Boss Class: Innovation: Coming up with new ideas

We all want the best of ba- dessert without calories luxury without expense and how about without passwords with Okta it's possible we secure identity for your business so you can safely use You could build experiences grow revenue without running The world's identity company. When you're a forward thinker, the only thing you're afraid of is business as usual. Workday is the AI platform that transforms manage people and money today so you can transform tomorrow. It's how we're The Economist.

Today on the weekend. we're bringing you the first episode of our new season of Boss Class about the world of work. This is a podcast for anyone who manages people or who hopes to. Think of it like a business degree in miniature or maybe don't because it's much more fun. Our host, Andrew Palmer, writes The Economist's Bartleby column on work, and he's funny, wise, and those who've been managed by him say he's pretty good.

On the first season of Boss Class, he told us how to recruit, how to run meetings and how to manage your own career. If you haven't heard it, I encourage you to go back and listen. Our new season of Boss Class has just begun and we'll release more episodes each Monday. This week and next in the Weekend Intelligence slot, we're bringing you two of those new shows.

Today, how innovative companies come up with great ideas. Andrew goes to Lego HQ in Denmark, meets robot bricklayers at a Dutch building site, and talks to Google's head of search about AI. You can find new episodes of the series by searching Boss Class wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm on a building site and wearing a heart hat. I've never felt more handy. I'm here because Salah Al-Fadji is showing me his vision of the future. Alfadji isn't a builder. He's not an architect. He's the co-founder of a Dutch startup called Monumental. It makes AI-driven bricklaying robots. and they work together they're like coordinating and like one is laying murder and then push the other one is pushing down the break In there.

and they grab the brick from another robot, which is the brick supply one, and that one can just drive off, grab more bricks, come back. Teams of four-wheeled robots are working alongside human masons on a new residential property development about 25 minutes from Rotterdam. The house is probably two stories. I'm using words like story as though I'm like... You've been in this industry for ages.

A supervisor from Monumental, who has a bit more building experience than me, and also knows how to count, is on hand to supervise the robots and intervene if needed. But the supervisor doesn't control the robots. They act autonomously. So the arm with the mortar is now positioned above the brick. And it's going to stop. One robot squeezes mortar onto a brick. I call it slightly disgusting. Another picks up the brick and places it onto the beginnings of a wall.

The other arm which is holding a brick comes and places it on top. Placing a brick is not as simple as it sounds. Camera vision and a software representation of the wall ensures that it goes in precisely the right place. The robots have also copied a trick from human masons, a specific way of increasing the adhesive connection between brick and mortar.

so what it's actually doing is actually like pushing and vibrating it into the mortar there are sensors into the end effector because it's actually you don't like place a brick on the mortar you actually need to push it down and what maces do we discovered is actually vibrate their hands Monumental was founded to solve a real-world problem, a shortage of bricklayers. There's a long way to go before its robots can fill that gap.

They can't build interior walls. They can't do soldier coursing, which as everyone knows is a row of bricks laid standing up with the narrow edge facing out. They hit problems. Things go wrong. Like bricks being dropped mid-task. That dropping worries me, actually. I've not seen this before not like this it's just like people journalists come in everything goes wrong disaster strike bloody journalists Despite the mishaps, Dutch families will soon live in houses part built by machines.

Even seeing a few bricks being laid in a kind of robotic choreography is hypnotic.

If you are asked to conjure up an image of innovation, what do you picture? Hammocks? Ping pong tables and whiteboards? People saying there's no such thing as a bad idea, despite the existence of Hawaiian pizza and golf. Thank you. Zalar Al-Fadji, whose robots really are at the cutting edge, has little patience with all that nonsense.

