The Long and The Short Of It

Episode 328 - Relative Tanking

Transcript:

Jen: Hello, Peter.

Pete: Hello, Jen.

Jen: Today, I want to talk to you about something that I think I've maybe coined a term for but I'm willing to change it by the end of this episode, and the term is: relative tanking.

Pete: Relative tanking, okay. Tanking, meaning bombing?

Jen: Yes. Yes, like when you really stink at something.

Pete: Right, right, right. When you think something went terribly because you stunk it up, yep. Tanking, bombing, but all through the lens of being relative. Alright, color me curious...I feel like I've been saying that a lot lately. This is The Long and The Short Of It.

Pete: I think I picked up, "Color me curious," from you, maybe? I feel like you say that a lot.

Jen: Yeah, you probably did. You probably did. I do say it. Okay. Relative tanking, let me define it.

Pete: Yeah.

Jen: It is the experience of knowing you did kind of terribly, or like did not do what you wanted or intended to do, and then realizing that relative to what other people expected, from their point of view, it wasn't that bad.

Pete: Oh, you mean the experience that I have every single day?

Jen: Well, I had this in a very extreme (at least it felt extreme on the inside) way recently.

Pete: Wow. Hit me.

Jen: I was invited by Susan Blackwell and Laura Camien, two creativity coaches...and Susan also happens to be a friend of mine, whom I admire and respect so much. They invited me to deliver a workshop for their creative cohort. They run a business called The Spark File. They're amazing, incredible people.

Pete: I've heard of this, yeah.

Jen: They're so good. And they have a podcast, and everyone should listen to it. Anyway, we decided that I was going to do a workshop on how to build your professional network, and do it without the ick factor. And I'm so excited about it, because I've run this kind of a workshop a million times for like lots of different audiences.

Pete: Right, bread and butter.

Jen: And I was so excited. I'm like, "It's going to be a group of creative people, so I'm going to make it incredibly interactive. I'm going to do all these exercises and breakouts." And anyway, we get into the Zoom room. I get through the first couple points. And then, I realize all of my notes are out of order, and I have printed out the version of the notes that has no timings on it, so I don't even know how to put it in order.

Pete: Oh no.

Jen: So I'm like trying to deliver this workshop, while trying to read ahead but stay engaged, and I'm kind of panicking.

Pete: Oh my god, I'm cringing for you.

Jen: It's the worst. And as I'm panicking, I'm saying inside my head, "Jen, stop talking for a second. Take a breath. Give them an exercise. Send them to a breakout. Do something, damn it. Make it interactive." But instead, I just keep talking.

Pete: Oh my god.

Jen: And I'm like, Pete, I'm in excruciating agony because I'm doing this for all of these creative people and I'm invited by these women I admire so much. I'm like, "Oh my god, this is tanking on a level that is so humiliating." So anyway, wrap the night. I hang my head in shame. I breathe. And I'm like, "Okay. Just remember, Jen, you didn't do any harm. So like, you didn't leave it worse than it was when you got there. Maybe somebody will have the courage to reach out tomorrow, and that was really the point." But I stewed on it for a couple days, where I was like, "How can I show my face in this town again?"

Pete: I bet.

Jen: Okay, so fast forward, Pete. It's weeks later now, and I open my podcast feed and there's a new episode of The Spark File, and the title of the episode is Reach Out. And I'm like, "Oh no. Oh god, oh god."

Pete: Oh no.

Jen: "Based on the timing, I feel like this is going to be some sort of a podcast episode about how John Waldman came in and tanked for our group, and so embarrassing for her." Anyway, I listen...and they do nothing but praise the workshop that I ran.

Pete: Oh my god.

Jen: And they're like, "It was great. It was inspiring. We learned so much. And she's such a masterful teacher." And I'm like, "What? Do you have any idea how bad I was? That was the most off my game I have felt delivering a workshop in as long as I can remember." And then, it occurred to me, "Oh, this is relative tanking. I know I tanked because I know what it's supposed to be when it's right..."

Pete: Right.

Jen: "...and relative to what I have delivered in the past, and relative to what the word 'interactive' means, Jen."

Pete: Relative to what you would like to deliver, yeah. Interesting.

Jen: But from their perspective, it was fine.

Pete: Yeah. Wow. Because relative to what they've experienced, it was like, "Oh, that was great." It wasn't just fine. Sounds like it was great. They did a whole podcast about how great it was.

Jen: Yeah. I don't know, Pete. So it's like really shaken me up in a very good way, where I'm like, "Oh, there are certain things that only I could know, and it's not fair to expect everyone else to know it. It's also not fair to expect everyone to be disappointed by the things I'm disappointed in."

