there's also—what would it be, boot down?— to also get prepared again to take time off.

Douglas: Yeah. You had to open, explore, and close, right?

John: Yeah. So that's something that can be applied on the micro and macro as well. And it's helpful, too, because in the time off, there's not only the gift of recharging and building your enthusiasm back up, but you're going to have—again, it's an important part of the creative process. It's called incubation. And then following incubation is illumination. That's the aha. That's the moment of clarity. That's like you've zoomed out peregrine-falcon-level view. You're looking at things differently because you're detached for once. And that's when we unlearn and rethink things.

Douglas: Yeah, I love that. And it also reminds me of not only do we need to prepare ourselves, we also need to prepare others. So setting those expectations and making sure that others aren't going to be negatively impacted by—because if it's completely selfish, then it's not going to necessarily serve us when we go to do our deep work again, because we usually have to collaborate with others or others are going to be the benefactors of our work. And so I think it's really awesome that the book shows this path where people can be really, really intentional about their rest ethic, so how they help inform others, how they help prepare others. I think it's really wise.

John: Yeah. And it's important, too, for leaders to—and I know you and I've talked about, especially in the art of facilitation, read the room and be aware. For I think leaders to feel more confident, I mean, just based on some of the early readers who’ve been reaching out to me that are in a position of leadership and influence, their biggest question after being won over on the importance of time off is, “Okay, now I need to work with my team to figure out what our more-detailed time-off strategies and operations are.” And that's awesome, and I'm glad that they're thinking about that, and they'll work through it, because until that intention and design is put forward, the time off and rest ethic in a business context is generally just a short little clause in vacation policy. Whereas it can be so much more manageable, I think, and smart, if it's a daily, a weekly, a monthly, it's not just this, like, “Oh, yeah, you decide when you take time off, and here's our policy.” To actually embrace it and to workshop it and to figure it out for the context of that business is something we hope leaders think about after they read it, because it expands that definition that time off is not just vacation and mai tais on a beach. I mean, our sub chapters are things like sleep, solitude, exercise, reflexion, play, which you and I talk a lot about. And then also our relationship to technology.

And the last thing I'll say that I'd be curious to get your ping-pong, back and forth. I think the most mind-blowing thing that we uncovered in the opening section, which is called “Time Off Throughout History,” it’s like 100,000-foot view of humanity’s relationship to work and leisure, and we found we kind of knocked the dust off of this brilliant thought series from Aristotle, who talked about this concept of noble leisure. And actually, the word school, which goes back to, I think it was pronounced schola or scala, meant leisure. They looked at it as what we did in our leisure time, which nowadays we would call extracurricular or volunteer or play time or hobby time, that was the most respected thing humans did. It was noble because in those moments we would think to ourselves what’s possible, what’s a better society, we would share, we care about the environment. Literally, because of noble leisure, they invented mathematics and philosophy, these things that propel humanity forward.

And why I got excited about that is he said that one day all of culture would have the opportunity to revisit noble leisure because we would eventually automate the mundane. And you and I think a lot about artificial intelligence and how that’s impacting the future of work. And we’re helping companies think about rescaling, retooling their teams to be more focused on these human skills, these soft skills, however you want to call them. But I just get excited because I agree that Aristotle, his advice of noble leisure, we're at a time in human history where that's not so much of a pipe dream anymore. You could argue that once, who knows, a decade, two decades from now, with automation—and you would know more than I on the accuracy—that real humanness, that noble leisure is kind of what’s left for us, the more that mundane is not only better suited for machines, but I think that helps humans get back to those quality moments.

Douglas: So, John, when we’re thinking about how facilitators can make use of these concepts and maybe help teams perform better or work better together, what comes to mind? What recommendations do you have to have better meetings or to just be better facilitators, in light of what you've kind of uncovered in the book Time Off?

John: So, I mentioned some of the sub chapters that are in there, of the components that make up a rest ethic, things like reflection, solitude, play. And I think that's really important to incorporate those types of practices into your workshop, your meeting, because in all of those activities that I just mentioned, you see people in a lot of joy.

And for example, you and I have been in some workshops, and when I was working on the reflection chapter in the book, there was this question that is in there around, when was the last time you felt like a kid, or what activity do you do that you feel the most childlike while you're doing it? And when you ask that in a professional setting, people’s answers, they light up, and there’s that inner child that’s still in there. And that question—let’s say, we’re brought in. It’s a serious problem, and we've got to figure it out, and we're there to facilitate it and workshop it. And it's definitely serious, and we've got to do the work, and we're going to have an awesome workshop. We're going to produce a prototype. We're going to produce an artifact. We're going to drive outcomes. Pretty serious stuff. But if you sprinkle in these moments of what I'll call time off from the deep work, from the actual serious thing, it actually improves the overall process because, again, it goes down to that creative process. You're leaving some time for incubation and illumination, because then after that, you have verification, which is all about, okay, actually doing the work to see if that idea is worth a damn.

And in the first one—I mentioned it was four phases—is preparation, which is also deep work as you prepare to do things again. And so if you implement time-off practices into any of your workshops, look at them as investments and illumination and incubation for your participants. And also, it helps them rebuild enthusiasm if you go for a walk or you just say, “Hey, we take breaks seriously,” because I've been around facilitators that I don't know what their reasons are, but they don't incorporate meaningful breaks and rest within the workshop. And you can tell when it's 3:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m., people are just like, they're done. They're checked out. It's like forcing someone to just continue hill sprints over and over. And so that would be the first thing is ask yourself what moments in our workshop could benefit from incubation and illumination? And have fun with it, and whatever vocabulary you choose to use, I think your participants are going to appreciate that time off, because I think when we think about workshops, meetings, seminars, conferences, the art of gathering, that can be tiring. And I think with facilitators that incorporate more rest, people can be less intimidated by it all. So that'd be the first thing, Douglas.

The second thing is facilitators—and you and I are facilitators. We do a lot of facilitation, and we know people that do more facilitation than we do. It is hard, and it is a lot of energy that is used to hold space and pay attention and document and solve problems and deal with conflict. It is no joke. And you could look at time off as time management, but I've been thinking about it more and more as energy management. And so I think to do your best work as a facilitator, you also deserve those intentional moments of time off to not only make sure you don't get overworked and overwhelmed and burned out, but you'll benefit, too. Maybe by stepping away for once, you'll completely rethink one of your workshop modules; or you'll reflect on some feedback that someone gave you, and you'll level up, or you'll come up with an entirely new idea for a workshop or an activity.

But I just wanted to make sure to say that, I mean, today you and I were wrapping up a design sprint and then doing prototyping, and there is definitely a part of me that's like, “Yeah, I still have a few more things to do. But my internal compass is also talking to me, saying ‘That was intense, and you can now go into the garden and cook a nice meal and rest and be back at it tomorrow.’”

So those are two things I would think about, and try to reframe it in your mind from a place of starting to eliminate this idea that you're not effective if you're not working. I think that's something society is unlearning—I hope our book helps—is this whole concept of visible busyness. Just because you’re active doesn’t mean you’re effective. Whereas, I think a lot of people assume it’s true. And once you reframe and see rest as productive because it helps with recharge and illumination and incubation, you’ll start taking it as serious as your time on.

Douglas: It's also, I believe, in the serendipity of if you can manage to do those things when you most need them, I think it'd be much more effective because it's timely. And it's sort of like eating before you. You're just ravenously hungry. And I found the co-facilitator has been an interesting way to have those micro moments where I can have some time off. I know how to be 100 percent on the entire workshop, and I found that to be, those workshops are much less draining.

John: I’m so glad you remixed it to that. I've been thinking a lot about that lately, Douglas. You and I have co-facilitated a lot, and I think that’s a really important message for the future of work as facilitation becomes more and more relevant, especially now in virtual work, too. Just having multiple facilitators not only provides that time off but you have a skill set that gives you strengths in certain activities. Let's say there's a meeting narrative. Let's just go with the open, explore, close. There's parts of your personality where you're really great at the explore and the close, and maybe I'm just, like, a master of the open. And if we're aligned as a team of facilitators, each one of us can be in our zone of genius more. And not only does it allow us to have these interstitial moments of “in the zone” and then kind of backing off and relaxing, it allows us to just do our best work. And I know what’s been really cool when both of us are co-facilitating: in my time off from facilitating, I'm observing you, which I'm able to give you feedback that is through the lens of a facilitator. Likewise, you've done the same for me. And so if you’ve been going it alone as a facilitator, hey, hats off to you. Deep respect. But try out co-facilitating.

Douglas: I think we’re at time, John, so I’m going to close it here and say thanks so much for being here today. It’s been so fantastic riffing with you. It's always fun chatting with you. And I think we should let the listeners know how they can find you and the facilitation work you do as well as where can they find the book?

John: Totally. So if you want to talk about meeting culture and prototyping and the maker movement and all things running awesome meetings that are magical, voltagecontrol.com. You'll find me on there somewhere. And in terms of the book Time Off, if you just type it in Amazon or Google, I’m sure it’ll come up. Timeoffbook.com will send you to Amazon as well.

And other than that, Douglas, it's been an honor to not only talk about this, but to stay in touch as friends and colleagues throughout many years now. So, I'm pumped you're doing a podcast, you ask really good questions, and I'm honored to be on the guest list.

Douglas: Thanks for joining. And we'll definitely encourage everyone to get a copy of Time Off because it's really fantastic and it's super timely.

John: Thank you.

Outro: Thanks for joining me for another episode of Control the Room. Don't forget to subscribe to receive updates when new episodes are released. If you want more, head over to our blog, where I post weekly articles and resources about working better together, voltagecontrol.com.

Have you ever wondered what it means to be a professional conversation designer? Listen as your host Douglas Ferguson and his guest Daniel Stillman, the founder of the Conversation Factory and a master facilitator, discuss what it means to be a conversation designer and much more in this episode of the Control Room Podcast.

Daniel shares how he got started as a conversation designer and why he believes that everything is an active conversation. He speaks about what he would change about meetings and why having a narrative with an opening, exploration, and closing is essential in a productive conversation.

Listen as Douglas and Daniel discuss impromptu networking, the best questions to ask, and the definition of appreciative inquiry. They also talk about meeting mantras and why they are so important. Daniel shares his take on why using sticky notes is so effective in the ideation process and how to translate the practice to the virtual landscape.

Daniel also explains how to host a virtual rock, paper, scissors tournament; it's both crazy and fun. Order a copy of Daniel's book Good Talk, How to Design Conversations that Matter', available now.

[00:50] Welcome. [01:02] Daniel's journey as a conversation designer. [04:01] Teaching design thinking to non-designers. [04:48] Everything is a conversation. [07:43] Providing an interface for an important idea for a product. [08:34] One thing Daniel would change when it comes to having meetings. [11:06] A narrative is crucial in conversations–opening, exploring, and closing. [13:19] Closing out daily meetings with precision. [16:14] The power of impromptu networking to make meetings better. [19:23] Impromptu networking is a great way to model the participation that you expect. [20:34] Daniel's favorite questions to ask. [22:15] Appreciative inquiry, defined. [24:23] The evolution and significance of Daniel's mantra. [26:27] Sticky note ideation heightens focus on specific concepts. [29:03] Reading the room virtually. [31:16] Virtual rock, paper, scissors tournament. [34:47] Ways to signal during virtual group gatherings. [35:48] Distributive facilitation and the future of work. [39:23] Thank you. [41:02] Waiting forever is not a good business plan for your company or your wedding. [43:24] Do large virtual meetings need comedians to keep people interested? [44:57] Daniel's book. [47:23] It has been a pleasure. [47:36] Subscribe.