Just like culturally, we have a very strong aversion towards like I just called like fake innovation, which is just like colored post-it notes, beanbags. There's this kind of aesthetic of innovation, which is not innovation. I'm Andrew Palmer, the management columnist for The Economist. The performances and practicalities of the workplace are what I write about each week.

in the first season of this podcast on how to be a good manager i learned how to hire people how to run teams and how to motivate employees I also discovered how important great bosses are, and how rare. Managing well is extremely difficult, but it is a skill that can be learned. So I'm back with a new set of questions for the bosses of today.

You'll hear tips from Levi's, Novo Nordisk, Supercell and more of the world's best performing companies on how to negotiate, how to present, how to take decisions and In this episode, we'll look at the holy grail of the workplace. innovation. Every manager has been asked to brainstorm product ideas. Job candidates boast about their ability to ideate The one thing you know about AI is that it's going to mean doing new things in new ways.

So to find out what proper innovation looks like, the reality of it, not the aesthetics, we'll meet three very different firms. Wave is a deep tech company trying to make self-driving cars a mass market reality. Lego is an established industry leader and an innovator at scale. Google is threatened by disruption. It faces the challenge of overhauling its flagship product.

to make the most of AI. We'll learn that innovation does not involve throwing a word association ball to your colleagues and wishing you were dead. It's more like the building sites where Monumental is training its robots. People know the overall goal, but the process is often messy. The pathway is frequently unclear. From The Economist, this is Boss Class, Season 2. On this episode, the ingredients of innovation.

I think the biggest bullshit is eureka ideas, where you just wake up and have an idea that solves things. Breakthroughs are achieved by sustained effort over many, many years. Alex Kendall is the founder of Wave. It's a startup which makes AI software for self-driving cars. And it's a single AI model that can learn to drive these different vehicles in different environments safely around all kinds of scenarios from urban to highway driving, to sun to rain, and even some examples in the snow.

Like Monumental, Wave is an embodied AI company, but it's much further along in its journey. In 2024, Wave raised over $1 billion in funding, the largest ever investment in a European AI firm. Its tech is now being adopted by some very big names. The Japanese carmaker Nissan has announced that by 2027 its system will use Wave's self-driving software.

For a long time, however, Wave's approach made it an outlier. Other self-driving firms were writing rules for what a car should do in specific circumstances. When the middle lane is empty, hog it. That kind of thing. The largely Chinese and Silicon Valley-esque efforts were focusing on creating the infrastructure and hand engineering the rules to be able to make these systems behave.

And that produced incredible pilots and demonstrations, but I just was convinced that that wouldn't be the way that this technology would be able to scale globally. It's not a classical robotics problem, it's not an infrastructure problem, but it's an AI problem. If you're wondering why it's an AI problem, here's the explanation.

I feel glad every time we go driving, the scenarios are different, the weather's different. I was driving yesterday and a lollipop person came out on the pedestrian crossing. For those across the Atlantic, a lollipop person is a crossing guard. In Britain, they're required by law to carry an enormous lollipop.

which they lick whenever someone crosses the road in front of them. And was guiding the traffic using hand gestures and things like this, or just scenarios that are very, very hard to tell the car what factors to look for. But the beauty of... embodied AI is that it can learn patterns in the data that are more complex than we can hand engineer.

The beauty is that it can scale very efficiently. The idea of a self-driving system capable of making its own decisions has become much more orthodox now. But when Kendall first formed this conviction, as a PhD student at Cambridge University eight years ago, it was audacious. Finishing my PhD, I went and spoke with many automotive companies, big tech self-driving companies.

And I was given feedback that this would never work. It's unsafe. Why don't you just use it for perception technology? I certainly had the conviction there that no, this would be how things work. This is where I want to devote my time and look at. certainly not been a linear or exponential growth towards this point. There's been a lot of ups and downs and a lot of

points where any rational person would have looked at this and said this is a fool's errand. Working on a breakthrough technology like this requires a mixture of optimism, bloody mindedness and flexibility.