Pete: Right, right. No one knows what you know. No one believes what you believe. No one has experienced what you've experienced. They're looking at it through their own relative lens. I mean, this is so good. I feel like I have a hundred and sixty versions of this that I could share with you, the amount of times I've had a similar experience based on the relative story that I'm telling myself, but then also the experience of hearing from two participants from the same workshop that had a totally different interpretation or experience other than their relative takeaways. So, maybe I'll just share a couple. The first one that comes to mind, and I shared this way back when it happened, is, I did a TEDx talk back in 2019 and it was about imposter syndrome. And I'd practiced it within an inch of my life, and I had a speaking coach that helped, and it was so dialed in, and there was no way I could stuff up anything because I had done it three million times. And there was a moment where I was on the red circle and I was speaking, and I completely blacked out. Completely blacked out. Now, turns out, having spoken to you and a bunch of actors, this is like a known phenomenon that can happen.

Jen: Yeah.

Pete: I'd never experienced it before. And I panic completely, internally, because I have absolutely no idea what just came out of my mouth. I have no idea where I'm up to in the talk. And so, I have no idea what to say next. And I have that voice in my head also, but the voice says, "Just don't say anything, and it'll come to you." And so, I paused for what I felt like was three minutes. And all of a sudden, the line came to me, and I remembered, and I kept going, and off I went. And the only thing I could think of when I walked off stage was, "Gosh, that was such a bomb. That is going to be on video. What an idiot. I can't believe it, how ridiculous I was." I was so annoyed at myself. My friends that were there came up to me afterwards, like, "That was great," blah, blah. And I was like, "You're being polite. What about that massive pause?"And they were like, "What are you talking about?" And I was like, "I know you're just being polite." And so, I stewed on it for, I want to say, six months until the video came out.

Jen: Whoa.

Pete: Well, I can stew like the best of them. And the video comes out, and I'm so reluctant to watch it back, but I know I have to. And anyway, I finally watch it back, and I can't even find the moment where I pause. Like, I can't even tell you where it was, because it's not there. It's not noticeable. And so, what happened is I guess all of that happened in the space of a second or two. And in my head, it was about three minutes, and it was a total bomb. But you can't actually tell. I can't even tell, and I've watched the video, and I was the one who gave the speech. So that is one of a hundred and seventy, like I mentioned, examples. But I just feel this in my bones, that the story we tell ourselves about what happened is not always in alignment with what actually happened, or at least people's relative experience of what happened, like you said.

Jen: Yeah. Wow. And I've seen your TEDx talk, and I'll tell you, I can't find the moment you're referring to either.

Pete: So funny. I mean, it does look a bit like it was recorded on a potato and the audio is not great...it was back in the day. But the pause is not there. I can't find it. I can't find it.

Jen: Yeah, it is not there.

Pete: That is wild.

Jen: So Pete, it seems to me that there are two ideas...I'm sure there are more than two. But there are two that are immediately coming to mind that are seemingly contradictory but may be, in fact, complimentary, that add up to this relative tanking situation.

Pete: Yep.

Jen: The first is holding one's self to a certain standard of excellence.

Pete: Yep, like knowing what you can deliver at a certain standard, and always wanting to strive to either match it or better itbecause you know what you're capable of as a human.

Jen: Exactly, like want to raise the bar. You want to get 1% better. You want to do all those things to demonstrate to yourself that you're growing and that you have some realistic sense of excellence about your work.

Pete: Yeah, I like that.

Jen: And I might have, before this conversation, thought of this as a contradictory idea, but now I'm willing to consider it as complimentary: There is also good enough.

Pete: Hmm. Yeah.

Jen: So I did not, in that moment, achieve my bar raising and I did not get 1% better. I definitely got more than 1% worse,

Pete: Right.

Jen: And it was still good enough.

Pete: Right, good enough to deliver on what you wanted to deliver. Which, I agree with both of those seemingly contradictory ideas. We want to be striving to deliver talks, workshops, services, products, performances that are as good as possible, and constantly striving to make them better. And at the same time, if what we're trying to do is, in the example of a workshop or a keynote or a class, open a door and turn on a light, introduce someone to a framework and give them an opportunity to practice it, the good enough, the bar for that is relatively...not low, but it's lower than the former, which is, you know, striving to make it absolutely perfect and nail it.

Jen: Yeah.

Pete: And so, I agree with you. Like you said this I think, at one point, you didn't do harm, which is kind of that's like the true tank of, "I didn't open any doors and I didn't turn on any lights. It was pitch black, and I just talked. And maybe I even caused harm, because I ranted and raved." And I don't know what would have happened that would indicate that or...you know what I mean? So, the good enough is something to strive for. It's almost like the minimum viable product or the minimum audience delivery. You got that, in that you opened the door and turned on the light.

Jen: Mmm-hmm.

Pete: I don't know. I'm trying to make sense of like there's two gates or checkpoints, and the first one is like the minimum amount of delivery or value that you want to deliver, which is the good enough. And then, it's like if you get to the better, hopefully, that is the second checkpoint. But if you don't, no one probably notices.

Jen: Right. That's exactly right. The thing that's so frustrating about it, at least for me, is like I don't like tanking. I know what I'm capable of, and it just hurts.