Daniel Stillman Good Talk: How to Design Conversations That Matter LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube

Daniel Stillman designs conversations for a living and insists that you actually do that too. As an independent design facilitator, he works with clients and organizations of all shapes and sizes (From Google to Visa, to name a few) to help them frame and sustain productive and collaborative conversations, deepen their facilitation skills, and coach them through the innovation process. His first book, The 30 Second Elephant and the Paper Airplane Experiment is about origami and teams and yes, it's as strange as it sounds. He hosts The Conversation Factory podcast where he interviews leaders, changemakers, and innovators on how they design the conversations in their work and lives.

Intro: Welcome to the Control the Room Podcast, a series devoted to the exploration of meeting culture and uncovering cures for the common meeting. Some meetings have tight control, and others are loose. To control the room means achieving outcomes while striking a balance between imposing and removing structure, asserting and distributing power, leaning in and leaning out, all in the service of having a truly magical meeting.

Douglas: Today on Control the Room Podcast, I have Daniel Stillman. Daniel Stillman is a conversation designer, and insists that you're one, too. He is the founder of the Conversation Factory and a master facilitator. Welcome to the podcast, Daniel.

Daniel: Douglas, it's a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me on.

Douglas: Of course. So, Daniel, I'd love to just have the listeners just hear a little bit about how you got started.

Daniel: So, this is funny because I was thinking about this during our pre-conversation. You and I have known each other for a while, but there's still stuff we don't know about each other. This came up when we were having a conversation last week, where you're like, "I don't know the story behind that thing. You just assume I know that because I've known you for a couple of years," stuff I've just never talked about. And so you've heard little snippets. So it's just kind of funny because we're friends, and now I'm telling you my story. I don't know. Just pulling out for a second on the meta-ness of it all.

Douglas: Yeah. And as you know, conversations can get weird.

Daniel: Yeah, they sure can. So, wait. What was the question again? How did I—what's my origin story?

Douglas: That's right.

Daniel: Was there any radioactive spiders involved in how I got my superpowers? I feel like I found my way into conversation design through design. I remember actually seeing an ad in the New York Times back when people found jobs in the New York Times' job-wanted section. Like, that was a thing. And I remember seeing this job for an exhibit designer, and I was like, this is so cool, because I had a background in science. I had studied physics in undergrad. And this idea of designing science exhibits—I loved going to museums when I was a kid. I grew up in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. I went to the Museum of Natural History as a kid often. That's where they would just send us on a rainy day. Like, just go there.

And this idea of being able to walk into a space and automatically learn just by being immersed in a space, just like, I don't know. It kind of tickled me. And I wound up going to design school because they had a studio in science-exhibit design. And so I was super-duper excited to learn how to become a designer and how to design spaces for education.

But while I was in design school, what I really learned was human-centered design. This idea that, wow, you can just go out into the world and talk to some people and learn about their problems, and then, make some stuff for them that they like, and then find out if they like it, and then, try it out again, make some test iterations. This was, like, 2005, 2006. The idea of human-centered design and design thinking we're really, I mean, nascent in design at the time. Pratt, where I went to school, was still very much form. We studied negative space and curves for entire semester-long classes. And so this idea of designing for people and designing for needs is what really inspired me.

But when I got out of school and I started working in a design studio, what I realized was that I actually had to start designing—I didn't know at the time—but I was designing conversations: stakeholder-engagement workshops to try to pull intelligence out of various stakeholders to understand user needs. And so workshop design became a real passion for me. And so that's kind of how I got to where I am today was I realized that design thinking and teaching design thinking to non-designers was something that was really important. I had this fantasy. I was like, if we all knew the rules to the same game, we could play the game. Let's make something that matters together, right? And that to me are like—those are the rules of design thinking. Hey, let's empathize and understand and define and deliver. That's what I do now is I try to inspire people to be intentional about how they create.

Douglas: That's amazing. So, thinking back to when you were just post school and you were starting to have some of those early realizations that everything was a conversation, can you take us to that moment? And what was it that really clicked for you? How did that make you feel, or what was surfacing? Was there something that wasn't quite serving you at the time and you realized there needed to be more, or was it just an observation?

Daniel: Actually, I can—I really remember the moment. I went to an event that my friend Jooyoung Oh was running. She was a design researcher at the time, and for many years she worked at Ziba. And at the time—I can't remember what she was doing—but she did this workshop where she had us do collages of words and pictures that she had printed out on stickers. And we did this visual collage of "my ideal experience for blank is…," and "my ideal experience for blank is not…" So she gave us these sheets of stickers with words and pictures on them. The pictures were evocative, emotional, suggestive. And we made these collages, and they became a focal point for a dialog. And I remember doing this and I was like, "Oh, my god, this is amazing." And it seemed so simple.

But we had this big meeting coming up with some stakeholders in the consultancy I was working on, and we were doing this big kickoff for this bug-repellent product, which I probably shouldn't talk about. And I said to my boss, he's like, "We really need to understand all these different stakeholders and what they really think this thing should be." And I was like, "Oh, my god, I've got a thing for that." The language I would use now is "I have a design for that conversation." I explained it to him a little bit, and he squinted his eyes, and he's like, "Okay." And I'm like, "Dude, you got to trust me on this. I can land this plane. It's going to get us good information."

And I remember going into that meeting, and we did this exercise. I remember—I literally remember printing out these sheets of these words and these stickers and these images. And one member of the stakeholder team was an engineer, and the other was a marketer. And there was a word that was placed on the is versus the isn't, in either case. The engineer did not want the experience of this chemical bug-repellent product to be magical, and the marketer thought that the experience should be magical. And so what we had was this conversation about magical and what it meant for something to be magical, and why the engineer didn't want it to be magical and why the marketer did want it to be magical.

Magical to the marketer meant effortless, easy, efficacious. Boom, done—bugs are gone. And to the engineer, he's like, "If it's magical, then that means that people don't trust it. If it's magical, people don't understand why it works. If it's magical, people can't understand that it's safe and scientific."

And so just from that collaging effort, which some people would deride as goofy, mood boarding, or whatever, it provided us with an opportunity to dive into this really important conversation, which is, What do we want this thing to be, and what do we want our customers to think about it?

And what we were doing was providing an interface for the conversation. If we just said, "Hey, what do you guys want this to be?" it would have seemed like, I don't know, one, we didn't know our stuff. But by giving them an activity to do, it pulled ideas out of their heads and put them on the wall and allowed us to unpack a really, really important idea for the project. What is magical?

Douglas: That's amazing. I think that is a challenge that I see in so many meetings, where two people are using two different words to mean two different things, or they're using the same word to mean different things. And that's a real problem. And often it is not surfaced, and I think that's where a lot of these visual-thinking tools can really surface some of those things and then gives us an opportunity to discuss it. Can shape the narrative.

And when I asked you about one thing that you could change about meetings, you talked about this need to have a narrative for our meetings. And just "we're having a meeting" is a flat story, and you're looking for something more dynamic. So tell us a little more about that.

Daniel: Well, you were in the room when our friend Allan Chochinov, at the first masterclass, Facilitation Masterclass, you came to in New York, when Allan talked about, what was it, like, a text expander that one of his students made? Allan was an old professor of mine at Pratt. Now he runs the Products of Design program at SVA. And one of his students wrote a text expander so that whenever you write meeting, it erases it. You literally can't write the word meeting, because a meeting is a meaningless word. A meeting can mean so many different things that it means nothing. What are we doing at that meeting? Are we meeting to sing a song together? Are we going caroling. Let's meet to go caroling. Oh, let's meet to align on a decision. Let's meet to figure out what our options are. Let's meet to plan the holiday party. It doesn't mean anything.

And so Allan's idea was if you don't have a prototype, you shouldn't have a meeting. If you don't have an object or an interface or a list, a thing to start the conversation off with, you shouldn't have that meeting. And so I think the story of "let's have a meeting" is just, it's a flat story, but it's also just a super-incomplete story. "Let's meet in order to blank, and let's talk about these three things, and I think that we should have process x, y, and z to discuss about them. Here's who can make the final decision. I'm just going to be gathering your inputs." "Oh, okay, cool. I don't want to come to that meeting if I can't make the final decision."

Oh, interesting. Now we have tension and a cliffhanger for how this story is going to end. If you told people the real story of your meeting, most people might not even come to those meetings, which people don't like. "Well, what if I made my meetings optional? People might not come." And I'm like, "Yeah, well, make your meetings better, make them matter, talk about something that people really care about."

Douglas: That's amazing. Also, I think the super power of that is when you realize that there's actually multiple narratives, multiple tracks, and that you might need to divide your audience. If someone's focused more strategically and someone else more tactical, being able to split those things rather than jamming everyone together into the same conversation and creating so much discord.

Daniel: Yeah. Everybody's sitting around a table and talking over each other. And yeah, so this is why narrative is important in conversations, at least this idea of opening, exploring, and closing.

Years after people come to my Facilitation workshops, the one thing people remember, they forget most things, but the one thing they remember is this idea of opening, exploring, and closing, and having time to both open or diverge and close and converge and making some time in the middle for something interesting to emerge. And I absorbed that idea from Dave Gray's coauthored book, Gamestorming, just the importance of having those three modes of thinking. And I think having that baked into the process and communicating that to people, it just means that we expect that something interesting and surprising will happen. Otherwise, just make a video. Just make a video of what you've decided and just tell everybody.

Douglas: It's fascinating because Dave Gray talks about the explorer section also being referred to as the groan zone because no one typically enjoys it. But the funny thing is most people, their meetings just consist of explorer. Let's just start exploring when we walk in the door, and then we explore until we have to walk out of the door. And that's really unfortunate if you don't give people that time, that boot-up time.

I just recently read a book on facilitation that was talking about—they were talking about it as clearing, which I thought was a really fascinating way to think about an opener, is allowing people to clear themselves and get ready for the meeting to start.

Daniel: Well, you're basically closing before you can open. As we all know, if you don't close, you can't open the next—like, if you don't—and I'm sure you've seen this in sprints, right? If people don't close on day one, mapping the problem, it's really hard to open on day two, finding a target. And if you don't close on a target, it makes drawing a set of solutions really, really super hard. And if you refuse to close on a smaller number of prototypes, it means that your last day of the sprint's going to be a bear because you test everything.

Douglas: Yeah. And we've often talked about how critical closing is in the kind of more macro sense as well, because if you aren't closing out your everyday meetings with precision, then it's really difficult to align on anything.

The real, I think pathological cases, when you walk out thinking you're aligned, but you're not, and so everyone else is telling a different narrative. And you were all in the same meeting, so it should sound like it.