Kendall likes to talk about tackling the hardest problems first to minimise the risk of hitting a roadblock later. That explains one of the biggest early decisions he made to move Wave from Cambridge to London. We didn't go to a desert city where the sun always shines, you've got clean weather, you've got wide boulevard roads, but we went to this

medieval city of transport network with lots of merging. And I mean, we've quantified this. It's got seven times more cyclists and jaywalkers than a city like San Francisco. Of course, the weather is varied, and it's one of the hardest places to drive in the world. Good to know Britain still leads the world in some things. Starting there forced us to build scalable technology.

and also doing so with constraints, like just a single GPU on the car and cameras, not relying on all of this infrastructure. And that forcing function forced us to build technology that could innovate and ultimately be more efficient. perhaps by orders of magnitude compared to our competition. If WAVE's vision has been consistent, its path has been adaptable. Technologies change. Thinking develop.

Three years ago, a few of Kendall's team told him they thought it would be worth investing in language models for robotics. to improve the car's efficiency. This was before the world had woken up to the power of language models and I thought it was absurd. I was at the time looking to keep the company focused and I was like, no, no, no, let's stay on task here. The team persisted.

And they convinced me that language would be a key part of the future of robotics for a number of reasons. Like if you think about the promise of embodied AI, it goes beyond a... robotaxi service where you're sitting in the car and it's like you're on invisible railway tracks and you just get in and

and go but actually we can build a system that's a chauffeur experience that can interact with you ask you how you're doing what kind of driving you'd like schoolboy racer please with a donut at the end language gives you a great ability to introspect the model and understand how it's thinking. You can ask it for feedback or ask why is it doing a certain decision and build a sense of trust with it or delegate a task that maybe it wasn't originally going to do and ask it to behave in a new way.

Kendall trusted that his team saw something he couldn't, and Wave incorporated language into its models. The idea that a single system will be able to cope with whatever is thrown at it was given a boost last year when the company's tech was tested on American roads for the first time. It was incredible. On the very first day we were driving in the US, I was there. I jumped in the car going to San Francisco.

And we saw the car learn these new behaviours. So in the UK, of course, we don't have four-way stop signs. You can't turn right at a red light. We drive on the left-hand side of the road. In the US, I learned all those behaviors so quickly and I was able to demonstrate those on the very first day of testing. I mean, that was remarkable for me. WAVE has taught me a couple of things about innovation. One is the importance of a clear mission. Alex Kendall believed in his idea and

The other is that conviction shouldn't lead to rigidity. Innovation is not linear. It zigs and zags.

This blend of fixed points and flexibility leads us on to our next company. And like Monumental, it's also in the business of bricks. So there's this lever on the back that you just fire the car across the table. It's so fun. We just smashed this thing and this Formula One car came across and hit our mic. That's good. One of Dan Meehan's latest creations has just collided with our recording equipment, all in the name of play.

Mian is a designer for LEGO and responsible for its Formula One and Space Rangers. He is exceptionally, unashamedly enthusiastic about LEGO, whatever form it comes in. We made a handful of bricks, it was 12 or 14 of these bricks, out of a 4.5 billion year old meteorite. For me, it was just a wonderful project because I felt like a child again. Feeling like a child again is pretty much the mission statement at LEGO.

I've come to the Toymaker's headquarters in Billund in Denmark to learn about how they create must-have toys for kids and big kids. When I met him, Mian was already working on products slated for launch in a couple of years time. I asked to see them, but wasn't allowed to. Or even to visit the floor where the designers worked. New products are kept tightly under wraps.

The products he did show me had launched or were just about to. Mian taught me through the design process for the Space Brief. It started with research into what drives kids' passion for space. To find out, he interviewed children across five countries, including America, China and Germany.

Actually, they were thinking very differently about space, particularly from their parents. So they were thinking much more about it being about beauty and wonder and imagination and less about the traditional, maybe Apollo-era generation of striving to be an astronaut. Mian tries to understand what makes kids tick. He speaks to their families too. They're often the ones paying after all.

