Relational Dynamics For Strategic Leaders | Dr Alice Jing Shan

WEBVTT
00:00:00.239 --> 00:00:02.000
Most people do think of strategy that way.
00:00:02.319 --> 00:00:03.680
Developing a new strategy.
00:00:04.000 --> 00:00:05.280
Strategic blind spots.
00:00:05.519 --> 00:00:06.799
When strategy meets reality.
00:00:06.959 --> 00:00:08.960
Strategy and innovation in the strategy world.
00:00:09.279 --> 00:00:10.640
Drive their strategic goals.
00:00:10.880 --> 00:00:13.519
And welcome back to Strategy Meets Reality Podcast.
00:00:14.880 --> 00:00:17.199
Welcome back to Strategy Meets Reality Podcast.
00:00:17.280 --> 00:00:19.359
It's great to have you again.
00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:22.399
I'm absolutely delighted to be joined by Dr.
00:00:22.480 --> 00:00:23.679
Alice Ying Shan.
00:00:24.480 --> 00:00:26.879
Joining me all the way from Edinburgh.
00:00:27.839 --> 00:00:31.039
And I'm delighted to have Alice on.
00:00:31.920 --> 00:00:41.200
I hunted you down and I've tried to get you uh convince you to come on, and finally you've agreed and you've come on.
00:00:41.280 --> 00:00:42.719
So it's absolutely fantastic.
00:00:42.799 --> 00:00:43.439
So welcome.
00:00:43.520 --> 00:00:45.200
Thank you for joining us, Alice.
00:00:45.520 --> 00:00:45.920
Thank you.
00:00:46.079 --> 00:00:46.640
Thank you, Mike.
00:00:46.799 --> 00:00:47.920
Happy to be here.
00:00:48.320 --> 00:00:48.880
Perfect.
00:00:49.119 --> 00:01:00.240
So for the listeners that haven't had the privilege of seeing your work um online on Substack, which I'll um link and LinkedIn, which I'll link in show notes.
00:01:00.399 --> 00:01:04.799
Please could you give a bit of background about yourself and a bit of context about what you've been up to lately?
00:01:05.359 --> 00:01:05.680
Sure.
00:01:06.000 --> 00:01:07.680
Hi everyone, I'm Alice.
00:01:07.840 --> 00:01:09.599
I publish in English as Dr.
00:01:09.680 --> 00:01:12.879
Alice Jing Shan, and my Chinese name is Shenjing.
00:01:13.040 --> 00:01:22.159
I am a person who observes and writes about how human systems hold together, come apart, and evolve under pressure.
00:01:22.400 --> 00:01:27.439
So this is the question I keep returning to in my work, my writing, and my life.
00:01:27.599 --> 00:01:37.439
And my own work moves across areas such as language, education, culture, organizations, and increasingly these days, artificial intelligence.
00:01:37.680 --> 00:01:47.120
They may seem like separate fields, but I see them as interrelated sites where the same underlying dynamics keep appearing.
00:01:47.280 --> 00:01:56.959
And I trace these reoccurring patterns through relational dynamics, which is my original lens for understanding system trajectories.
00:01:57.280 --> 00:02:11.120
In the age of AI, or what I call the age of AIR, I believe the questions I've been working on and returning to for many years is becoming increasingly urgent and relevant for all of us.
00:02:11.280 --> 00:02:13.599
And thank you very much, Mike, for having me here today.
00:02:14.000 --> 00:02:14.879
Oh no, it's a pleasure.
00:02:15.039 --> 00:02:17.120
And that's what I'd like to dig in.
00:02:17.199 --> 00:02:21.520
There's a lot I want to discuss from strategies to tactics to AI.
00:02:21.680 --> 00:02:27.360
But first, as you mentioned it, do you mind giving just a bit of context about relational dynamics?
00:02:28.080 --> 00:02:39.280
So relational dynamics is something I've been working on for a while, but perhaps consolidated finally in the past year or so.
00:02:39.520 --> 00:02:57.919
So it's an umbrella term, umbrella frame that I work within which I worked, I worked, uh I proposed ontology called ontology of relational dynamics, with a core claim that reality is relational dynamics under constraint over time.
00:02:58.240 --> 00:03:05.280
And because it's a solid, I think an ontology which um answers the question, what is reality?
00:03:05.520 --> 00:03:20.080
And that naturally is upstream and downstream, it can guide a lot of different ways of understanding how knowledge is generated and how we apply different methods to understand different domains.
00:03:20.240 --> 00:03:30.159
So an easy way of understanding it is um relational dynamics is my kernel, is my operating system, and everything else is application.
00:03:30.639 --> 00:03:31.280
I like it.
00:03:31.520 --> 00:03:34.479
You you got a really key thing in there about relational.
00:03:34.800 --> 00:03:48.240
Now I've just had this, so um, I'm just fresh off a call with a client this morning, and um they done um a great PowerPoint, you know, with listeners know my contempt for PowerPoints, but um this was lovely.
00:03:48.400 --> 00:04:01.120
But they what they've done is they sh they had a lot of information there about the market, about these competitors are doing this, um, we're doing this, but there was nothing that was relational.
00:04:01.439 --> 00:04:11.039
So they were talking about their their opportunities, but none of none of it was relational to yeah, but in comparative to what and to who.
00:04:11.520 --> 00:04:18.160
So they had all these competitors all around saying that they're doing this, they're doing this, but what's the relation?
00:04:18.879 --> 00:04:20.560
Where is where is it going?
00:04:20.720 --> 00:04:38.800
And I thought that when you think about relational dynamics, thinking about actually what what's the interfaces, what's the connections, where is that going on a sort of default trajectory, or how could that be not interfered with, but how can we shape that trajectory?
00:04:39.279 --> 00:04:41.759
This is very interesting and very common.
00:04:42.000 --> 00:04:52.639
You see um organizations talking about certain market and they look at other opponents, what other people are doing, and there's really multi multifold here.
00:04:53.040 --> 00:05:01.120
First of all, I think the relation is not just relation to other people in the field, it's a relation to the field itself.
00:05:01.360 --> 00:05:09.519
And in society, in human systems, very often we forget that the field is changing itself very much and a nested field.
00:05:09.680 --> 00:05:20.800
So a market is never just a static market, the market can change and your whole industry can just disappear very quickly, especially these days with artificial intelligence.
00:05:21.040 --> 00:05:33.519
So the fact that if your eyes are only on what other people similar to your company are doing, I think essentially they're already losing contact with reality.
00:05:33.759 --> 00:05:39.600
And we should talk more about, you know, strategy meets reality, because I really like the title.
00:05:39.759 --> 00:05:42.959
It rejects the idea that reality is static.