Daniel: The cost is even higher than that, Douglas, because internally—I think one of the reasons why people pay an external facilitator, one reason why people hire me and hire you, is to create urgency. "Douglas is here. We've paid him. It's expensive. Everyone stop what you're doing. We have to focus now." When people have an internal meeting, their urgency isn't there. There's no burning platform, like Kotter talks about. There's no urgency. And so if you don't close, you push off decisions.

And work is a gas. A gas at standard pressure and temperature expands to fill the space available to it. So time creates pressure, and a sprint or a workshop reduces the volume of space we have to it. And if we don't cap things off or tie them off and say that this is the decision we're going to have, and now we're going to move on to the next phase, it's very idealistic to say these things. It is really hard to do, right? It's really hard to say, okay, well, let's just try this thing, or let's move on to the next thing, even though we don't feel we're ready. I hate doing it. I still tell my clients to do it because it's hard. I know it's important to do, and I struggle with it myself. But if we don't do that, what happens is we wind up working nights and weekends. That's the cost—not seeing our families. If we can close in the time that we have proposed, then we can have the rest of our lives back.

Douglas: Yeah, well, it's interesting. You talked about it being hard, but the answer really is to disagree and commit. If we can come together and not rely on unanimity, this desire to have everyone agree, then we can get to a point where there is a decision, we're all going to support it, and we're going to see what comes out. And I think the thing that I try to coach people on is there're one-way doors and two-way doors. So if it's a reversible decision, then why are we working weekends to get this?

Daniel: Right. Having kids is not the same thing as, where should we go for vacation? Where you go to vacation is still a reversible because you've gone and you've spent that money; you've gone on that vacation. But you can always just leave early. You know, you can cancel a vacation halfway through. You're like, "I hate it here. Let's go someplace else." But it is very hard to cancel, not to get into any politics, but once you've got the kid, it's really hard to cancel it.

Douglas: That's right.

Daniel: Still not impossible. All my friends who are adopted, it's a thing. But it creates repercussions.

Douglas: Let's shift gear a little bit here and talk about impromptu networking. It is a really powerful way to make meetings better. And why is that?

Daniel: Oh, right, right, right. This was my—actually, it's funny. I was only a light dabbler in liberating structures before I worked with you. I remember looking at the website, and I know many people have had this experience of, this is a crazy place on the Internet. You get to the website, and you're like, wow, there's a lot of interesting stuff here, but this looks like the ravings of a madman. And having met Keith, I still actually have that same opinion. It is definitely the ravings of a madman.

And I had done things like that before. I had started most of my workshops in my early days with "Grab someone and tell them a story, and then, listen to their story," because creating energy in a workshop or a meeting is a hard job, and it shouldn't be the job, the sole job, the sole responsibility of the facilitator. As I like to say, it's everybody's problem we're here to solve. It's just not my problem, presumably. If people are here, they're buying into the problem. So starting with a conversation or a story or a reflection about an important component of it is really, really great. Plus, conversations are complex, and so the fewer number of people in the conversation, the less complex it can feel. And so if you've got a group of five or ten or fifteen, pairing up with somebody just immediately simplifies the conversation and makes it more intimate.

I was talking with somebody today about this. He used to be a teacher. And this "think, pair, share," which I thought I invented because it rhymes, and I thought I was clever, this is baked into Harvard University's education best practices initiative. And every teacher already knows this. Think to grab a partner and talk to them about blank. It's just such an easy reflex. But I see so many facilitators who try to wrangle a group as a large mass of people, and I just don't think it works. You have to be—it takes a lot of strength.

This is a total side note, but I love telling this story. Have you seen The Princess Bride movie?

Douglas: Mm-hmm.

Daniel: Yeah. There's the scene where Fezzik and the Man in Black are fighting as Vizzini is escaping with Buttercup. And they've just climbed up the wall, the Cliffs of Insanity, and they're about to face off. And spoiler alert—Fezzik loses. And he realizes halfway through the fight why he's having such a hard time. He's like, "I haven't done one-to-one combat in so long. I'm used to fighting groups of people. You have to use different techniques."

And I think of impromptu networking as a really, really great group-fighting technique, because it doesn't matter if you've got two people or ten people or a hundred people, you say, "Okay, everybody grab a partner and have a quick conversation about blank." And then the room is filled with energy that you did not have to create. People are connecting to other people, they're learning from each other, and then it's up to you to do the next thing, which is take that energy and funnel it, direct it, focus it towards the next activity, get people to do something with that inspiration and that information and that connection that they've gotten from other people at the moment.

Douglas: Yeah. And we often talk about modeling behavior. And I think impromptu networking is a great way to model the participation that we expect. So we get them at ease with participating and gaining that human connection that they so need. And especially in the virtual world, it's really critical to start setting some of those expectations, because people aren't used to doing it when they're tuning in the virtual webinars and stuff.

Daniel: Oh, my god, I know. I did that with a workshop, super-duper early in the meeting. And one of the reasons why I like to do it early is this idea of antifragile openings. If somebody shows up five or ten or fifteen minutes late, they can still float in, weave in to the second or third pairing. And this woman was like, "I knew you would do breakout rooms. I didn't think it would happen so soon." I'm like, "Yeah, if you show up 20 minutes late to this workshop, you're going to miss something, but you're not going to miss everything. You're still going to be able to get some…" She was able to come into the third pairing in impromptu networking.

Douglas: For sure. And impromptu networking only works if you have a good invitation, and your prompt has to be tight. This means that you have to have a good question. So Daniel, what are your favorite questions?

Daniel: Oh, man. That's my favorite question. That's definitely my favorite question. I actually asked that of somebody on a recent podcast episode that I was hosting, on my Conversation Factory podcast. I interviewed Cameron Yarbrough, who has a scaled coaching platform called Torch.io. And his favorite question to ask people is, what are your blind spots? And boy, oh boy, that's a really—I mean, technically an impossible question to answer yourself, but it's a really, really interesting one. He described it as a cone, like a Zen question that is unanswerable but interesting. And so good questions can be like that.

I think the other easy, easy question is, tell me a story about blank. Just tell me a story when you last blank, or tell me a story about how you have blanked. Or just go straight to story because stories evoke emotions and empathy. So don't just say, "Tell me a story of when you were at your best." It's a hard question to answer still, but it's a really interesting one, and it evokes interesting reactions for people. And that's why I think focusing on positivity over negativity is always hard.

Douglas: Absolutely. That was the thing I was going to bring up next, actually, was the fact that I'm a huge fan of, if your questions can be appreciative or express gratitude, that can be really amazing. And if you can make people become introspective. So think about a time when you maybe received—what's the best compliment you've ever received? So lovely.

Daniel: Yeah. And just to double stitch on that, by the way, not everybody knows what appreciative inquiry is. And it's, when you look at it, if you come from design thinking or the sprint world, you look at appreciative inquiry, and you're like, it can be weird, but you're like, wait, how is this different than design thinking? And the difference is is that you only focus on the positive. And there's this idea that you can, in fact, heal a system and a person by looking at only the positives.

And in my book, I actually, I found a story. I couldn't find the truth of it. I couldn't find a direct quote, but people have talked about it, this idea that—I forget the name of the Dallas Cowboys coach—but at one point during a slump, he was like, we are only going to show you your best plays. You know, they tape the plays, and they go back, and they review things. They're like, look, we are going to review and analyze your best plays only.

And it kind of flips things on its head because a lot of designers and a lot of innovators think like, oh, we're problem solving. And so if I'm problem-solving, I have to look at what's broken, and then I have to fix it. But with appreciative inquiry, there's this radical idea that I can find what's working and ask how I can magnify it and expand it.

Douglas: Yeah. there's an amazing book called Super Human, and it goes into a lot of super athletes that are doing just amazing things, like free scaling mountains, and the winged airmen—the Red Bull team that just jumps off of buildings and does insane things.

Daniel: Base jumpers.

Douglas: Exactly. And one of the things that they discovered—and this is a phenomenon in this world—which is there is something that humans have not been able to do for decades. And the first time one human does it, like 10, 15 other humans would do it a day later, because they've shown that it's possible. It just opens up the world of, well, now I can just go to do that thing that I know—I've seen them do it. Now I can do it.

Daniel: Yeah. Wow. I love that. That's really, really awesome.

Douglas: And so this is similar to your mantra, Daniel: if you don't write it down, it didn't happen. So we need to be able to see it to prove it, and then we can we can double stitch on it. And we have a mantra that's similar: always capture room intelligence. So why is this so important?

Daniel: Well, I, first, have to honor my friend Miles Begin, who gave me that mantra years ago, and that was when I first started teaching design thinking to non-designers. That's the whole point is if it's not on a sticky note and it's not on the wall, we can't talk about it. And having that mantra's really helpful, especially if you have over-talkers in the room, and it's also really helpful if you have "under-talkers" in the room. If somebody's really, really overexplaining an idea, you can say, "Hey, can you fit that on one sticky note and get it up on the wall? That is truly, truly awesome. That'll be great."

But we used to tell a story about—have you ever watched Mad Men?

Douglas: Of course.

Daniel: Yeah. So there's an amazing Mad Men episode where—I forget the team. It's, like, Peggy and a couple of the other people stay up all night to bang out some ideas for something. They're drinking, and they're smoking. And they finally have this amazing insight, and they're like, "Wow, that is such a great idea!" And then they go to sleep because they're satisfied. Spoiler alert—they didn't write their idea down. And so the next day, when Don Draper comes in, and Don's like, "Okay, what'd you jerks come up with?" And they're like, "Oh, my god, we've got this great idea," and they're looking around their desks, and they're like, Wait a minute. What was it?" And their brains are just this empty vacuum of space. And they're like, "Oh, my god, we didn't write it down." And they're just crestfallen. And Don's like, "I understand. That happens sometimes." It's one of the few moments when Don decides to be really, really human. Like, he gets it. You didn't write down the idea, and it disappeared.

And so I found an old PowerPoint of mine from, like, one of the first design-thinking workshops I ever taught. And there is a scene—we found a screenshot of Don Draper and some other people, just to teach people this idea of, if you don't write down your ideas, they will disappear into the air. And this is long before I knew that conversations had interfaces and that if you use a durable interface for your conversations, not surprisingly, you can have a more-sustained conversation about it. That's why when you get it on the wall, we can talk about it. If it's not on the wall, I'm just interpreting what I heard, and it can disappear in the air.

So one of the great things about design-thinking workshops is that we create this paper trail of insights and agreements when we go from phase to phase. And if you don't do that, we're having a much floofier conversation. So it's really, really important to get things down.

And if we're talking about virtual, it's actually really problematic. I mean, I love MURAL, but MURAL sticky notes are not the same thing as real sticky notes, because on a real sticky note, there's a limit to how much information I can put on the sticky note. With MURAL, you can literally write the great American essay on one sticky note and just shrink it down to infinitely small size. So, you're not as limited.

We always used to tell people, oh, use Sharpie on a sticky note. That's because a Sharpie and a sticky note create one idea. But it's way too easy in virtual visual capture to put too much information into one sticky note.

Douglas: You know, Daniel, that's a big debate: how much limitations did the software put on us to mimic the real world? I think that's a fascinating conversation.

Daniel: I would love to be able to switch on real-sticky-note mode.