Once he's done his research, it's back to the leadership team with some proposals. And then they say, yes or no. depending on how well we deliver the information and the story. And then the designers start designing, sketching, and visiting Lego's vault of old products for inspiration. So it's just something to get an idea out of your head, thinking...

I think it needs to be about this big or I think it needs to be this colour. And then there's a process of refinements and, you know, taking that through peer review. The real test of a new toy comes when it gets into the hands of users. The very best part of my job is when we do kids' tests because kids are so honest and they will break the model instantly. Kids will also use models differently than the designers expected.

There was a six-wheeled space rover And for the whole of that playtest, that vehicle with six big wheels and they had suspension and it didn't drive for the whole play test it flew so the young boy that picked it up he just flew this thing around the room collecting little aliens and putting them in the back of the space truck

We asked about the six-wheel vehicle because there was a lot of time going into the mechanism because it had full suspension and it had six big wheels, which could we take those elements and change them for something? And we said, do we need to add the boosters? Do we need to put bigger wings on it? it's cool just as it is and it flies so i was like okay no changes to the six wheel robot right

That's why I love it because we spent so long making sure it was a really cool vehicle that we tested driving over at the desk and playing on the floor and a lot of action play that we did with it to make sure it stood up to the rigors of play. We never flew it. Talking to Mian is a bit like meeting the Tom Hanks character in the film Big.

where a youngster inside an adult's body creates hit toy after hit toy because he can see things from a child's perspective. We have a very structured way of being very innovative. And here's Dad.

Niels Christensen became the CEO of Lego in 2017. He knows the value of innovation. Half of the company's revenue each year comes from new products. If you talk about having your head on the block as an innovative company, there's probably a few companies that are as dependent on being creative and innovative all the time as we are. Why is that? Is it the nature of kids as consumers? Yes.

they really like something new so we also need to be super relevant to what happens right now if wicked launches then and that becomes really important then legos with wicked formula one is really big creating excitement among kids and this is a strategic partnership with Formula One and the legal group, and we try to push into that. But Christensen also knows that unbridled creativity can lead to chaos.

when you're a forward thinker the only thing you're afraid of is business as usual workday is the ai platform that transforms manage people and money today so you can transform tomorrow. It's how we're We all want the best of both. Dessert without calories, luxury without expense, and how about security without passwords? We secure identity for you. you can safely use any technology. You could build experiences your animal secure grow revenue without running up Scale easily.

The world's identity company. So a significant part of his job is channeling the enthusiasm of the designers. Big kids need boundaries too. It's not up to any designer just to design any new brick they would like to.

We need to produce the bricks and we want to produce the bricks as close to consumers as possible. I mean, we make billions and billions and billions of bricks every year and they need to be produced just at the right time to be packed into just the right box just before the consumers need them. With 50% new every year, I don't have a lot of inventory settings, so we produce it when it's needed, when it gets underway.

So how do you now allow somebody to be super innovative and have all the wild ideas while you restrict the complexity on the other hand so you can actually Maybe it's the secret sauce of when we actually

The secret sauce involves giving people like Dan Meehan the chance to let their imaginations occasionally run wild. Once a month we have this, uh... Fabulab Friday where all the designers they can do whatever they want. Fabulab? Fabulab Friday. Okay. Basically it means they can do whatever they want. I mean whatever skunk project they have or whatever.

Whatever play thing they need to play out or do, they just use that. So it's 5% of the working time where they can totally freely work outside any project they have because we need them to do that. Meehan had not mentioned Fabulab Fridays to me, but he had talked about another period set aside for out-of-the-box thinking.