00:05:43.199 --> 00:05:45.360
Reality is changing all the time.
00:05:45.600 --> 00:05:51.680
And one thing about strategy in my working frame is that strategy is field level awareness.
00:05:51.920 --> 00:06:01.199
So you're in coherence, you're reading the field, whereas tactic is more like executive uh executive move motion.
00:06:01.360 --> 00:06:04.720
So you look at who is doing what when.
00:06:04.879 --> 00:06:06.639
So this is more tactical.
00:06:07.040 --> 00:06:25.600
Of course, you need to look at what other opponents are doing, but if you lose sight of, for instance, your your own goal, what is the relationship between the people in your own company that can bring to the table and your relationship to the field, then perhaps you're already limiting yourself.
00:06:25.839 --> 00:06:33.120
And important, I think one thing we can also see, we talk about a little bit, uh we talk a little bit about sports.
00:06:33.360 --> 00:07:01.120
And I really like to use sports as an or metaphor when we talk about strategy, because a lot of people, they don't have to be theorists to understand that strategies apply in sports, and we all have like a physical interaction, doesn't matter if we are the players or the audience, we have this physical understanding, embodied understanding of how strategies are applied on the field, in the field.
00:07:01.360 --> 00:07:12.800
So if you're only looking at what your opponents are doing, then essentially you're forgetting your own team and you're forgetting and one strategy doesn't work for obviously every team.
00:07:12.959 --> 00:07:26.480
And you need to work with the weather, you need to work with the media, you need to work with so many other elements, and that is the beauty of I suppose um human systems, because it's so complex, but that's also what makes it so difficult.
00:07:26.800 --> 00:07:27.920
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:07:28.160 --> 00:07:37.920
And I I remember like when we we met up for a pre-chat before the show, um, and I was talking about, you know, everyone uses strategy now.
00:07:38.000 --> 00:07:41.439
It's just like it's just a term it's just thrown around in organizations.
00:07:41.759 --> 00:07:50.560
And you said um, you know, from your from your sort of heritage and your background that strategy is quite a quite a serious word.
00:07:50.800 --> 00:07:51.360
Yeah, yeah.
00:07:51.759 --> 00:07:52.319
Yeah, yeah.
00:07:52.560 --> 00:07:59.040
It's not one that's just thrown around as easy as it probably is um in a lot of sort of Western organizations.
00:07:59.519 --> 00:08:05.360
Yeah, so strategies where I come from, first of all, it's something that feels quite big and grand.
00:08:05.519 --> 00:08:16.319
And I suppose a lot of people also perhaps make the mistake, in my opinion, of distinct uh the distinction between these two terms.
00:08:16.480 --> 00:08:19.519
Some people think it's long-term versus short term.
00:08:19.759 --> 00:08:20.160
Yeah.
00:08:20.399 --> 00:08:26.879
And or think strategy is somehow more elaborate, but I think it doesn't really work like that.
00:08:27.120 --> 00:08:35.279
So I think, so from a relational dynamics perspective, strategy is not only about choosing a goal or destination.
00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:42.480
It is a way of staying coherently with a moving field and moving reality.
00:08:43.360 --> 00:08:45.039
So I'll give you an example.
00:08:45.200 --> 00:09:06.240
So strategy is something that needs to be tested by constraints, timing, emotions, power dynamics, organizational memories, incentive structures, human emotions, our our language and communication capacity limits, you know, these are the things that are at the field level.
00:09:06.480 --> 00:09:09.039
And tactics are the exact move.
00:09:09.120 --> 00:09:10.639
So who does what when.
00:09:10.799 --> 00:09:12.960
So these are very different levels.
00:09:13.120 --> 00:09:15.360
It's not to say strategies are better than tactics.
00:09:15.519 --> 00:09:19.039
For something to work, you need both strategy and tactics.
00:09:19.360 --> 00:09:29.360
But if we don't get the distinction right, I think a warning or the danger is that you can see people very busy.
00:09:29.519 --> 00:09:34.720
You can see organizations are trying to be really, really productive by doing a lot of things.
00:09:34.960 --> 00:09:42.080
Doesn't matter if it's organizational individuals, we're just busy, busy, but we're not actually making any strategic advance.
00:09:42.240 --> 00:09:44.320
We're just running in circles.
00:09:44.480 --> 00:09:52.960
And that can be very dangerous because, as I said, these days things are moving so quickly, and um we need to keep an eye on the field.
00:09:53.279 --> 00:09:53.759
Yes.
00:09:54.080 --> 00:10:09.360
And and I think that's an important connection that is is often missing in that strategic thinking is that we we come up with an idea, we then set our functions to do stuff, and then we then try to optimize the parts.
00:10:09.519 --> 00:10:11.919
So we get that function, you just be really good at this.
00:10:12.000 --> 00:10:19.440
And but what we're not looking at is that what what is the strategic effect that the whole is having on the external environment?
00:10:19.759 --> 00:10:25.759
And then with that, then how's that changing our understanding uh as you put it the field?
00:10:26.080 --> 00:10:27.360
So now we've done that.
00:10:27.600 --> 00:10:31.120
How has the field responded to our intervention?
00:10:31.279 --> 00:10:36.320
And then also what's changing in the field from our last assumptions?
00:10:36.559 --> 00:10:42.240
There doesn't seem to be that full look to go, well, we've done this, what's happened, or this is happening now.
00:10:42.559 --> 00:10:44.720
Is what we're doing still relevant?
00:10:45.039 --> 00:10:45.360
Yeah.
00:10:45.519 --> 00:10:55.600
And in in Chinese, actually, we have an idiom called Zhu Xantanbing, which literally means discussing warfare on a piece of paper.
00:10:56.480 --> 00:11:08.879
It describes the kind of wishful thinking strategy that sounds clever in abstraction or nice in documentation, but fails the moment it touches reality.
00:11:09.200 --> 00:11:09.840
Oh, I love that.
00:11:10.000 --> 00:11:11.679
I'm gonna have to I'm gonna have to learn that.
00:11:12.000 --> 00:11:14.879
I'll send you I'll send you the link uh to some, yeah.
00:11:15.039 --> 00:11:16.480
I I send you the phrase, yeah.
00:11:16.720 --> 00:11:17.679
Yeah, that'd be great.
00:11:18.399 --> 00:11:19.519
The only one I'll learn.
00:11:20.080 --> 00:11:21.679
I'm not great with languages.
00:11:21.840 --> 00:11:32.879
Um but yeah, and I and I I've exactly right, and I think there's this whole point with reality um that gets um missed.
00:11:33.039 --> 00:11:59.120
I think that's why I created you know when strategy meets reality um podcast, in the fact that um it's only really until you start to engage with that reality will you will you know how things respond, and really we must always realize as well is that our perspective of reality is always going to be limited, and there's always going to be darkness that we don't know.