Pete: Yeah, which is the reflection, I think. So, this is...okay, I have a few thoughts on this. The first is the reason you and I talk a lot about and have talked a lot about an R.S., which stands for reflective script, which is a process of us asking ourselves a few questions at the end of anything, having delivered something, that sound like, "What went well? What went less well? And what was my general thoughts or vibe on the situation," so that I can close the loop on the learning of what I did, what I liked, and what I didn't like. The reason I like that so much is because it suggests that it's never perfect, which means there's always something I could have done better, and it gives you an opportunity to capture what that might be, so you can keep striving for that high standard of success. However, I was introducing this concept to an audience, a group of leaders, a couple weeks ago actually, and I was talking about the benefits of an R.S. so that you can close the loop on your learning. And someone said, "Would you ever give those same three questions to someone who was there? What was your overall thoughts? What went well? What went less well?" And I was like, "Yes! That is a brilliant idea." I don't know why I hadn't thought of that. I mean, we've talked about giving feedback before. But is there such a thing as a, I don't know, a P.R.S., like a peer reflective script, where you ask the people in the room the same questions? Because I think it's pretty common that we come up with a bunch of things we could have done better that other people don't see.

Jen: Yeah.

Pete: And so, it's a useful reminder for us that what the audience sees and hears is different to what you see and hear. And that, I think, could be reassuring.

Jen: Yeah, I love that idea. It's actually such a simple format, because you and I do this all the time. What? How have we never thought of that before?

Pete: I know, so obvious. So obvious. So the other thing about the P.R.S., or just people in the audience's reactions...this was the other thread I had in my head, I guess I'll articulate it through a story. It was only a matter of maybe two months ago, where I was delivering this in-person workshop. And someone in the room, I could tell, was not catching what I was throwing, was not on board with the concept of the workshop, and was getting really agitated and frustrated at the conversation we were having, sort of like a volcano bubbling up. And I was thinking to myself, "I feel like this thing's about to explode." And it did. Explode, it did. And there was a bit of an outburst around, "I disagree with this for this reason. I don't think we should be pandering to the audience that we're trying to communicate to." We were talking about understanding your audience, so you can communicate to them in a way that means something to them. And he had a big disagreement about that, and how that feels like pandering, and he has a message that he wants to be able to deliver and people should receive it, and how he intends them to receive it. And so, he disagreed with the concept of the workshop...which, I disagree with his disagreement, but whatever. He was allowed to disagree. And so clearly, he didn't get enough. He didn't get what he wanted out of the workshop. He didn't get value out of the workshop. It came through in the after-workshop survey, very obvious that there was one person in the room that did not like the format. In the very same workshop, in the very same evaluation form, there were comments like, "This was the best leadership workshop I've ever been a part of at this company, and I've been here for twenty-five years." There were comments like, "This is the most practical and helpful framework that I've ever learned. Thank you so much." And I just, I can only shrug and laugh because it's the same experience. Well, not the same experience. It's the same thing that happened, the same workshop that was delivered, but the experience of the individual was totally different based on their own relative story. So, I don't know. I just feel like, I mean, it's another example of sonder, right? Like, the story we all have in our head is different to the story everyone else has in their head.

Jen: And so, what do we do next time we tank, Pete? Because there will be a next time.

Pete: There'll be a next time, for sure. My answer to this is Rule #6.

Jen: Mmm.

Pete: My answer to this is, don't take yourself so damn seriously. When I shared in the episode we did recently, the thirteen ways to make your communication better...I think it was 13 Lessons. The 13th, which I delivered in that workshop, was, "Don't take yourself so damn seriously." And the point I made in that was, when you're giving a talk or running a workshop or even just facilitating a meeting, it's really easy to build up in your head that this is the most important meeting of all time, that is going to change the dimension of how everyone is seeing and looking at a certain thing, and you have to get it right because it's just so critical. And I disagree with that. I think what's more true is, in the context of the workshop I was running, you're just an hour in their day.

Jen: Mmm.

Pete: And most of us have, I don't know, twelve or thirteen hours in a day that involve a bunch of meetings, a bunch of tasks, a bunch of to-do's, a bunch of life admin, a bunch of things that we're doing. And perhaps if they go to a workshop that you're running that goes for an hour or two, you are like this tiny fraction of their day. And I find that freeing, to go, "Don't take yourself so seriously." Yes, see what went well and what went less well. Yes, try and get better. And hold it lightly.

Jen: Yeah.

Pete: It's not that important. Don't take yourself so seriously that this crushes you. Because guess what? It was one or two hours in their day. And hopefully, like in your case, they actually probably did get something out of it that you maybe didn't even see in the moment.

Jen: It's so funny to hear you say that, because I say something so similar to actors all the time, "You're going in for your two minute audition. It's the most important two minutes of your life...at least it feels that way. You've worked for weeks gearing up to this, and then it feels like every future experience you'll ever have hinges on those two minutes. Where, for the people behind the table, it's just another eight-hour audition day."

Pete: Just another eight hours, right. And you're two minutes in that eight hours.

Jen: Right. Wow. Relative tanking...or relative succeeding. It's all relative, as they say.

Pete: And that is The Long and The Short Of It.