Douglas: Yeah, that'd be fantastic. And I find as a facilitator, where you talked about virtual being more difficult, and this is just one example. There's a long, long list of why we have to lean in more, and it's difficult to be a lazy facilitator, virtually, whether it's we're looking to see how long the sticky notes are or we're making sure that people are connected and having to do troubleshooting and provide technical support.

One of the things we spoke about, this notion of helping teams get unstuck and making sure that they continue the momentum as they leave the workshop and they go start to build their vision. And you talked about that being the magic question, just having to look around and just check and see if everything's fixed. This is something that I've talked to Erick Skogsberg quite a bit about, this notion of, from learning the science, we have to consider assessment points. What is our learning objective and making sure we've built in points of assessment so we can understand if we've gotten there. And even if you're not training people, it's important that you build this into workshops because you're taking people on a journey and you want to make sure that they're hitting the milestones, right? What do we do virtually? You and I have talked about this quite a bit, but what do the listeners need to know about virtual kind of reading the room?

Daniel: Well, you have to find other feedback loops. And I think that's where—like, when we've set up MURALS for multiple tables, when you put them on separate MURALS, which I know is something you've recommended in the past, especially if you're doing a larger meeting, putting them on separate MURALS reduces the load, but it makes it harder as a facilitator to monitor multiple tables. So it's nice to have three or—if you only have 15 or 20 or 30 people to just make areas for each of the breakout rooms to work, because then you can just see everything that's happening, because while MURAL does have those preview images, as we've argued over before, the preview images don't update often enough for you to get that feedback loop, but it can be really, really simple. I've seen you do this, where you ask everybody to rename themselves in Zoom. And that's pretty meta because you're asking them to give you some information about themselves, but you're also testing whether or not they're engaged and whether or not they are interested. And if you don't see people—if you see people not doing that, then, we don't have anyplace to go because it's like, oh, they don't know how to use the tool, Zoom, and they aren't interested enough to tell you something about themselves in this area. And so it's just finding simpler, smaller feedback loops to make sure that you're moving forward with people with you, if that makes sense.

Douglas: Oh, absolutely. And we've been using two facilitators in most of our workshops, with someone dedicated to looking for those signals. So they're kind of keeping a lookout for those things. So, absolutely.

And also, just to keep this a bit evergreen, I'm now on the beta for the new rendering engine, so do not have to make multiple MURALS for even larger gatherings now on MURAL, so that's pretty exciting. And after that launches, you won't have to be in the beta program, have access to that. So I'm sure listeners in the future will be happy to have that.

Daniel: I'm wondering why I'm not on that beta program.

Douglas: I think you should talk to some friends, Daniel.

So with that, I'm super-curious about Rock, Paper, Scissors online. How does this work?

Daniel: Well, so here's the thing. Like I say, I, because I think you're referring to a LinkedIn post that I made, where I didn't even think it was possible. I just sort of assumed. And this goes to your sporting-events thing, right? where when somebody does it, then you're like, oh, that's how to do it. And it partially goes against my lazy facilitation principle. But during some of the facilitation masterclass cohorts that I run, we make spaces for people to try out new warmups and icebreakers that they've never done before. And this one woman, Janine Underhill, said, I'd like to try to do a Rock, Paper, Scissors tournament." And I'm like, "Good luck, sister. I'm going to enjoy this." And she did it. She did it. It can be done.

I think what's interesting about it is that simultaneity in remote facilitation is impossible because of the speed-of-light limit. It's basically an Einstein-Bose condensate kind of a problem. If you and I tried to snap at the same time, we can't. Even if we said, "One, two, three, snap," we wouldn't snap at the same time, because you wouldn't hear me snapping at the same time. There's a delay because we're in between this piece of software. The software institutes a delay, and sound travels more slowly than light. And so we're never going to have simultaneity.

In person, it is very hard to notice that lack of simultaneity, right? When I say, "Rock, paper, scissors, shoot," it seems simultanous because we're within, like, two feet of each other. But when we are 100,000 miles from each other, and we are on Zoom, we notice it. And what happens is people start slowing down, because we go one, two, three, shoot, as we wait for the other person to catch up with us. And then somebody always throws before the other person, and so it's like—but we don't have a response action time to metabolize that information. And so it's actually a really interesting learning opportunity to talk about how challenging communication can be remotely. But it is totally possible to do it, and it is fun to do it, and it is ridiculous to do it. Everyone should try it.

Douglas: That's amazing. So structurally, when you do a Rock, Paper, Scissors battle, you're just having people start off in groups.

Daniel: Yes.

Douglas: And then the winners are laddering up to—it's like a basketball tournament kind of…

How do you do all these groups? Are you doing breakout groups, and then combine them together?

Daniel: Yes, I will, in the interest of community, I will tell you all of my secrets. So Janine worked too hard at it, I think. She did all the initial pairings. We only had a group of 15, and she did all the initial pairings, and she did the secondary pairings as well, and she did the tertiary pairings. She called out all the pairings, kept track of it all. And that was to her credit.

Douglas: She was recording the brackets.

Daniel: She was the bracket-eur. My variation is to have people turn off their video if they lose. That's the easiest thing to do is just have people turn off their video if they lose, because then, at least, the bracketing is easier.

Douglas: Yeah. Or someone could raise their hand if they're looking for…

Daniel: Yes. Totally. They're signaling. And so here's the thing. We could try to do it a perfect way, or we could let the group solve it and see if we can get them to understand everything there is to understand about group communication, because signaling, oh, how do we signal stuff? Okay. How do we start—how do we keep signaling for the rest of our meetings? Okay, cool. And I've seen groups really develop some great habits around, okay, put your hand over your head if you haven't blanked. And so I don't think the bracketing thing—video makes it easier. Bracketing, the problem is, is that I think bracketing can't be done automatically. It's much harder to say, okay, I'm going to claim blank person as my hand-off person. So I haven't solved it. But I also haven't tried to do it with 100 hundred people. I've only done it with 20. And then it works fine. And it's fun.

Douglas: Absolutely.

Daniel: It's as fun and as ridiculous, if not more so, than doing it virtually.

Douglas: Speaking of distributed facilitation in general, you've mentioned to me that it's weirder and squishier. So I guess some final comments for the listeners around challenges, just why is it weirder and squishier? And then, what are you hopeful for? What are you optimistic about?

Daniel: I've written about this before. I can send you a link to the article on LinkedIn that I wrote. It's called "This Digital Place," and we have a sense of place that comes for free by being four-dimensional beings. We exist in space and time, and we've had a long time, our entire lives, to get used to it. And we've had 40,000 years as modern humans to evolve for it. We've evolved in it. This is our—you know, [knocks on wood] this physical space is my native place. And so when we go into this digital place, it feels weird because it is literally not natural for us. But those Post-it notes behind you on the wall are not natural for us either. We designed those for ourselves as a tool, and I cannot imagine having an in-person meeting without those tools anymore, in the short decade that I've had those tools. I remember we didn't always have big Post-it sticky pads. We didn't always have whiteboards. We've grown really used to this environment. In the last 10, 20, 30 years, we've created this built environment around our meetings and our engagements, and we require them now. But I assure you, they are not natural. They feel natural to us because we've become acculturated to it and to them. And we do not have a culture for this distributed place. We don't have rituals for this distributed place. We are learning them slowly but surely.

The example I love to give is, whatever it was, like, maybe five years ago, that guy from the BBC whose kids tromped in in the middle of his presentation—a little girl in yellow, running in like she owned the place. It was hilarious. And the guy was super embarrassed. The mother of the kids was extra-special embarrassed. And I was listening to NPR yesterday, where this woman was welcoming this man on to share a report about something. And he's like, I'm really glad to be here. Blah, blah, blah. And then his dog barks in the background. And the interviewer was like, "And it sounds like your dog's excited to be with us today as well, too. What's his name?" And he's like, "It's Buster." And she's like, well, hello to Buster. So, blah, blah, blah, let's talk about blah, blah, blah. And it was seamless. It was smooth. She was like, whatever. We're just here, and there's a dog. Nobody cares anymore.

That's something to be optimistic about, that we can adapt to this place, that we can learn new tools, that we can learn new rituals and new patterns. The fact of the matter is this is not natural, but there's very, very little that's natural about our lives. And we make our lives. We design the spaces and places where we have the conversations that we want to have. And so I'm pretty optimistic about the fact that our old patterns don't work as well here and that we have to develop new patterns, and that it is possible that maybe we will learn to retain some of those patterns when we get back to meeting in person in 19 months, my current estimate.

Douglas: Well, Daniel, I look forward to continuing this journey with you. I agree, there's lots to learn and there's lots to explore. And we won't know for quite some time where these new norms and these new customs emerge, but I'm already seeing some things happen, and I think you and I are doing our best to be on the forefront of that. And so I just want to say thanks for being there with me, and it's been fun learning with you.

Daniel: Likewise, man. I mean, a lot of facilitators say, "I can't feel the room, and it's not as good." And honestly, I was one of those facilitators. Jim Kalbach from MURAL will literally quote back to you, like, the umpteen times over the last three years that I said to him, like, "I'm good, dude. I'm a great in-person facilitator. I'd much rather not compete on a global scale with anybody who has access to MURAL for facilitation gigs." And we're in a situation where that's no longer possible in person is a fundamental assumption of what I used to do. That is impossible anymore.

And I think if we can't adapt, if I can't adapt, if the rest of us can't adapt, we are royally screwed. We have to learn how to do this. And that's one of the reasons why we did the large virtual meetings things together. I thought it was important to push my own limits and say, is it possible to do the kind of big, crazy workshops that we did in person? If they had value—and we thought they did, and I think they still do—then, can we do them here, rather than, I don't know, wait 18 months before having a bunch of people come together to make an important decision?

I mean, honestly, Janet and I are having a long, ongoing discussion about this. We had to cancel our wedding in June. And what to do about getting married, and do we do a Zoom wedding? Will that be fun? Will that be interesting? Will it feel like a real wedding? Or should we wait an indefinite amount of time to bring everyone together to celebrate the fact that we have something good going here? I don't think that waiting forever is a really good business plan for anything, not for a marriage and certainly not for third-quarter top-to-top strategic meeting. I see you're nodding. You're like, yeah, they should not be putting off those meetings. And I think people are putting them off, or they're doing them really, really poorly.

Douglas: Yeah. I think there are two outcomes we've seen the more we explore this with companies. And some companies have the mindset, they have it figured out because they know how to run a Zoom meeting, or they know how to do webinars.

Daniel: Right. One to Many—done.

Douglas: Yeah. Like, I'm good. So they're just in the camp of, don't realize all the potential they're missing. And then you've got another camp that says we'll just wait until we can do it in person because they've got caught flat-footed and they know that there's so much missing, but they don't know what to do. And so that's definitely the inspiration for putting together more virtual offerings. And the large virtual-meetings workshop is, I think, really hits the nail on the head as far as a real challenge around, what do we do with large groups? That sounds troubling. But the fascinating thing to me, Daniel, is that there's so much more that people learn. These aha moments can apply to much smaller meetings, but it's the large groups that people are the most confused by, and so that's where we approach the teaching opportunity.