00:11:59.279 --> 00:11:59.600
Yeah.
00:11:59.919 --> 00:12:07.679
And we have to keep interacting, but it doesn't mean um and I wrote about this not long ago saying that basically there's there's there's always a gap.
00:12:07.840 --> 00:12:19.200
It's the gap in strategy, it never closes because there's always our assumption, there's always how it meets reality, and there's always going to be a gap between those two that we're we're constantly managing, doesn't mean it fails.
00:12:19.519 --> 00:12:20.320
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:12:20.399 --> 00:12:21.440
That's a very good point.
00:12:21.600 --> 00:12:23.039
And you're absolutely right.
00:12:23.200 --> 00:12:24.320
There's always a gap.
00:12:24.559 --> 00:12:31.840
And that's why I think eventually it pushes me to the point where I was trying to think what is reality.
00:12:32.159 --> 00:12:32.559
Yeah.
00:12:32.879 --> 00:12:36.320
I I think most people just don't think about it, which is fine.
00:12:36.399 --> 00:12:37.840
You know, everybody needs a hobby.
00:12:38.080 --> 00:12:39.440
That was my hobby.
00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:51.440
And the reason why I think relational dynamics under constraint over time is powerful because I basically compressed it to two variables.
00:12:51.679 --> 00:12:58.000
So you've got relational dynamics and you have constraint and over time, those are two dimensions.
00:12:58.320 --> 00:13:04.320
So I'm trying to include as many things as possible, but not flattening the nuances.
00:13:04.639 --> 00:13:08.320
And um, like we talked about, a lot of people don't think about relations.
00:13:08.480 --> 00:13:11.919
They think um things are just things.
00:13:12.480 --> 00:13:28.000
But um very often, especially in complex systems and in human systems, we don't are we're not just things, we exist because there is some sort of relation that brings us together, and that needs to come first, I think.
00:13:28.240 --> 00:13:29.519
And then the dynamics.
00:13:29.679 --> 00:13:37.759
And I mean, obviously we can see as we grow older, we are interacting with different people, different organizations, bigger and bigger, our connections.
00:13:37.919 --> 00:13:44.799
So it's easy to see the dynamics, it's easy to see the changes of an organization, of a country, of an individual.
00:13:45.120 --> 00:13:53.360
But I think it's important to not lose sight of what makes us meaningful in the first place, which is the um relation.
00:13:54.080 --> 00:13:55.360
Yes, yeah, yeah.
00:13:55.600 --> 00:13:59.360
Um I have to revert back to the idea of structural coupling.
00:13:59.679 --> 00:14:00.000
Yes, yes.
00:14:07.360 --> 00:14:09.039
We are related, we are coupled.
00:14:09.120 --> 00:14:11.840
Yes, um, and it's really important to realise.
00:14:12.240 --> 00:14:17.919
But you you also mentioned really two critical things in strategy, I think, are overlooked.
00:14:18.080 --> 00:14:20.720
One is constraint and the other is time.
00:14:21.519 --> 00:14:24.559
Um, especially time over constraints.
00:14:24.799 --> 00:14:33.279
I think people are starting to think about constraints, probably not in the same way that we we think about it, but time is definitely something that is never looked.
00:14:33.360 --> 00:14:46.480
I've never gone uh looked at a strategy document, and the only mention of time is like 2031 or something, you know, five, ten years in into the that's the only time that they mention time.
00:14:47.039 --> 00:14:51.279
There's no mention of time around tempo and speed that we need to do things.
00:14:51.360 --> 00:14:56.799
You know, our window of opportunity is open for this, so we need to think about our internal tempo.
00:14:57.039 --> 00:14:57.919
Can we meet that?
00:14:58.240 --> 00:15:02.080
But I think time is something that is is seriously overlooked.
00:15:02.480 --> 00:15:03.360
Yes, it is.
00:15:03.600 --> 00:15:09.600
So in my own framework, uh time is one of the four key criteria.
00:15:09.840 --> 00:15:14.559
So I think in English you have a saying called the right time, right place, and right people.
00:15:15.039 --> 00:15:15.919
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:15:16.320 --> 00:15:19.679
Chinese always have a saying, it's very similar.
00:15:19.840 --> 00:15:25.840
So you can see that timing is always, always part of the strategy, part of what makes something excellent.
00:15:26.080 --> 00:15:32.799
But timing in my working frame, I think it's also about threshold.
00:15:33.279 --> 00:15:41.519
So it's about when you gauge accumulated conditions, do they meet a threshold?
00:15:41.679 --> 00:15:44.159
For instance, let's see a football pitch.
00:15:44.240 --> 00:15:51.440
Okay, I'm not like very, very big on football uh in terms of vocabulary, but I do like to talk about football and watch them.
00:15:51.679 --> 00:15:56.399
You can have an excellent player who is a great sprinter, right?
00:15:56.559 --> 00:15:59.200
But he can't just be running around the whole time.
00:15:59.440 --> 00:16:03.120
You know, he needs to preserve his energy when the time is right.
00:16:03.279 --> 00:16:11.120
It's a very straightforward idea that you can't just have somebody who is great at doing something keep doing something the whole time.
00:16:11.279 --> 00:16:12.799
Timing is very, very important.
00:16:13.120 --> 00:16:15.840
So it's the same with organization.
00:16:16.159 --> 00:16:20.639
You can strike or you can launch only when the timing is right.
00:16:20.879 --> 00:16:26.480
But the timing is tricky because many people might use calendar time.
00:16:26.799 --> 00:16:31.120
So the more flattened calendar time or physical time.
00:16:31.360 --> 00:16:39.120
Whereas I think more realistically, we should be looking at calendar time as well as what I call developmental time.
00:16:39.679 --> 00:16:43.679
So developmental time is looking at the conditions really.
00:16:43.919 --> 00:16:46.399
Is it are we ready to do something?
00:16:46.960 --> 00:16:52.879
Instead of thinking, oh, there's a rule book according to this company that succeeded last year.
00:16:53.039 --> 00:16:57.679
They said by month number, by the fourth month, you should be able to do something.
00:16:57.840 --> 00:17:03.519
That is fundamentally not a very good strategy because the timing, the threshold has not met.
00:17:03.840 --> 00:17:08.240
So it's very important, I think, to think about timing in terms of the threshold.
00:17:08.559 --> 00:17:17.119
And also just because your company is ready, your organization is ready, doesn't mean the market is ready, doesn't mean the interface is ready.
00:17:17.279 --> 00:17:23.599
So for instance, you can have a brilliant, you know, theory or your brilliant uh product ready.
00:17:23.680 --> 00:17:27.359
But if there's no interface, like I said, no interface, no entry.