Come to think of it, at Lego, most things are out of the box. We have what's called a creative boost week a couple of times a year where the whole design org will take a week to work on.

something there's a free creative boost week which is early in the year and that is as the title says where if you have an idea you have a week make it and then you present it to the whole design organizations we have a conference room where we set up little posters and you build your model and you take it and everyone comes and everybody looks and

There's been great ideas that have come through that. We then have a more focused creative booth week where maybe we have an idea like Lego space and we think, hey, we'd really like to make... six to ten products at a variety of price points and sizes and complexities and we need some help. So therefore, that's when you're saying, hey, space fans, hey, anyone who's got a burning desire to make something, come and join the team. So far, so fabulabular.

But at LEGO, Niels Christensen says every idea also needs to fit into a structured process. So at the end of the day, it finds its way into exactly the portfolio, representing all the different age groups, all the different themes and partners we have. We work together and just hit the portfolio we think is right for.

2026. Okay. All right. So that's your lead time. That's our lead time in actually making it happen. Yeah, because you mentioned a film like Wicked or, you know, so you have a sense of your... Part of this planning is the kind of... We have more than a sense. We have total insight on what's going to happen. Total insight. That's me told. I think it's just interesting that despite being super creative and innovative, we actually make decisions.

On what we think will be hot in 26, we do that by the end of 24. So it takes a lot as an organization to really know our bets and make those decisions be super clear.

on where we put our X. Yeah. So the constraints at the front end on the designers are kind of that partnerships, the calendar that's coming at the back end, it's the modular materials that have to be made. And within that, they can play as they wish. Exactly. I think that mastering... total creativity on one side and then really a very, very structured supply chain and huge factories on the other side and making that gel in a way, I think that's quite special for us.

As I left, Christensen went to fetch what I assumed would be his card, but instead of an oblong bit of paper, he handed me a little Lego figure. We're looking at a Lego representation of Neil. It says Niels B. Christensen on the front. I mean, this is your business card, right? It is. It literally is. So email address and phone.

They are pretty accurate. You could have argued they should have longer legs. You are quite tall. But that's back to complexity. Lego is very different to Wave and Monumental. The startups are trying to make a brand new technology work. At the Toymaker, innovation has been industrialized into a potent potpourri of playfulness and planning, creativity and calendars. But there are echoes between them.

A clear sense of purpose, whether building walls or driving cars or making bricks. A focus on feedback and a mixture of iteration and new ideas.

If these strands connect firms at the start of their journey and titans of their industry, what about a company which has to innovate in response to the challenge of a new technology? The breath of what people come to for search continues to leave me in a sense of awe. Liz Reed knows what you Google, though not in a creepy way. She's the tech giant's head of search.

If you go back to our mission of like organizing the world's information, people often like stop right there, organize the world's information. But there's like the second part about making it universally accessible and useful. And useful is a very different bar.

right? Reed's task is to get the world's most popular search engine prepped for the era of generative AI. You can have a medical book in a library that you can check out and it can be available to you but you may not understand any of it so great it's accessible but who cares right And so we constantly have this question about how can you make information

more useful to people. And so what we thought about a lot with AI Overviews is what are the types of questions that are either not really possible or they're really hard. for people to get a good understanding after, and how do we change them. AI overviews are the most visible manifestation of Reid's work on AI. In 100 countries, and for many search queries, Google's large language model now generates a summary answer at the top of the page.

The future is changing the sorts of questions that people ask. What you see with Genitive AI is that we'll often talk about people asking longer queries. And the question is, why do they ask longer queries? Well, they ask longer queries because they often put more of the pieces of their task in the query.

Right, okay, so instead of it just being, okay, I'm gonna search for... dog-friendly campsites and I'm going to search for kid-friendly campsites and I'm going to search for affordable campsites I'm like I need an affordable campsite that is available in this time and allows dogs and will be okay with my kid in a stroll that's actually the question they had Why not just search, how can I have the worst possible holiday?

The obvious problem for Google is that a good AI summary risks fewer people clicking on the links that power its revenues. This question of the ecosystem sometimes has this myth that users want either an AI overview or a link. And that's actually not what we see. What we see that actually a lot of people like about AI overviews is the fact that they can get bought. AI Overviews first went live in America in May 2024.