Daniel: Yeah. And large can just mean 15 or 20. It's not hard to break the two-pizza rule, right? It is really easy to break the two-virtual-pizza rule quickly, and most of us don't have Fezzik-level skills when it comes to wrestling with large groups. And we need them. Everybody needs them, I think, especially if you work in a large corporation.

But also, I went to a birthday party on Friday for someone I went to junior high school with. And this guy's sister, who I was best friends with in junior high, she does stand-up comedy. And we did a call on Wednesday for the party, and she's like, "What should I'd be looking out for, Daniel?" And I was like, "Well, look, it's a lot of people. You need to have an M.C." And she's like, "Oh, I can do that," because she's M.C.'d open comedy nights. And it's like, "You need to have somebody to keep the energy moving and to orchestrate things and to keep the conversation moving." It's not trivial.

I think maybe this is where comics will find work in this new economy. How the Emmys and the Oscars need Billy Crystal and Kevin Hart, maybe these large virtual meetings just need comics, which is an insight you had for the first Control the Room,right? Just bring in some comedy to keep it going.

Douglas: It might work a little better in the virtual setting, maybe. We'll see.

Daniel: Yeah. Are they available for me and my team?

Douglas: Yeah. Bring them in, for sure. Yeah.

There's also some companies that have sprung up that allow you to rent—

Daniel: Llamas? Yes, I know.

Douglas: Llamas and perezosos and all sorts of stuff.

Daniel: I don't even know what those are, but…

Douglas: Oh, it's a sloth.

Daniel: Oh, okay.

Douglas: Everyone's got to have a sloth at their workshop.

Daniel: Yeah, but see, that's just like shiny distraction.

Douglas: I agree. And Daniel, you know, I think this is the exact reason why so many people dislike icebreakers and eye openers and energizers, because they just throw them in, with no reason whatsoever, and without a debrief—in fact, I've started to say, if you can't ask, "Why did we just do that," and have that erupt into a pithy conversation, ask yourself, "Why did we just do that?"

Daniel: Whoa, yeah. I agree with you. Obviously, I agree with you.

Douglas: So, Daniel, what do we need to leave listeners with? What should they know? And how could they find you, contact info, all that good stuff?

Daniel: Well, I'm on the Internet, easy to find, fairly SEO'd. If you Google "Daniel Stillman," you might find me. If you Google "The Conversation Factory," you'll definitely find me. I have a podcast. I have a book coming out, by the way, Douglas. It will be coming out shortly, God willing. It's called Good Talk: How to Design Conversations that Matter. They're advertising it as a step-by-step handbook. It's not a step-by-step guide, because I don't think there's a single recipe that could possibly account for all situations. But it is a map to the territory and can help people learn how to form and shape and guide all the conversations in their lives better, from big-group conversations to the conversations that they have with themselves every day. We have a shocking number of conversations with ourselves, and those need to be designed just as much as quarterly action-plan gatherings and off-sites.

And so if you go https://theconversationfactory.com/goodtalk, you can find it. You can download some chapters. It's a thing. You don't have to pay me anything. You don't have to buy the book. The first two chapters, there's a lot there—although somebody has told me that I ended the first two chapters at the right spot, that made them want to read the third chapter. And to that, I have to thank Kellie McGann, who helped me with the editing of the book.

Douglas: It is a fantastic book. I've read it several times—

Daniel: What?! Crazy.

Douglas: —and I think it's really critical for people that are wanting to elevate their meetings and just their interactions at work and at home. It is a fantastic way to step back and look at your dialog in an abstract way so that you can put terms to it. So just like physics is the science of being able to take the phenomenon in the world, how the air moves past you and how your car functions, and you can put equations to it so you can understand it. You can talk about it in an abstract way so that you can reason about it. Daniel has done that for conversations. And if you think about how many conversations we have and all the moments throughout life where conversations are important, you can imagine how relevant this book becomes. And I can't highly recommend it enough.

Daniel: It's really, really—it's wonderful to hear you say that. I appreciate you saying it. Writing a book, as you know, is a terrible, terrible thing. I'd never recommend it to anybody. The fact that it's out there and everyone can read it is terrifying to me. You can see what goes on in my head now, and the fact that I had a love of physics, and still do, and a love of design, it's not surprising, hearing you talk about it, I'm like, "All right. Of course. That's why I wrote the book the way that I did."

Douglas: Excellent. Well, Daniel, it's been a pleasure having you here today, and I can't wait to chat with you again.

Daniel: Thanks, Douglas. It's always a pleasure. Thanks, man.

Outro: Thanks for joining me for another episode of Control the Room. Don't forget to subscribe to receive updates when new episodes are released. If you want more, head over to our blog, where I post weekly articles and resources about working better together, voltagecontrol.com.

Have you ever wondered what it means to be a professional conversation designer? Listen as your host Douglas Ferguson and his guest Daniel Stillman, the founder of the Conversation Factory and a master facilitator, discuss what it means to be a conversation designer and much more in this episode of the Control Room Podcast.

Daniel shares how he got started as a conversation designer and why he believes that everything is an active conversation. He speaks about what he would change about meetings and why having a narrative with an opening, exploration, and closing is essential in a productive conversation.

Listen as Douglas and Daniel discuss impromptu networking, the best questions to ask, and the definition of appreciative inquiry. They also talk about meeting mantras and why they are so important. Daniel shares his take on why using sticky notes is so effective in the ideation process and how to translate the practice to the virtual landscape.

Daniel also explains how to host a virtual rock, paper, scissors tournament; it's both crazy and fun. Order a copy of Daniel’s book Good Talk, How to Design Conversations that Matter', available now.

[00:50] Welcome.
[01:02] Daniel's journey as a conversation designer.
[04:01] Teaching design thinking to non-designers.
[04:48] Everything is a conversation.
[07:43] Providing an interface for an important idea for a product.
[08:34] One thing Daniel would change when it comes to having meetings.
[11:06] A narrative is crucial in conversations–opening, exploring, and closing.
[13:19] Closing out daily meetings with precision.
[16:14] The power of impromptu networking to make meetings better.
[19:23] Impromptu networking is a great way to model the participation that you expect.
[20:34] Daniel's favorite questions to ask.
[22:15] Appreciative inquiry, defined.
[24:23] The evolution and significance of Daniel's mantra.
[26:27] Sticky note ideation heightens focus on specific concepts.
[29:03] Reading the room virtually.
[31:16] Virtual rock, paper, scissors tournament.
[34:47] Ways to signal during virtual group gatherings.
[35:48] Distributive facilitation and the future of work.
[39:23] Thank you.
[41:02] Waiting forever is not a good business plan for your company or your wedding.
[43:24] Do large virtual meetings need comedians to keep people interested?
[44:57] Daniel's book.
[47:23] It has been a pleasure.
[47:36] Subscribe.

Daniel Stillman
Good Talk: How to Design Conversations That Matter
LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube

Daniel Stillman designs conversations for a living and insists that you actually do that too. As an independent design facilitator, he works with clients and organizations of all shapes and sizes (From Google to Visa, to name a few) to help them frame and sustain productive and collaborative conversations, deepen their facilitation skills, and coach them through the innovation process. His first book, The 30 Second Elephant and the Paper Airplane Experiment is about origami and teams and yes, it’s as strange as it sounds. He hosts The Conversation Factory podcast where he interviews leaders, changemakers, and innovators on how they design the conversations in their work and lives.

Intro: Welcome to the Control the Room Podcast, a series devoted to the exploration of meeting culture and uncovering cures for the common meeting. Some meetings have tight control, and others are loose. To control the room means achieving outcomes while striking a balance between imposing and removing structure, asserting and distributing power, leaning in and leaning out, all in the service of having a truly magical meeting.

Douglas: Today on Control the Room Podcast, I have Daniel Stillman. Daniel Stillman is a conversation designer, and insists that you're one, too. He is the founder of the Conversation Factory and a master facilitator. Welcome to the podcast, Daniel.

Daniel: Douglas, it’s a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me on.

Douglas: Of course. So, Daniel, I’d love to just have the listeners just hear a little bit about how you got started.

Daniel: So, this is funny because I was thinking about this during our pre-conversation. You and I have known each other for a while, but there's still stuff we don't know about each other. This came up when we were having a conversation last week, where you're like, “I don't know the story behind that thing. You just assume I know that because I've known you for a couple of years,” stuff I've just never talked about. And so you've heard little snippets. So it's just kind of funny because we're friends, and now I'm telling you my story. I don’t know. Just pulling out for a second on the meta-ness of it all.

Douglas: Yeah. And as you know, conversations can get weird.

Daniel: Yeah, they sure can. So, wait. What was the question again? How did I—what's my origin story?

Douglas: That’s right.

Daniel: Was there any radioactive spiders involved in how I got my superpowers? I feel like I found my way into conversation design through design. I remember actually seeing an ad in the New York Times back when people found jobs in the New York Times’ job-wanted section. Like, that was a thing. And I remember seeing this job for an exhibit designer, and I was like, this is so cool, because I had a background in science. I had studied physics in undergrad. And this idea of designing science exhibits—I loved going to museums when I was a kid. I grew up in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. I went to the Museum of Natural History as a kid often. That's where they would just send us on a rainy day. Like, just go there.

And this idea of being able to walk into a space and automatically learn just by being immersed in a space, just like, I don’t know. It kind of tickled me. And I wound up going to design school because they had a studio in science-exhibit design. And so I was super-duper excited to learn how to become a designer and how to design spaces for education.

But while I was in design school, what I really learned was human-centered design. This idea that, wow, you can just go out into the world and talk to some people and learn about their problems, and then, make some stuff for them that they like, and then find out if they like it, and then, try it out again, make some test iterations. This was, like, 2005, 2006. The idea of human-centered design and design thinking we're really, I mean, nascent in design at the time. Pratt, where I went to school, was still very much form. We studied negative space and curves for entire semester-long classes. And so this idea of designing for people and designing for needs is what really inspired me.

But when I got out of school and I started working in a design studio, what I realized was that I actually had to start designing—I didn't know at the time—but I was designing conversations: stakeholder-engagement workshops to try to pull intelligence out of various stakeholders to understand user needs. And so workshop design became a real passion for me. And so that's kind of how I got to where I am today was I realized that design thinking and teaching design thinking to non-designers was something that was really important. I had this fantasy. I was like, if we all knew the rules to the same game, we could play the game. Let's make something that matters together, right? And that to me are like—those are the rules of design thinking. Hey, let's empathize and understand and define and deliver. That's what I do now is I try to inspire people to be intentional about how they create.

Douglas: That’s amazing. So, thinking back to when you were just post school and you were starting to have some of those early realizations that everything was a conversation, can you take us to that moment? And what was it that really clicked for you? How did that make you feel, or what was surfacing? Was there something that wasn't quite serving you at the time and you realized there needed to be more, or was it just an observation?

Daniel: Actually, I can—I really remember the moment. I went to an event that my friend Jooyoung Oh was running. She was a design researcher at the time, and for many years she worked at Ziba. And at the time—I can’t remember what she was doing—but she did this workshop where she had us do collages of words and pictures that she had printed out on stickers. And we did this visual collage of “my ideal experience for blank is…,” and “my ideal experience for blank is not…” So she gave us these sheets of stickers with words and pictures on them. The pictures were evocative, emotional, suggestive. And we made these collages, and they became a focal point for a dialog. And I remember doing this and I was like, “Oh, my god, this is amazing.” And it seemed so simple.