00:17:27.440 --> 00:17:29.839
So you gotta somehow work on the interface.
00:17:30.000 --> 00:17:39.039
If there isn't one, then you need to build the interface so that somebody or something can hold, can have that capacity to hold.
00:17:39.119 --> 00:17:41.039
So it's all very coherent.
00:17:41.279 --> 00:17:44.160
They all need to move at the same same time.
00:17:44.240 --> 00:17:44.640
Yeah.
00:17:45.039 --> 00:17:45.440
Yes.
00:17:45.680 --> 00:17:46.960
Um, yeah, it's really important.
00:17:47.359 --> 00:17:49.920
And that's the classic with uh Netflix.
00:17:50.400 --> 00:17:57.839
They they had the idea they moved, but the the environment or the interface wasn't ready.
00:17:58.160 --> 00:18:02.880
So they had to hold back and then they relaunched when it was ready.
00:18:03.200 --> 00:18:06.960
So it's a really classic case around the the the timing point.
00:18:07.279 --> 00:18:10.480
But what you put is uh interfaces are quite interesting.
00:18:10.720 --> 00:18:15.039
So you know, would you be able to explore more about um sort of interfaces?
00:18:15.680 --> 00:18:25.279
Uh so interface here is not like a technical term, even though it can get very technical and operationalized and very much computerized these days.
00:18:25.519 --> 00:18:32.960
But interface essentially um in my working frame is when something is made available to another.
00:18:33.279 --> 00:18:36.960
So it's not just a medium, uh, it's not static.
00:18:37.279 --> 00:18:47.519
Interface is where something is made available to another, but interface can also change, can also make uh play a role.
00:18:47.839 --> 00:18:53.839
So for instance, a more like let's say a static interface would be here's an example.
00:18:54.000 --> 00:18:58.640
In our previous house, we wanted to build a glass house.
00:18:58.880 --> 00:19:00.960
So a glass house in our garden.
00:19:01.279 --> 00:19:05.599
And I had never had any construction experience in my life.
00:19:05.920 --> 00:19:08.240
So I thought you just build a glass house.
00:19:08.319 --> 00:19:10.559
We had the money, we had the land, we had the manpower.
00:19:10.880 --> 00:19:14.400
And um obviously you need something called decking.
00:19:14.720 --> 00:19:15.920
Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:19:16.240 --> 00:19:17.119
I didn't know that.
00:19:17.279 --> 00:19:31.759
And it turns out that uh the amount of time and energy and working with the weather to build the decking took us forever because we didn't have an interface to hold the new structure we would like to build to attach to our house.
00:19:31.920 --> 00:19:39.839
And also after we build it, so after we did the decking and we had the how uh glass house, that took the glass building glasshouse was so quickly.
00:19:40.319 --> 00:19:44.319
It was very quick, it just came out of nowhere with the proper help.
00:19:44.480 --> 00:19:49.119
But the decking took forever, and we never once got compliment on the decking.
00:19:49.200 --> 00:19:59.039
It was always the glass house, and that was interesting because so many people don't look at the foundation where they make something possible, they look at the final product.
00:19:59.279 --> 00:20:16.880
Um and I think that's also a strategic um probably a blind spot, thinking that just because you've got the resources, you've got the things ready, but you maybe lose sight um in the field that something is missing.
00:20:17.359 --> 00:20:30.880
And in a more human system term, I would say that our eyes, our ears, these are all interfaces because they are the places where light is made available to our um brain.
00:20:31.039 --> 00:20:33.920
They're you know how sounds made available to our brain.
00:20:34.079 --> 00:20:36.240
So these are all interfaces.
00:20:36.640 --> 00:20:42.160
And um also for human interaction, language is very much interf interface.
00:20:42.319 --> 00:20:48.480
We wouldn't be able to communicate our thoughts without the medium of language.
00:20:49.039 --> 00:20:54.400
But also language is tricky here because language itself plays a role.
00:20:54.559 --> 00:20:55.839
So it's not transparent.
00:20:56.240 --> 00:21:05.200
You see, it's not during this uh conversation there are times that we misunderstand each other, we have to negotiate, we have to explain ourselves.
00:21:05.440 --> 00:21:14.880
So it's constantly there's tension and friction, and that's what makes it so interesting because people because language is so dynamic.
00:21:15.039 --> 00:21:21.359
It's one of the most, most overlooked but stable interface in human society.
00:21:22.079 --> 00:21:22.319
Yes.
00:21:22.640 --> 00:21:42.720
But with now artificial intelligence, especially large language models, one of my proposals is that we look at uh language, we rethink language as interface because it has entered um because the computers now have entered human systems.
00:21:42.880 --> 00:21:45.680
So the language itself has become hybrid.
00:21:45.759 --> 00:21:49.119
It's both computer language and human system language.
00:21:49.279 --> 00:21:53.519
So we should not look at these models as just computers or machines.
00:21:53.759 --> 00:22:04.880
They have um taken on human communication interfaces, which makes a huge difference in terms of our interaction and understanding of them.
00:22:05.279 --> 00:22:05.680
Yeah.
00:22:05.920 --> 00:22:10.160
And I think that takes a a completely different approach than what we're used to.
00:22:10.319 --> 00:22:10.480
Yeah.
00:22:10.720 --> 00:22:31.359
Because you know, I I'm English, so I have the privilege of going to most countries and not needing to worry about different languages because most people will try and and normally if um and it's the same in organizations, but if I go somewhere and they don't understand me, my my response then is is thinking, oh I just need to be clearer and louder.
00:22:31.839 --> 00:22:33.440
And you go clearer and louder.
00:22:33.519 --> 00:22:36.480
So I just repeat what I've just said but clearer and louder.
00:22:36.640 --> 00:22:47.680
And I think that's how traditionally we've tried to bridge that interface with language is that if people don't understand us obviously the answer is just more clarity.
00:22:48.079 --> 00:22:52.640
So we just repeat the same things but just try and be clearer or or simpler.
00:22:52.880 --> 00:23:10.640
But I think what you're talking about and correct me if I'm wrong is there's more of a an understanding an interpretation that needs to happen which I don't think that we really spend time thinking about we just think well if they've not understood me I just need to do it more.
00:23:10.880 --> 00:23:26.079
I need to amplify more and you hear it you hear a lot of in organizations that you should just communicate communicate communicate some more and eventually people will understand but I believe I definitely believe in more and more that is not true.
00:23:26.480 --> 00:23:41.279
Yeah I think you're really onto something and for people who've worked with organizations I think we all intuitively know that or uh communication is not just saying more or having more meetings there's something more nuanced in it.