But the story began long before that, with Google's early work on large language models. Different teams sort of had demos or little projects together. And then at some point we sort of started to pull them together and we had more of a sense of what the product is. That's often the case with innovation where people will be like, aha, there was this one aha moment. Some of us haven't had an aha moment since 1985.

It wasn't like there was nothing and then there was an immediate aha moment, right? You're scratching the surface, you're finding out things. There were multiple versions of the overviews. In the months that we were building it, it went through many iterations, you would figure out this felt great, this felt too hard for people, this was confusing, this was too long, this was too short.

Search is really interesting because people have an expectation that they can get information very quickly. And so one of the things you're trying to do with AI overviews is figure out that right blend of ensuring that if you came in with a question, you can get to that answer as quickly as possible.

And also people like learning a little bit more than they necessarily asked, right? And so what's that right balance even within the response of the clarity? When should you elaborate? How do you help people have ideas of what to do next? As ever at Google, user behavior told the team what was working and what was not. If you put something bad at the top of the page, this will not cause people to use search more often. This will cause people to come to search less often. So that can be a signal.

How do they engage? If they're not happy with results, they often try again. They issue another query. So if you're shrinking the number of times that a user has to like... issue a query and then try again and try again. We've seen years and years over, that's a sign that people are happier. The questions people asked also guided the team's effort. And some of those early questions caused the AI to give answers so weird that they were newsworthy.

Some of those questionable bizarre results centered around the AI overview telling users that you can eat a certain amount of rocks a day for your health, it's healthy to do so. To be honest, if you ask me before, are people going to ask us, how many rocks should I eat a day?

I don't go like, yeah, that seems like a question on top of people's minds. But then they ask that question. You're like, oh, I need to go do something about that. And this is something that's been true well before generative AI and search, right? You have a known sort of area where you think you can improve. you open something up and then people start asking new questions in that space and then they surprise you with additional questions you never thought.

Nobody searched for opening hours 20 years ago on Google because their belief that they would get opening hours was basically nil right so they just didn't ask that question and then you started to do it and then people asked more and then they were like yeah but what's the opening hours for the breakfast uh you know menu and you're like oh my gosh okay this is a new question reed is trying to anticipate a fast moving future

But she's keen to emphasize that answers may be found in the past. I try and be careful, especially because Google's had a long tenure, about like when somebody says, we've tried that before. Most of the things that I think of as being really successful at Google or at least in the search and map space where I've worked in. They were tried two or three times before and failed.

Because the instinct was right, but the tech wasn't ready or the data wasn't ready or something wasn't ready. Like what? What do you have in mind there? Right now on Google Maps, we have quite a lot of... reviews from users and photos from users. We tried that for years before we could get any traction and then two things changed. The combination of notifications and understanding where a user was.

So if I go to you, Andrew, I'm like, hey, Andrew, would you like to review all the restaurants that you've been to in the last two months? Like, oh, now I have to think of the restaurants and I have to search for the restaurant one by one. Oh my gosh, there's a lot of work. Not really. I had about 800 Pret-a-Manger sandwiches. But imagine I had a more varied diet, and Reid's point is that an old idea can suddenly have its moment. And we know that you went to the restaurant yesterday.

And we can alert you and say, hey, would you like to write a review for that restaurant? Oh, that's a lot less work, right? You just click the notification, you click five stars. Woohoo, you've given a rating. And so the bar of friction. was really high for us before and we couldn't do that. And then suddenly the bar of friction for the user got way lower.

and we were able to interact with users. Data obviously matters to the iterative process Reid describes. This is Google, after all. But she says there's still room for intuition. I do think you have to mix it with a set of instinct, because... You're charting new territories, right? So you can't just look at data before. I think one thing that stuck with me that one of my UX designer peers years ago told me is, like, make sure you're falling in love with the problem, not the solution.