But we had this big meeting coming up with some stakeholders in the consultancy I was working on, and we were doing this big kickoff for this bug-repellent product, which I probably shouldn't talk about. And I said to my boss, he’s like, “We really need to understand all these different stakeholders and what they really think this thing should be.” And I was like, “Oh, my god, I've got a thing for that.” The language I would use now is “I have a design for that conversation.” I explained it to him a little bit, and he squinted his eyes, and he's like, “Okay.” And I'm like, “Dude, you got to trust me on this. I can land this plane. It’s going to get us good information.”

And I remember going into that meeting, and we did this exercise. I remember—I literally remember printing out these sheets of these words and these stickers and these images. And one member of the stakeholder team was an engineer, and the other was a marketer. And there was a word that was placed on the is versus the isn't, in either case. The engineer did not want the experience of this chemical bug-repellent product to be magical, and the marketer thought that the experience should be magical. And so what we had was this conversation about magical and what it meant for something to be magical, and why the engineer didn't want it to be magical and why the marketer did want it to be magical.

Magical to the marketer meant effortless, easy, efficacious. Boom, done—bugs are gone. And to the engineer, he's like, “If it's magical, then that means that people don't trust it. If it's magical, people don't understand why it works. If it's magical, people can't understand that it's safe and scientific.”

And so just from that collaging effort, which some people would deride as goofy, mood boarding, or whatever, it provided us with an opportunity to dive into this really important conversation, which is, What do we want this thing to be, and what do we want our customers to think about it?

And what we were doing was providing an interface for the conversation. If we just said, ”Hey, what do you guys want this to be?” it would have seemed like, I don’t know, one, we didn't know our stuff. But by giving them an activity to do, it pulled ideas out of their heads and put them on the wall and allowed us to unpack a really, really important idea for the project. What is magical?

Douglas: That's amazing. I think that is a challenge that I see in so many meetings, where two people are using two different words to mean two different things, or they're using the same word to mean different things. And that's a real problem. And often it is not surfaced, and I think that's where a lot of these visual-thinking tools can really surface some of those things and then gives us an opportunity to discuss it. Can shape the narrative.

And when I asked you about one thing that you could change about meetings, you talked about this need to have a narrative for our meetings. And just “we're having a meeting” is a flat story, and you're looking for something more dynamic. So tell us a little more about that.

Daniel: Well, you were in the room when our friend Allan Chochinov, at the first masterclass, Facilitation Masterclass, you came to in New York, when Allan talked about, what was it, like, a text expander that one of his students made? Allan was an old professor of mine at Pratt. Now he runs the Products of Design program at SVA. And one of his students wrote a text expander so that whenever you write meeting, it erases it. You literally can't write the word meeting, because a meeting is a meaningless word. A meeting can mean so many different things that it means nothing. What are we doing at that meeting? Are we meeting to sing a song together? Are we going caroling. Let's meet to go caroling. Oh, let's meet to align on a decision. Let's meet to figure out what our options are. Let's meet to plan the holiday party. It doesn't mean anything.

And so Allan's idea was if you don't have a prototype, you shouldn't have a meeting. If you don't have an object or an interface or a list, a thing to start the conversation off with, you shouldn't have that meeting. And so I think the story of “let's have a meeting” is just, it's a flat story, but it's also just a super-incomplete story. “Let's meet in order to blank, and let's talk about these three things, and I think that we should have process x, y,  and z  to discuss about them. Here's who can make the final decision. I'm just going to be gathering your inputs.” “Oh, okay, cool. I don't want to come to that meeting if I can't make the final decision.”

Oh, interesting. Now we have tension and a cliffhanger for how this story is going to end. If you told people the real story of your meeting, most people might not even come to those meetings, which people don't like. “Well, what if I made my meetings optional? People might not come.” And I'm like, “Yeah, well, make your meetings better, make them matter, talk about something that people really care about.”

Douglas: That’s amazing. Also, I think the super power of that is when you realize that there's actually multiple narratives, multiple tracks, and that you might need to divide your audience. If someone's focused more strategically and someone else more tactical, being able to split those things rather than jamming everyone together into the same conversation and creating so much discord.

Daniel: Yeah. Everybody’s sitting around a table and talking over each other. And yeah, so this is why narrative is important in conversations, at least this idea of opening, exploring, and closing.

Years after people come to my Facilitation workshops, the one thing people remember, they forget most things, but the one thing they remember is this idea of opening, exploring, and closing, and having time to both open or diverge and close and converge and making some time in the middle for something interesting to emerge. And I absorbed that idea from Dave Gray's coauthored book, Gamestorming, just the importance of having those three modes of thinking. And I think having that baked into the process and communicating that to people, it just means that we expect that something interesting and surprising will happen. Otherwise, just make a video. Just make a video of what you've decided and just tell everybody.

Douglas: It’s fascinating because Dave Gray talks about the explorer section also being referred to as the groan zone because no one typically enjoys it. But the funny thing is most people, their meetings just consist of explorer. Let's just start exploring when we walk in the door, and then we explore until we have to walk out of the door. And that's really unfortunate if you don't give people that time, that boot-up time.

I just recently read a book on facilitation that was talking about—they were talking about it as clearing, which I thought was a really fascinating way to think about an opener, is allowing people to clear themselves and get ready for the meeting to start.

Daniel: Well, you’re basically closing before you can open. As we all know, if you don't close, you can't open the next—like, if you don't—and I'm sure you've seen this in sprints, right? If people don't close on day one, mapping the problem, it's really hard to open on day two, finding a target. And if you don't close on a target, it makes drawing a set of solutions really, really super hard. And if you refuse to close on a smaller number of prototypes, it means that your last day of the sprint’s going to be a bear because you test everything.

Douglas: Yeah. And we've often talked about how critical closing is in the kind of more macro sense as well, because if you aren’t closing out your everyday meetings with precision, then it's really difficult to align on anything.

The real, I think pathological cases, when you walk out thinking you're aligned, but you're not, and so everyone else is telling a different narrative. And you were all in the same meeting, so it should sound like it.

Daniel: The cost is even higher than that, Douglas, because internally—I think one of the reasons why people pay an external facilitator, one reason why people hire me and hire you, is to create urgency. “Douglas is here. We’ve paid him. It’s expensive. Everyone stop what you’re doing. We have to focus now.” When people have an internal meeting, their urgency isn’t there. There’s no burning platform, like Kotter talks about. There’s no urgency. And so if you don’t close, you push off decisions.

And work is a gas. A gas at standard pressure and temperature expands to fill the space available to it. So time creates pressure, and a sprint or a workshop reduces the volume of space we have to it. And if we don't cap things off or tie them off and say that this is the decision we're going to have, and now we're going to move on to the next phase, it's very idealistic to say these things. It is really hard to do, right? It's really hard to say, okay, well, let's just try this thing, or let's move on to the next thing, even though we don't feel we're ready. I hate doing it. I still tell my clients to do it because it's hard. I know it's important to do, and I struggle with it myself. But if we don't do that, what happens is we wind up working nights and weekends. That's the cost—not seeing our families. If we can close in the time that we have proposed, then we can have the rest of our lives back.

Douglas: Yeah, well, it's interesting. You talked about it being hard, but the answer really is to disagree and commit. If we can come together and not rely on unanimity, this desire to have everyone agree, then we can get to a point where there is a decision, we're all going to support it, and we're going to see what comes out. And I think the thing that I try to coach people on is there’re one-way doors and two-way doors. So if it's a reversible decision, then why are we working weekends to get this?

Daniel: Right. Having kids is not the same thing as, where should we go for vacation? Where you go to vacation is still a reversible because you've gone and you've spent that money; you've gone on that vacation. But you can always just leave early. You know, you can cancel a vacation halfway through. You're like, “I hate it here. Let's go someplace else.” But it is very hard to cancel, not to get into any politics, but once you've got the kid, it's really hard to cancel it.

Douglas: That's right.

Daniel: Still not impossible. All my friends who are adopted, it's a thing. But it creates repercussions.

Douglas: Let’s shift gear a little bit here and talk about impromptu networking. It is a really powerful way to make meetings better. And why is that?

Daniel: Oh, right, right, right. This was my—actually, it’s funny. I was only a light dabbler in liberating structures before I worked with you. I remember looking at the website, and I know many people have had this experience of, this is a crazy place on the Internet. You get to the website, and you’re like, wow, there’s a lot of interesting stuff here, but this looks like the ravings of a madman. And having met Keith, I still actually have that same opinion. It is definitely the ravings of a madman.

And I had done things like that before. I had started most of my workshops in my early days with “Grab someone and tell them a story, and then, listen to their story,” because creating energy in a workshop or a meeting is a hard job, and it shouldn't be the job, the sole job, the sole responsibility of the facilitator. As I like to say, it's everybody's problem we're here to solve. It's just not my problem, presumably. If people are here, they're buying into the problem. So starting with a conversation or a story or a reflection about an important component of it is really, really great. Plus, conversations are complex, and so the fewer number of people in the conversation, the less complex it can feel. And so if you've got a group of five or ten or fifteen, pairing up with somebody just immediately simplifies the conversation and makes it more intimate.

I was talking with somebody today about this. He used to be a teacher. And this “think, pair, share,” which I thought I invented because it rhymes, and I thought I was clever, this is baked into Harvard University’s education best practices initiative. And every teacher already knows this. Think to grab a partner and talk to them about blank. It's just such an easy reflex. But I see so many facilitators who try to wrangle a group as a large mass of people, and I just don't think it works. You have to be—it takes a lot of strength.

This is a total side note, but I love telling this story. Have you seen The Princess Bride movie?

Douglas: Mm-hmm.

Daniel: Yeah. There's the scene where Fezzik and the Man in Black are fighting as Vizzini is escaping with Buttercup. And they've just climbed up the wall, the Cliffs of Insanity, and they're about to face off. And spoiler alert—Fezzik loses. And he realizes halfway through the fight why he's having such a hard time. He's like, “I haven't done one-to-one combat in so long. I'm used to fighting groups of people. You have to use different techniques.”

And I think of impromptu networking as a really, really great group-fighting technique, because it doesn't matter if you've got two people or ten people or a hundred people, you say, “Okay, everybody grab a partner and have a quick conversation about blank.” And then the room is filled with energy that you did not have to create. People are connecting to other people, they're learning from each other, and then it's up to you to do the next thing, which is take that energy and funnel it, direct it, focus it towards the next activity, get people to do something with that inspiration and that information and that connection that they've gotten from other people at the moment.

Douglas: Yeah. And we often talk about modeling behavior. And I think impromptu networking is a great way to model the participation that we expect. So we get them at ease with participating and gaining that human connection that they so need. And especially in the virtual world, it's really critical to start setting some of those expectations, because people aren't used to doing it when they're tuning in the virtual webinars and stuff.