00:23:41.519 --> 00:23:55.680
And in my PhD I proposed a framework called oral participation an iceberg model of oral participation where I broke down the communication to different parts.
00:23:55.839 --> 00:24:15.279
So we talked about in our previous meeting we talked about even though I think in complex systems there are so many interrelated parts there are still parts that we can take them apart and see what is leading to what so that is the structured sequence and structured coupling we're talking about.
00:24:15.519 --> 00:24:18.960
And I think we shouldn't give up just because it's so complicated.
00:24:19.119 --> 00:24:20.960
We should track the dynamics.
00:24:21.200 --> 00:25:09.839
So in that oral uh in that iceberg of oral participation model I proposed um different elements in communication in terms of what I call the knowing so that's the cognitive capacity the feeling so that's the psychological readiness and there's the doing so do you have the linguistic vocabulary to say it and there's also of course the social contextual relationship so do I feel confident comfortable to speak out next to you and also there's the external surroundings for example are we having this communication in a classroom in a meeting or in a pub you know it all changes the relationship of that particular communication.
00:25:10.079 --> 00:25:24.079
So if an employee is not being honest with you or is not being comfortable speaking up maybe the best approach is not to try to have more you know serious meetings with them one-on-one.
00:25:24.480 --> 00:25:33.920
It's maybe it's not helpful and maybe try change the location and try to think about maybe there's much more nuance in that relationship.
00:25:34.079 --> 00:25:50.640
And the power dynamics is always an interesting one because for instance you talked about yourself being a native English speaker and I also spend a lot of time researching the dynamics between native English speakers and non-native English speakers.
00:25:50.880 --> 00:25:58.640
It's it's very interesting because I think it was my supervisor actually Nicola Galloway who proposed the term shared non-nativeness.
00:25:58.799 --> 00:26:14.880
It refers to the solidarity or the common understanding of people who are non-native English speakers and we tend to be perhaps more tolerant to each other's verbal issues in verbal communication.
00:26:15.039 --> 00:26:30.880
We tend to use more strategies, more creative in terms of the way we play with words whereas there is this implicit um power dynamics between the the speech between a native speaker and a non-native speaker.
00:26:31.039 --> 00:26:44.880
It's not that people come in with a force of authority it's something that you may be telling yourself that I'm not speaking here as a native speaker I feel a little bit inferior even though you could be a domain expert.
00:26:45.039 --> 00:28:10.559
So that is very very important to remember especially now we're all involved in this frequent intercultural communication and I think um yeah it's something to be aware self-aware yeah when we have this kind of communication I remember having so when I was at um Sanders I was instructor at Sanders and in my platoon of officer cadets I had um I had uh mainly English obviously um because they were the British Academy but we had foreign cadets so I had a Qatari a Bahrainian and I had a um a German national and I remember having to stop my platoon one day and just get them to imagine imagine you were in this foreign um academy and everyone was speaking a foreign language how would you feel what would you want from people you know your fellow cadets around you to consider when you're doing that because it almost became they almost came blind to the fact that they were even though they knew they were the foreign cadets but I think it was blind about the sort of paradigm the the language and the ease of our language but not even the not the ease of our language but obviously to each other but it's also the cloakism of our language is that we have several things that meet that sound the same that mean different things.
00:28:10.799 --> 00:28:29.359
Yeah yeah yeah yeah and I think that was a good pause for them to rethink about you know how they approach that and that power dynamics in the in the language but how how do you think this is changing or adapting with AR This is so interesting.
00:28:29.599 --> 00:28:51.279
So because now we are on to self-aware that just because you're very fluent in a language doesn't necessarily mean you're more competent, I suppose, because you could be a native speaker in this language without actually more framework more reference to a bigger world so to speak.
00:28:51.599 --> 00:29:05.039
And in that sense I think from very early age or early in my work I've noticed that fluency does not necessarily mean registration or fluency does not necessarily mean you're very good.
00:29:05.200 --> 00:29:07.279
It just means that somebody can talk talk talk.
00:29:07.519 --> 00:29:28.000
And AI has really accelerated to an extreme because before we we can't compute we can't process information that quickly and therefore you still need some time to generate meaning and we have more clues to interpret somebody like their text and stuff.
00:29:28.240 --> 00:29:49.119
But now with AI I'm not even talking about the most advanced model I'm just talking about like let's say ChatGPT it can produce such large amounts of text so quickly so fluently but also talking nonsense it really takes the fluency does not necessarily mean registration to the next level.
00:29:49.359 --> 00:29:54.640
Some people call it hallucination I think a hallucination is not created by artificial intelligence.
00:29:54.880 --> 00:30:09.200
Humans do that all the time but it takes it to the next level where you can see that just because it's largely produced it's um produced really quickly doesn't sometimes it doesn't really mean very much.
00:30:09.440 --> 00:30:22.799
And that also I think we can see a lot for example on LinkedIn a lot of people producing large quantity of things that are not very deep not very useful not very fruitful.
00:30:23.039 --> 00:30:51.599
And I actually have a very interesting observation lately we're talking about non-nativeness feeling a bit in inferior feeling a little bit insecure for example with your sentence structure with the spelling and stuff I've noticed that some people are saying I'm trying to make typos just to show that I'm an authentic human or I'm trying to write not so perfect because I want to preserve that authenticity of being human.
00:30:51.759 --> 00:32:30.799
And I think this is so interesting it's everything is the opposite of what I was being taught because our model was trying to sound like native speakers trying to write like native speakers trying to be correct trying to behave like large language models basically you've got people do the uh reverse it's almost like saying you go to McDonald's and you're so tired of everything tastes the same you want something that is specially made for you from a home kitchen kind of yeah but it it's true no I find this in my right and I I said to you before I've not engaged it because a lot of that but um I've heard people put up stuff of like going up you tell it was AI written and it's use words like coherence and stuff I was like coherence is like a is like a standard word for us you know we're definitely what we talk about coherence is really important words um you know you can't use alignment um it's not the same thing and it's just like it was all these different words and I'm like wow I use those words yeah yeah and I'm thinking Jesus what's what's going on and I you can tell quite easily when when when people are but it's it's a very difficult thing to navigate at the moment and there was something that you said that was really important in in that far I got sidetracked with the the words and it was it the confidence you talk about the fluency but it's also the confidence that happened so I I was with some clients and we we were running a bit of experimentation and it was quite interesting because they had their analysts.
00:32:30.960 --> 00:33:21.519
So analysts went off and they were looking at the external environment looking for things that we we wanted to prod and understand a bit more about and we done the same with AI except for the problem is is when when we were getting a large text back from the AI it was very confident so you can't tell but when the analyst done it and the analyst work was just as good probably not as large volume but you know really good and clear but the difference was is that when the analyst spoke back about the findings you can tell by the way they communicated where the confidence was in certain areas so we could get that back where with with AI found it was quite flat in the sense that you can't tell there's no the the confidence is there that everything is okay and I think that's more worrying.