Falling in love with the problem, not the solution, is a nice aphorism. I can imagine repeating it to people as though I came up with it myself. then you want to be obsessed with that. And so you don't want to just focus on here's your first idea to do it. You want to get focused on testing. Does the solution actually solve the problem for that? I think a lot of the instinct, the question I sometimes push people on with that is like, what is the hypothesis behind the instinct?

You can't always measure everything, so you can't always have data, but the instinct is like, this is hard for people. Or watch somebody do this and see why it's difficult. Or if I could unlock this, this thing would happen. Liz Reid's advice reinforces many of the messages from the other people I've spoken to. Try things out. Get as close to the customer as you can and be prepared to get things wrong.

I'm just trying to think of our very first pilot we did. We didn't even know what to look for, so we focused a lot on wall quality obviously because that was important. Back in the Netherlands, Salah al-Fajji is an evangelist for this approach. Being out on the building site, seeing what his robots do in the wild, is the way Monumental learns and improves.

and then we realized we actually missed two or three key things including the staining of the bricks just like visually their color it sounds so stupid as i say it right but like you're just like focused on like where do the bricks go what do they look like and then we realized like the way we built the wall the way we laid the mortar even if you clean it up afterwards like half the bricks were like stained and had mortar on them which you could not remove

There's no one way to innovate. Lego is churning out new products with a two-year lead time. Wave and Monumental are moving towards a founder's vision. Google is overhauling the world's most popular webpage in mid-air. But there are common themes. One, forget the 1980s earworms. Breakthroughs very rarely come from aha moments. You often have to work towards something for years, and you don't know when the market will be ready for it. 2. Iterate and innovate.

A portfolio approach pays dividends. Whether you do it formally or not, give people space to work on big new ideas, as well as improvements to existing ones. 3. Test and learn. Whether it's a building site or London streets or playing children, get feedback and be ready to change course. There's a phrase that I've found useful for at least the past 10 minutes of my career. Fall in love with the problem, not the solution.

Next week, I'll look at the aspect of office life that causes people the most stress. Public speaking. Beautiful. Give me one more. I'm going to not look at you this time. In this season of Boss Class, we're releasing an extended interview to accompany each episode. On this week's Meet the Boss interview, I talk with Liz Reed of Google and find out more about how people search, why dog food matters to the firm.

and what three-year-olds can teach all of us. They ask whatever question comes to mind because they don't worry about how hard it is to answer. They assume you know everything. and coming up on the rest of this season of Boss Cars. I've seen many leaders and managers over my career that get so stuck in the here and now as opposed to

Let's look around a corner. And I think what the jazz band does is have an alternative for dealing with complexity. Things are going to go wrong. The question is, what happens next? What's the next note? So what's the secret of a good negotiator? You just have to be able to shut your mouth and listen well. To listen well, you'll need to be a subscriber. Right now, you can sign up for Half Price. just a couple of dollars a month search economist podcasts plus for our best offer

We'd also love to get your thoughts about what you've heard and what you'd like to hear on the show. Email us at podcasts at economist.com with the subject line Boss Club. Boss Class Season 2 is produced by Alicia Burrell, Sam Colbert, and Pete Norton. Our sound designer is Wei Dong Lin. Original music by Darren Ong. The series editor is Claire Reid. Our executive producer is John Shields. I'm Andrew Palmer. This is The Economist.

Thank you for listening. You can hear all of Andrew's interview with Liz Reed of Google and every episode in this series by searching for Boss Class in your podcast app. We'll bring you another episode of Boss Class in this feed next week. When you're a forward thinker, the only thing you're afraid of is business as usual. Workday is the AI platform that transforms the way people and money today It's how we're moving. We all want the best of both.

without calories, luxury without expense, and how about security without passwords? With Okta, it's possible. We secure identity for your business so you can safely use any technology. You could build experiences that Grow revenue without running up costs Scale easily. the best of both The world's identity company.