Daniel: Oh, my god, I know. I did that with a workshop, super-duper early in the meeting. And one of the reasons why I like to do it early is this idea of antifragile openings. If somebody shows up five or ten or fifteen minutes late, they can still float in, weave in to the second or third pairing. And this woman was like, “I knew you would do breakout rooms. I didn't think it would happen so soon.” I'm like, “Yeah, if you show up 20 minutes late to this workshop, you're going to miss something, but you're not going to miss everything. You're still going to be able to get some…” She was able to come into the third pairing in impromptu networking.

Douglas: For sure. And impromptu networking only works if you have a good invitation, and your prompt has to be tight. This means that you have to have a good question. So Daniel, what are your favorite questions?

Daniel: Oh, man. That's my favorite question. That’s definitely my favorite question. I actually asked that of somebody on a recent podcast episode that I was hosting, on my Conversation Factory podcast. I interviewed Cameron Yarbrough, who has a scaled coaching platform called Torch.io. And his favorite question to ask people is, what are your blind spots? And boy, oh boy, that's a really—I mean, technically an impossible question to answer yourself, but it's a really, really interesting one. He described it as a cone, like a Zen question that is unanswerable but interesting. And so good questions can be like that.

I think the other easy, easy question is, tell me a story about blank. Just tell me a story when you last blank, or tell me a story about how you have blanked. Or just go straight to story because stories evoke emotions and empathy. So don't just say, “Tell me a story of when you were at your best.” It's a hard question to answer still, but it's a really interesting one, and it evokes interesting reactions for people. And that's why I think focusing on positivity over negativity is always hard.

Douglas: Absolutely. That was the thing I was going to bring up next, actually, was the fact that I'm a huge fan of, if your questions can be appreciative or express gratitude, that can be really amazing. And if you can make people become introspective. So think about a time when you maybe received—what's the best compliment you've ever received? So lovely.

Daniel: Yeah. And just to double stitch on that, by the way, not everybody knows what appreciative inquiry is. And it's, when you look at it, if you come from design thinking or the sprint world, you look at appreciative inquiry, and you're like, it can be weird, but you're like, wait, how is this different than design thinking? And the difference is is that you only focus on the positive. And there's this idea that you can, in fact, heal a system and a person by looking at only the positives.

And in my book, I actually, I found a story. I couldn't find the truth of it. I couldn't find a direct quote, but people have talked about it, this idea that—I forget the name of the Dallas Cowboys coach—but at one point during a slump, he was like, we are only going to show you your best plays. You know, they tape the plays, and they go back, and they review things. They’re like, look, we are going to review and analyze your best plays only.

And it kind of flips things on its head because a lot of designers and a lot of innovators think like, oh, we're problem solving. And so if I'm problem-solving, I have to look at what's broken, and then I have to fix it. But with appreciative inquiry, there's this radical idea that I can find what's working and ask how I can magnify it and expand it.

Douglas: Yeah. there's an amazing book called Super Human, and it goes into a lot of super athletes that are doing just amazing things, like free scaling mountains, and the winged airmen—the Red Bull team that just jumps off of buildings and does insane things.

Daniel: Base jumpers.

Douglas: Exactly. And one of the things that they discovered—and this is a phenomenon in this world—which is there is something that humans have not been able to do for decades. And the first time one human does it, like 10, 15 other humans would do it a day later, because they've shown that it's possible. It just opens up the world of, well, now I can just go to do that thing that I know—I've seen them do it. Now I can do it.

Daniel: Yeah. Wow. I love that. That's really, really awesome.

Douglas: And so this is similar to your mantra, Daniel: if you don't write it down, it didn't happen. So we need to be able to see it to prove it, and then we can we can double stitch on it. And we have a mantra that's similar: always capture room intelligence. So why is this so important?

Daniel: Well, I, first, have to honor my friend Miles Begin, who gave me that mantra years ago, and that was when I first started teaching design thinking to non-designers. That's the whole point is if it's not on a sticky note and it's not on the wall, we can't talk about it. And having that mantra’s really helpful, especially if you have over-talkers in the room, and it's also really helpful if you have “under-talkers” in the room. If somebody’s really, really overexplaining an idea, you can say, “Hey, can you fit that on one sticky note and get it up on the wall? That is truly, truly awesome. That'll be great.”

But we used to tell a story about—have you ever watched Mad Men?

Douglas: Of course.

Daniel: Yeah. So there's an amazing Mad Men episode where—I forget the team. It's, like, Peggy and a couple of the other people stay up all night to bang out some ideas for something. They're drinking, and they're smoking. And they finally have this amazing insight, and they're like, “Wow, that is such a great idea!” And then they go to sleep because they're satisfied. Spoiler alert—they didn't write their idea down. And so the next day, when Don Draper comes in, and Don’s like, “Okay, what’d you jerks come up with?” And they're like, “Oh, my god, we've got this great idea,” and they're looking around their desks, and they're like,  Wait a minute. What was it?” And their brains are just this empty vacuum of space. And they're like, “Oh, my god, we didn't write it down.” And they're just crestfallen. And Don's like, “I understand. That happens sometimes.” It’s one of the few moments when Don decides to be really, really human. Like, he gets it. You didn't write down the idea, and it disappeared.

And so I found an old PowerPoint of mine from, like, one of the first design-thinking workshops I ever taught. And there is a scene—we found a screenshot of Don Draper and some other people, just to teach people this idea of, if you don't write down your ideas, they will disappear into the air. And this is long before I knew that conversations had interfaces and that if you use a durable interface for your conversations, not surprisingly, you can have a more-sustained conversation about it. That’s why when you get it on the wall, we can talk about it. If it's not on the wall, I'm just interpreting what I heard, and it can disappear in the air.

So one of the great things about design-thinking workshops is that we create this paper trail of insights and agreements when we go from phase to phase. And if you don't do that, we're having a much floofier conversation. So it's really, really important to get things down.

And if we're talking about virtual, it's actually really problematic. I mean, I love MURAL, but MURAL sticky notes are not the same thing as real sticky notes, because on a real sticky note, there's a limit to how much information I can put on the sticky note. With MURAL, you can literally write the great American essay on one sticky note and just shrink it down to infinitely small size. So, you're not as limited.

We always used to tell people, oh, use Sharpie on a sticky note. That's because a Sharpie and a sticky note create one idea. But it's way too easy in virtual visual capture to put too much information into one sticky note.

Douglas: You know, Daniel, that's a big debate: how much limitations did the software put on us to mimic the real world? I think that's a fascinating conversation.

Daniel: I would love to be able to switch on real-sticky-note mode.

Douglas: Yeah, that’d be fantastic. And I find as a facilitator, where you talked about virtual being more difficult, and this is just one example. There's a long, long list of why we have to lean in more, and it's difficult to be a lazy facilitator, virtually, whether it's we're looking to see how long the sticky notes are or we're making sure that people are connected and having to do troubleshooting and provide technical support.

One of the things we spoke about, this notion of helping teams get unstuck and making sure that they continue the momentum as they leave the workshop and they go start to build their vision. And you talked about that being the magic question, just having to look around and just check and see if everything's fixed. This is something that I've talked to Erick Skogsberg quite a bit about, this notion of, from learning the science, we have to consider assessment points. What is our learning objective and making sure we've built in points of assessment so we can understand if we've gotten there. And even if you're not training people, it's important that you build this into workshops because you're taking people on a journey and you want to make sure that they're hitting the milestones, right? What do we do virtually? You and I have talked about this quite a bit, but what do the listeners need to know about virtual kind of reading the room?

Daniel: Well, you have to find other feedback loops. And I think that's where—like, when we've set up MURALS for multiple tables, when you put them on separate MURALS, which I know is something you've recommended in the past, especially if you're doing a larger meeting, putting them on separate MURALS reduces the load, but it makes it harder as a facilitator to monitor multiple tables. So it's nice to have three or—if you only have 15 or 20 or 30 people to just make areas for each of the breakout rooms to work, because then you can just see everything that's happening, because while MURAL does have those preview images, as we've argued over before, the preview images don't update often enough for you to get that feedback loop, but it can be really, really simple. I've seen you do this, where you ask everybody to rename themselves in Zoom. And that's pretty meta because you're asking them to give you some information about themselves, but you're also testing whether or not they're engaged and whether or not they are interested. And if you don't see people—if you see people not doing that, then, we don't have anyplace to go because it's like, oh, they don't know how to use the tool, Zoom, and they aren't interested enough to tell you something about themselves in this area. And so it's just finding simpler, smaller feedback loops to make sure that you're moving forward with people with you, if that makes sense.

Douglas: Oh, absolutely. And we've been using two facilitators in most of our workshops, with someone dedicated to looking for those signals. So they're kind of keeping a lookout for those things. So, absolutely.

And also, just to keep this a bit evergreen, I'm now on the beta for the new rendering engine, so do not have to make multiple MURALS for even larger gatherings now on MURAL, so that's pretty exciting. And after that launches, you won’t have to be in the beta program, have access to that. So I'm sure listeners in the future will be happy to have that.

Daniel: I’m wondering why I’m not on that beta program.

Douglas: I think you should talk to some friends, Daniel.

So with that, I’m super-curious about Rock, Paper, Scissors online. How does this work?

Daniel: Well, so here's the thing. Like I say, I, because I think you're referring to a LinkedIn post that I made, where I didn't even think it was possible. I just sort of assumed. And this goes to your sporting-events thing, right? where when somebody does it, then you're like, oh, that's how to do it. And it partially goes against my lazy facilitation principle. But during some of the facilitation masterclass cohorts that I run, we make spaces for people to try out new warmups and icebreakers that they've never done before. And this one woman, Janine Underhill, said, I'd like to try to do a Rock, Paper, Scissors tournament.” And I'm like, “Good luck, sister. I'm going to enjoy this.” And she did it. She did it. It can be done.

I think what's interesting about it is that simultaneity in remote facilitation is impossible because of the speed-of-light limit. It’s basically an Einstein-Bose condensate kind of a problem. If you and I tried to snap at the same time, we can’t. Even if we said, “One, two, three, snap,” we wouldn’t snap at the same time, because you wouldn’t hear me snapping at the same time. There’s a delay because we’re in between this piece of software. The software institutes a delay, and sound travels more slowly than light. And so we’re never going to have simultaneity.

In person, it is very hard to notice that lack of simultaneity, right? When I say, “Rock, paper, scissors, shoot,” it seems simultanous because we're within, like, two feet of each other. But when we are 100,000 miles from each other, and we are on Zoom, we notice it. And what happens is people start slowing down, because we go one, two, three, shoot, as we wait for the other person to catch up with us. And then somebody always throws before the other person, and so it's like—but we don't have a response action time to metabolize that information. And so it's actually a really interesting learning opportunity to talk about how challenging communication can be remotely. But it is totally possible to do it, and it is fun to do it, and it is ridiculous to do it. Everyone should try it.

Douglas: That’s amazing. So structurally, when you do a Rock, Paper, Scissors battle, you're just having people start off in groups.

Daniel: Yes.

Douglas: And then the winners are laddering up to—it’s like a basketball tournament kind of…

How do you do all these groups? Are you doing breakout groups, and then combine them together?

Daniel: Yes, I will, in the interest of community, I will tell you all of my secrets. So Janine worked too hard at it, I think. She did all the initial pairings. We only had a group of 15, and she did all the initial pairings, and she did the secondary pairings as well, and she did the tertiary pairings. She called out all the pairings, kept track of it all. And that was to her credit.