00:33:21.920 --> 00:33:55.279
When you said uh the analysts were they talking back as in in verbal form or like or they typing it was both so we had verbal and we had the presentation so we could tell not only I suppose that's pretty that's a really good question actually because a lot of it I was listening to verbal so I could tell a lot where but even in the report back you can tell you where some bits are a bit lacking some a bit more and you can then prod and go well what's happening here where when we got the stuff back from AI it was very good.
00:33:55.519 --> 00:33:58.960
But I was just like whoa I don't know where to start with this.
00:33:59.279 --> 00:34:33.760
Yeah it's just very interesting so I've been obser uh observing that as well for human that's what I meant by the language interface is one of the most stable and most long-lasting enduring human interface because it's part of the interfaces embedded in many many interfaces of human bodies we use our senses our different senses at least five senses if not six or more and together we have this coherent understanding of the person who's in front of us which I call social modeling.
00:34:34.000 --> 00:34:50.719
For instance I am speaking confidently and comfortably with you but I pause and that's where the attention goes the energy goes and you can see while I'm thinking about it maybe there's something more here or maybe because I am uncertain.
00:34:50.960 --> 00:34:59.360
So it's more natural it's just how people used to talk as how the language is supposed to talk is supposed to be used.
00:34:59.519 --> 00:35:13.360
And let's put it maybe not the most statistical correct way, but maybe we put 5% or less in the actual words we use but the overall senses of how how the words come out.
00:35:13.599 --> 00:35:27.119
Let's say if I am talking to you but my body language is like really really shrinking and I look uncomfortable, unconfident and then you know that something's not right here, even though I could be using the exact same words.
00:35:27.440 --> 00:35:42.239
And my worry with this overobsession without fully understanding that how language works is we flatten the whole the multi-dimension of communication to just a text form.
00:35:42.559 --> 00:35:52.559
And you can easily see how an email is interpreted by 10 different employees in 10 different ways because they don't see the person behind it.
00:35:52.880 --> 00:36:10.960
And when documents or meeting summaries are produced a large volume high speed a lot of this real communication nuances or the original intention can be all flattened and that can have a lot of consequences.
00:36:11.360 --> 00:36:11.920
Yeah.
00:36:12.239 --> 00:36:25.360
Yeah I think I think that's the the point we try and get at especially with strategy when we're trying to communicate that clear intent so that people have the framework to be able to deploy the tactics to be able to do what they need to do.
00:36:27.119 --> 00:36:40.480
So if we focus only very much on the language side you you quickly find out that language um in these models without the understanding of the field can easily drift.
00:36:40.719 --> 00:36:51.360
So not all drifts are bad because sometimes drift can also create um lead to creativity but I my point is we need to make sure the drifts are transparent.
00:36:51.519 --> 00:37:02.079
We need to know that when something is drifting from its original intent I actually have a visual aid here with my children's toys love that.
00:37:02.400 --> 00:37:11.679
So if let's say you have an idea that is like this and because I'm given a speech I am going to make it a bigger idea because it sounds better.
00:37:14.159 --> 00:37:34.480
During the meeting or during the briefing I forgot part of the idea because this is how real communication works right I forgot part of idea so only this much came out but we've still got 10 more minutes so I think I'm gonna add a bit more but because it's didn't come out so fluently it it's like this bit.
00:37:34.719 --> 00:37:35.039
Okay.
00:37:35.199 --> 00:37:41.280
So it starts to you you see it starts to change and then the audience or my employee they heard this bit.
00:37:41.440 --> 00:37:44.639
So they think oh I I remember it's this shape.
00:37:44.880 --> 00:37:59.199
So when they go home maybe it looked like this and it just starts to like change change change and maybe you have other employees or other people who's listening and it's like a different language right so you you just keep changing it.
00:37:59.280 --> 00:38:12.320
And my whole point is that you see like the original idea can easily drift and of course when you move to a different language and things get even more crazy because you don't find the exact words.
00:38:12.480 --> 00:38:22.400
So things start to curve they start to curve and they start to start to shape into things that you didn't expect to to happen.
00:38:22.559 --> 00:38:31.760
And then there's also all of these let's say the the framework and the organizational framework we have a model but it has to fit with our framework.
00:38:31.920 --> 00:38:41.199
So you have all these things around it and very very soon if you don't pay enough attention a simple idea can drift into something that's completely different.
00:38:41.360 --> 00:38:47.920
Not to say this is not cute but not to say this is not useful but obviously very different from the original intent.
00:38:48.159 --> 00:39:07.119
And I think that's what we need to really pay attention to these tools or what I call not just tools they are they're actually complex adaptive systems because as we're sleeping as we're doing our thing um AI is constantly changing and we need to be very mindful of that.
00:39:07.280 --> 00:39:20.400
I'm not against AI I just think we need to understand these are not tools these are changing systems changing complex systems so I would rather think of them as condition rather than tools.
00:39:20.800 --> 00:39:38.239
Yes I agree and and sometimes people think I'm anti-AI I'm not it's it's just that there's a lot of to consider like what you've eloquently put and the fact I always say about the recursive levels and different horizons and stuff so you need to be really careful when you bring that into businesses.
00:39:38.480 --> 00:39:44.559
But what you've highlighted there about the I love that by the way um yeah I love the it that's perfect.
00:39:45.360 --> 00:39:56.159
What you're you're demonstrating with those shapes changing is the same if we go back to where we started our original conversation at the start about the external environment and how we're coupled with it.
00:39:56.480 --> 00:40:20.719
Is that your your intent your idea is is not being delivered by you uh as the the strategic leader is being delivered by the the parts of the organisation yes and we need to ensure that that intent is is really clearly understood because their actions are going to determine if we're going to have that effect on the external environment that we so wish to have.
00:40:20.880 --> 00:40:21.039
Yeah.
00:40:21.199 --> 00:41:04.800
And it's often people don't look as I was saying before they don't look back to go actually is is from the idea from our hypothesis our assumption that we had to our intent to the actions that people have done through the tactics is the culmination of those tactics now influencing the external environment in the way that we wanted to and you imagine just in your demonstration there that whole chain of events there's there's so many variables in there and that's why it's so important that we're very clear about what is our intent, what is the effect that we're hoping to see and what's happening so we can then see where things are going well or or not so well.
00:41:05.119 --> 00:41:22.000
Yeah I'm laughing right here because I'm just thinking about World Cup as we speak and in football or in basketball very often you see this in in the field where you have five players on a team or 11 doesn't matter you have a clear strategy.
00:41:22.239 --> 00:41:33.280
Everybody seems to understand the strategy but in complex systems we have a saying the collective is not just things adding up it's the more than the addition it's the structured coupling.
00:41:33.440 --> 00:42:47.360
So how you position the how you position the the players really matters right it doesn't matter you tell them it's a strategy but you have to have the tactics who's standing what passing the ball to who and in that sense sometimes we also have in that case we also have a foreign or a foreign coach who don't who doesn't speak the same language as the and see like how how many layers can can the strategies or the tactics lost in translation uh because it's not it's not just a coach's idea it the ideas can be changed so many times and maybe the team members are talking about their tactics their strategies as they go so I think that's why sports is so much fun because you see so many small incidences where people's interpretation and their emotion and audiences you know spectators reactions everything come into play um it's what I meant by strategy is the field level because you you need to understand everything is changing and you can't not have the same strategy playing this team versus that team.
00:42:47.599 --> 00:42:48.719
Every team is different.
00:42:48.800 --> 00:43:03.840
So your strategy needs to change in relation to who you're playing against right so I think this is this is a great example of combining the language element as well as the strategic um tactical element and the World Cup as we speak.
00:43:04.159 --> 00:43:35.280
Yes it it it's really fascinating when you you go that but um I always you you I like the word you use flattening we try to flatten everything down into the most simplest form um and you see this a lot with you know what's your what's your winning aspiration and then you know that's sort of it and what's your sort of priorities there I think they miss a lot of the the dynamics uh the relations that happen or or need to happen.
00:43:35.840 --> 00:44:06.559
That's also the danger of only looking at the successful stories I think because the successful stories it's very often just a slice of reality slice of truth or maybe the end game the tail of that trajectory whereas if you look at a lot of failures I like to look at failure modes because they fail in so many different ways but you can learn so much and that is Also, the danger of adopting, let's say, a framework, a model, because you expect reality to work that way.
00:44:06.800 --> 00:44:13.599
But very often, I like to say models are at best a representation of a version of reality.
00:44:13.920 --> 00:44:22.719
And a model was only proposed under certain constraints, certain conditions, and very easily they they just don't work.
00:44:22.880 --> 00:44:39.119
So if you go in thinking that this is our model, this is our plan, it needs to work, and then you come up with more models, more what I call consumptive virtue to stick to that original plan, very soon you might find yourself in not a very comfortable position.
00:44:39.920 --> 00:44:40.239
No.
00:44:40.559 --> 00:44:51.280
And I get that I was I was speaking to someone a few weeks back and I said, So when do you know that you need to re-look at your strategy?
00:44:53.039 --> 00:44:58.239
And um their answer was next year when we have our strategy refresh.
00:44:58.400 --> 00:45:02.800
And I was just like, wow, okay, that's not really what I was expecting.
00:45:03.039 --> 00:45:11.360
But that that is just um, you know, I'll say it's not an extreme because I know some that probably won't look for five years, but that's the problem.
00:45:11.440 --> 00:45:24.320
They put so much energy in this view, you see it, they put a lot of energy in this view of trying to get market analysis now and do that, and they they put a lot of energy in it to then basically come up with an idea and they leave it.
00:45:24.880 --> 00:45:41.679
They don't have any of those sort of feedback loops to go, well, how how do we know, you know, what's changing the external environment, what what is constraints may um appear that will mean that actually what we were going to do is not viable.
00:45:41.920 --> 00:45:51.840
So, how do we then know that, you know, what what do we know about the tempo and the the speed in which we need to be able to get ourselves ready to execute for the right time, the right interfaces.
00:45:52.000 --> 00:45:53.840
If we miss that opportunity, what does that mean?
00:45:54.000 --> 00:46:06.159
I think there's not really that ongoing orientation that needs to happen, that constant view of the internal, external, what's happening, what's the relationship, and and how do we continuously move to our advantage.
00:46:06.480 --> 00:46:15.119
Yeah, and on that point, there's also I've written about it, in complex human systems, nothing stays local, really.
00:46:15.280 --> 00:46:16.480
Nothing stays local.
00:46:16.719 --> 00:46:22.800
Everything has some sort of real some sort of reaction, one leads to another.
00:46:22.960 --> 00:46:24.800
So nothing stays local.
00:46:24.960 --> 00:46:26.800
There's always a global effect.
00:46:27.039 --> 00:46:38.000
Maybe in loosely coupled systems you don't see it so obvious, but in tightly coupled systems, you see very quickly one thing leads to another, leads to another.
00:46:38.159 --> 00:46:49.039
And in Chinese, we have a beautiful, a little bit dramatic saying, but very beautiful saying called, which literally means pull one hair and your whole body moves.
00:46:49.679 --> 00:46:50.400
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:46:50.639 --> 00:47:04.400
Yeah, because you know it's like one thing, it's a tiny, tiny localized movement, but your whole body moves, which is a very, you know, uh interesting way of describing the dynamics in complex systems.
00:47:04.719 --> 00:47:05.199
Yeah.
00:47:05.840 --> 00:47:09.679
And I see this in um we we use sports analy analogy.
00:47:10.000 --> 00:47:33.360
So I use Formula One, as I've got Max was tapping behind me looking at me, um, is that you see that, and this is why I like Formula One so much, because you you see the strategy, um, and this is the thing earlier you were saying about is not necessarily long term because their strategy is normally very short term, um, and it's track by track relational to the track.
00:47:33.440 --> 00:47:47.119
Um, but when you're saying about pull one hair and then everything happens, you only saw it this week that there was one thing where Lewis Hamilton went into the pit early, and everyone else had to react to that.
00:47:48.000 --> 00:47:56.320
So everyone's strategy that they thought they were doing, or the tactics they thought they were doing, um suddenly had to change because something that they didn't think was gonna happen actually happened.
00:47:56.880 --> 00:48:02.800
And just that one action causes a reaction around, which then means they've reacted to that.
00:48:02.960 --> 00:48:05.679
Now the the trajectory they were going has changed.
00:48:06.159 --> 00:48:06.639
Yeah, exactly.
00:48:06.960 --> 00:48:09.280
So it's is it's quite interesting when you look at that.
00:48:09.679 --> 00:48:29.119
And where you have a good team, for instance, if you have a good team, a healthy organization that is developing the the space, the pace they're developing, and they have the structure to hold that pace, and then you naturally see if something happens, the whole organization has this coherence to move together.
00:48:29.440 --> 00:48:35.679
But uh very often we see, for example, an organization expanding or having a successful line.
00:48:35.760 --> 00:48:43.599
So they go, go, go, they have this momentum, but actually the structure is not ready for that to keep up.
00:48:43.760 --> 00:48:54.079
And that's when a lot of things can go wrong, and they don't understand why we were successful in launching that product, but not the whole line or whole 10 products or in 10 areas.