Douglas: She was recording the brackets.

Daniel: She was the bracket-eur. My variation is to have people turn off their video if they lose. That's the easiest thing to do is just have people turn off their video if they lose, because then, at least, the bracketing is easier.

Douglas: Yeah. Or someone could raise their hand if they're looking for…

Daniel: Yes. Totally. They're signaling. And so here's the thing. We could try to do it a perfect way, or we could let the group solve it and see if we can get them to understand everything there is to understand about group communication, because signaling, oh, how do we signal stuff? Okay. How do we start—how do we keep signaling for the rest of our meetings? Okay, cool. And I've seen groups really develop some great habits around, okay, put your hand over your head if you haven't blanked. And so I don't think the bracketing thing—video makes it easier. Bracketing, the problem is, is that I think bracketing can't be done automatically. It's much harder to say, okay, I'm going to claim blank person as my hand-off person. So I haven't solved it. But I also haven't tried to do it with 100 hundred people. I've only done it with 20. And then it works fine. And it's fun.

Douglas: Absolutely.

Daniel: It's as fun and as ridiculous, if not more so, than doing it virtually.

Douglas: Speaking of distributed facilitation in general, you've mentioned to me that it's weirder and squishier. So I guess some final comments for the listeners around challenges, just why is it weirder and squishier? And then, what are you hopeful for? What are you optimistic about?

Daniel: I’ve written about this before. I can send you a link to the article on LinkedIn that I wrote. It's called “This Digital Place,” and we have a sense of place that comes for free by being four-dimensional beings. We exist in space and time, and we've had a long time, our entire lives, to get used to it. And we've had 40,000 years as modern humans to evolve for it. We've evolved in it. This is our—you know, [knocks on wood] this physical space is my native place. And so when we go into this digital place, it feels weird because it is literally not natural for us. But those Post-it notes behind you on the wall are not natural for us either. We designed those for ourselves as a tool, and I cannot imagine having an in-person meeting without those tools anymore, in the short decade that I've had those tools. I remember we didn't always have big Post-it sticky pads. We didn't always have whiteboards. We've grown really used to this environment. In the last 10, 20, 30 years, we've created this built environment around our meetings and our engagements, and we require them now. But I assure you, they are not natural. They feel natural to us because we’ve become acculturated to it and to them. And we do not have a culture for this distributed place. We don't have rituals for this distributed place. We are learning them slowly but surely.

The example I love to give is, whatever it was, like, maybe five years ago, that guy from the BBC whose kids tromped in in the middle of his presentation—a little girl in yellow, running in like she owned the place. It was hilarious. And the guy was super embarrassed. The mother of the kids was extra-special embarrassed. And I was listening to NPR yesterday, where this woman was welcoming this man on to share a report about something. And he's like, I'm really glad to be here. Blah, blah, blah. And then his dog barks in the background. And the interviewer was like, “And it sounds like your dog’s excited to be with us today as well, too. What’s his name?” And he’s like, “It’s Buster.” And she’s like, well, hello to Buster. So, blah, blah, blah, let’s talk about blah, blah, blah. And it was seamless. It was smooth. She was like, whatever. We're just here, and there's a dog. Nobody cares anymore.

That's something to be optimistic about, that we can adapt to this place, that we can learn new tools, that we can learn new rituals and new patterns. The fact of the matter is this is not natural, but there's very, very little that's natural about our lives. And we make our lives. We design the spaces and places where we have the conversations that we want to have. And so I'm pretty optimistic about the fact that our old patterns don't work as well here and that we have to develop new patterns, and that it is possible that maybe we will learn to retain some of those patterns when we get back to meeting in person in 19 months, my current estimate.

Douglas: Well, Daniel, I look forward to continuing this journey with you. I agree, there's lots to learn and there's lots to explore. And we won't know for quite some time where these new norms and these new customs emerge, but I'm already seeing some things happen, and I think you and I are doing our best to be on the forefront of that. And so I just want to say thanks for being there with me, and it's been fun learning with you.

Daniel: Likewise, man. I mean, a lot of facilitators say, “I can't feel the room, and it's not as good.” And honestly, I was one of those facilitators. Jim Kalbach from MURAL will literally quote back to you, like, the umpteen times over the last three years that I said to him, like, “I'm good, dude. I'm a great in-person facilitator. I'd much rather not compete on a global scale with anybody who has access to MURAL for facilitation gigs.” And we're in a situation where that's no longer possible in person is a fundamental assumption of what I used to do. That is impossible anymore.

And I think if we can't adapt, if I can't adapt, if the rest of us can't adapt, we are royally screwed. We have to learn how to do this. And that's one of the reasons why we did the large virtual meetings things together. I thought it was important to push my own limits and say, is it possible to do the kind of big, crazy workshops that we did in person? If they had value—and we thought they did, and I think they still do—then, can we do them here, rather than, I don’t know, wait 18 months before having a bunch of people come together to make an important decision?

I mean, honestly, Janet and I are having a long, ongoing discussion about this. We had to cancel our wedding in June. And what to do about getting married, and do we do a Zoom wedding? Will that be fun? Will that be interesting? Will it feel like a real wedding? Or should we wait an indefinite amount of time to bring everyone together to celebrate the fact that we have something good going here? I don't think that waiting forever is a really good business plan for anything, not for a marriage and certainly not for third-quarter top-to-top strategic meeting. I see you're nodding. You’re like, yeah, they should not be putting off those meetings. And I think people are putting them off, or they're doing them really, really poorly.

Douglas: Yeah. I think there are two outcomes we've seen the more we explore this with companies. And some companies have the mindset, they have it figured out because they know how to run a Zoom meeting, or they know how to do webinars.

Daniel: Right. One to Many—done.

Douglas: Yeah. Like, I'm good. So they're just in the camp of, don't realize all the potential they're missing. And then you've got another camp that says we’ll just wait until we can do it in person because they've got caught flat-footed and they know that there's so much missing, but they don't know what to do. And so that's definitely the inspiration for putting together more virtual offerings. And the large virtual-meetings workshop is, I think, really hits the nail on the head as far as a real challenge around, what do we do with large groups? That sounds troubling. But the fascinating thing to me, Daniel, is that there's so much more that people learn. These aha moments can apply to much smaller meetings, but it's the large groups that people are the most confused by, and so that's where we approach the teaching opportunity.

Daniel: Yeah. And large can just mean 15 or 20. It’s not hard to break the two-pizza rule, right? It is really easy to break the two-virtual-pizza rule quickly, and most of us don't have Fezzik-level skills when it comes to wrestling with large groups. And we need them. Everybody needs them, I think, especially if you work in a large corporation.

But also, I went to a birthday party on Friday for someone I went to junior high school with. And this guy’s sister, who I was best friends with in junior high, she does stand-up comedy. And we did a call on Wednesday for the party, and she’s like, “What should I'd be looking out for, Daniel?” And I was like, “Well, look, it's a lot of people. You need to have an M.C.” And she's like, “Oh, I can do that,” because she's M.C.’d open comedy nights. And it’s like, “You need to have somebody to keep the energy moving and to orchestrate things and to keep the conversation moving.” It's not trivial.

I think maybe this is where comics will find work in this new economy. How the Emmys and the Oscars need Billy Crystal and Kevin Hart, maybe these large virtual meetings just need comics, which is an insight you had for the first Control the Room,right? Just bring in some comedy to keep it going.

Douglas: It might work a little better in the virtual setting, maybe. We’ll see.

Daniel: Yeah. Are they available for me and my team?

Douglas: Yeah. Bring them in, for sure. Yeah.

There’s also some companies that have sprung up that allow you to rent—

Daniel: Llamas? Yes, I know.

Douglas: Llamas and perezosos and all sorts of stuff.

Daniel: I don’t even know what those are, but…

Douglas: Oh, it’s a sloth.

Daniel: Oh, okay.

Douglas: Everyone's got to have a sloth at their workshop.

Daniel: Yeah, but see, that’s just like shiny distraction.

Douglas: I agree. And Daniel, you know, I think this is the exact reason why so many people dislike icebreakers and eye openers and energizers, because they just throw them in, with no reason whatsoever, and without a debrief—in fact, I've started to say, if you can't ask, “Why did we just do that,” and have that erupt into a pithy conversation, ask yourself, “Why did we just do that?”

Daniel: Whoa, yeah. I agree with you. Obviously, I agree with you.

Douglas: So, Daniel, what do we need to leave listeners with? What should they know? And how could they find you, contact info, all that good stuff?

Daniel: Well, I'm on the Internet, easy to find, fairly SEO’d. If you Google “Daniel Stillman,” you might find me. If you Google “The Conversation Factory,” you'll definitely find me. I have a podcast. I have a book coming out, by the way, Douglas. It will be coming out shortly, God willing. It's called Good Talk: How to Design Conversations that Matter. They're advertising it as a step-by-step handbook. It's not a step-by-step guide, because I don't think there's a single recipe that could possibly account for all situations. But it is a map to the territory and can help people learn how to form and shape and guide all the conversations in their lives better, from big-group conversations to the conversations that they have with themselves every day. We have a shocking number of conversations with ourselves, and those need to be designed just as much as quarterly action-plan gatherings and off-sites.

And so if you go https://theconversationfactory.com/goodtalk, you can find it. You can download some chapters. It’s a thing. You don’t have to pay me anything. You don’t have to buy the book. The first two chapters, there’s a lot there—although somebody has told me that I ended the first two chapters at the right spot, that made them want to read the third chapter. And to that, I have to thank Kellie McGann, who helped me with the editing of the book.

Douglas: It is a fantastic book. I've read it several times—

Daniel: What?! Crazy.

Douglas: —and I think it's really critical for people that are wanting to elevate their meetings and just their interactions at work and at home. It is a fantastic way to step back and look at your dialog in an abstract way so that you can put terms to it. So just like physics is the science of being able to take the phenomenon in the world, how the air moves past you and how your car functions, and you can put equations to it so you can understand it. You can talk about it in an abstract way so that you can reason about it. Daniel has done that for conversations. And if you think about how many conversations we have and all the moments throughout life where conversations are important, you can imagine how relevant this book becomes. And I can't highly recommend it enough.

Daniel: It's really, really—it's wonderful to hear you say that. I appreciate you saying it. Writing a book, as you know, is a terrible, terrible thing. I’d never recommend it to anybody. The fact that it's out there and everyone can read it is terrifying to me. You can see what goes on in my head now, and the fact that I had a love of physics, and still do, and a love of design, it's not surprising, hearing you talk about it, I'm like, “All right. Of course. That's why I wrote the book the way that I did.”

Douglas: Excellent. Well, Daniel, it's been a pleasure having you here today, and I can't wait to chat with you again.

Daniel: Thanks, Douglas. It's always a pleasure. Thanks, man.

Outro: Thanks for joining me for another episode of Control the Room. Don't forget to subscribe to receive updates when new episodes are released. If you want more, head over to our blog, where I post weekly articles and resources about working better together, voltagecontrol.com.

Coming soon. Subscribe now.

Coming soon. Subscribe now.