00:48:54.239 --> 00:49:06.159
I think often it leads back to because the capacity, the structure, the holding capacity or the coherence is not there yet for them to move together.
00:49:06.400 --> 00:49:14.079
It's almost like in the field where one talented footballer is already in possession of the ball and he just go, go, go.
00:49:14.159 --> 00:49:16.639
But the whole team is already still behind.
00:49:16.800 --> 00:49:32.480
They need to work together coherently to move forward, which is also why it explains why in soci in our organizations, including football and basketball, basketball teams, we really like talents.
00:49:32.639 --> 00:49:35.280
We like elites, elite and superstars.
00:49:35.760 --> 00:49:40.480
But very often when they go to play, they somehow suck.
00:49:40.719 --> 00:49:43.039
They somehow don't really shine.
00:49:43.199 --> 00:49:59.039
And when we don't understand why, I think it's because partly is because organizations hire them and then don't have the holding capacity, don't have the team that can create the condition for the superstars to work.
00:49:59.280 --> 00:50:05.920
And obviously in World Cup, you see people who are playing the playing the leagues and they're super superstars.
00:50:06.239 --> 00:50:25.920
But when they come to train with their own national teams, they haven't got a good understanding of the strategies or have enough time for the tactical, you know, systems to work coherently and therefore they don't win or they don't perform as well as we would expect them to work.
00:50:26.079 --> 00:50:28.639
And we see that a lot across domains.
00:50:28.800 --> 00:50:39.199
Doesn't matter it's in governance or in management, in education, in um business, economics, or football, it's across the board.
00:50:39.440 --> 00:50:48.079
We want talents, but we don't have the structure to create the conditions to let the talents shine.
00:50:48.320 --> 00:51:06.400
And another thing about this trap is that because talents are so good, they're so used to behav performing so well, so they take on additional stress on themselves, or they feel like why can't they they beat themselves up for not performing well?
00:51:06.559 --> 00:51:13.440
And that has a whole lot of you know consequences on their um well-being and other relations.
00:51:13.679 --> 00:51:17.920
They may be resentful to uh other um players, other team members.
00:51:18.159 --> 00:51:23.599
So it it's a lot of um a lot of consequences of not understanding the dynamics.
00:51:23.920 --> 00:51:24.400
Yes.
00:51:24.800 --> 00:51:28.239
You saw that in uh England rugby with Marcus Smith.
00:51:28.320 --> 00:51:35.360
In Harlequins, he had the structure around him to have that flair and that speed and that capacity to adapt quickly.
00:51:35.519 --> 00:51:43.840
When he went to England, it was almost all that was not there, it was very quite slow and mechanistic, and um everything had to be planned.
00:51:43.920 --> 00:51:46.960
Um, and that's not where you know, that's not where he shined in.
00:51:47.119 --> 00:51:56.800
And yeah, you could tell that especially that last part about him beating himself up about his performance, you could really see that, and it's sort of the compound effect of that made more errors.
00:51:57.039 --> 00:52:05.679
Um and you see this with with a lot of organizations and overcoming to time, but you see it where they optimise for those parts.
00:52:06.400 --> 00:52:16.639
Optimize for then they're not really thinking about the the coherent nature about well how how do we how do we get the the effects from the whole?
00:52:16.800 --> 00:52:25.360
So how do we make the whole um a service for the effect rather than let's just optimize and hope then that the the effect will come by the optimized parts?
00:52:25.679 --> 00:52:29.599
Yeah, local optimization just it just doesn't work in a long line.
00:52:30.159 --> 00:52:30.320
Yeah.
00:52:31.119 --> 00:52:31.760
I love that.
00:52:32.000 --> 00:52:33.760
Thank you for coming on, Alice.
00:52:33.920 --> 00:52:39.440
Before you go though, what would you like to leave our listeners to think about from this episode?
00:52:40.320 --> 00:52:41.760
What what I like?
00:52:42.000 --> 00:52:50.800
Um I think so part of the the interview we haven't fully um I think explored is um AI.
00:52:51.199 --> 00:53:06.800
And the question I would our I would love our audience to think about is that in the age of AI, are we still in relationship with reality or are we just getting better at responding to the representation of reality?
00:53:07.519 --> 00:53:23.599
Um yeah, that that was um I think that would be a question I would encourage everybody to think because we're so used to using different software, different um different um tools or different um AI products.
00:53:23.760 --> 00:53:26.400
Are we losing contact with the field?
00:53:26.559 --> 00:53:28.480
That's my that would be my question.
00:53:29.199 --> 00:53:29.679
Wow.
00:53:30.719 --> 00:53:32.159
There's a lot there to think about.
00:53:32.719 --> 00:53:45.760
I'm already thinking, I'm I'm already buzzing away thinking around, you know, our our own bias that we put into what we're asking, you know, and plus it's um it's eagerness and confidence to give us response.
00:53:46.159 --> 00:53:52.880
Actually, are we I think we're spending a lot of time optimizing and not going actually testing those assumptions.
00:53:53.280 --> 00:54:03.920
Yeah, and if you think about the representation, because all the products that we're interacting, what we call AI, they're essentially based on certain models.
00:54:04.079 --> 00:54:10.559
And models like we talked about are at best a representation of reality, which is constantly changing.
00:54:10.719 --> 00:54:19.519
So if we take the models result as repr um as reality, then we can see things already drifting from the beginning.
00:54:20.159 --> 00:54:20.559
Wow.
00:54:20.719 --> 00:54:29.360
I mean that's a lot for them to go and actually you know for the audience if you're listening, you have to think about that and please get in touch and share your thoughts.
00:54:29.440 --> 00:54:30.960
And I'll share that with Alice as well.
00:54:31.119 --> 00:54:32.000
She'll see it.
00:54:32.159 --> 00:54:37.199
Um yeah, maybe we'll we'll get Alice back on for a uh QA.
00:54:37.519 --> 00:54:42.400
Um and we get people and we can explore, give you the opportunity to ask Alice the questions.
00:54:42.639 --> 00:54:44.719
So, but thank you so much for coming on.
00:54:44.800 --> 00:54:46.400
I've really enjoyed this episode.
00:54:46.960 --> 00:54:55.519
And for the audience, if you've enjoyed it, please like, share, and subscribe, um, and share to people that may have also um get great value from Alice's work.
00:54:55.599 --> 00:54:59.280
So, once again, Alice, thank you so much for coming on and being a guest.
00:54:59.679 --> 00:55:01.039
Very happy to be here today.
00:55:01.280 --> 00:55:02.239
Thank you, everybody.
00:55:02.480 --> 00:55:03.679
Bye everyone.