Hey, guys. Welcome to the podcast. My guest today is Jeff Vaughn. He is director of North America field, MSLs for Inviso Engage. And we talk about rethinking for success. It's top lessons for MSL's embracing the mindset through insights of Adam Grant's book, Think Again. So it's kinda like a book review. Really cool conversation. Hope you guys like it. Don't forget to follow me on LinkedIn and check us out on MSL talk live, which is the 1st Tuesday of every month, typically.
And that's at 1:30 PM EST, and that's on LinkedIn. Welcome to MSL talk with Tom Caravella, a podcast specifically designed for MSLs and all things field medical. Hey, Jeff. Welcome to the podcast, my friend. Welcome back. This is what? The 3rd time, I think? I think the 3rd time, Tom. Yeah. Three times is a charm. Well, listen, when you get the rock stars, you gotta keep them coming back. You know what I'm talking about? Thank you. I appreciate it. Well, this is awesome.
Guys, just for a little background, Jeff had reached out and approached me on this idea, which was to do a podcast on the book, Think Again. I actually read the book as per Jeff's suggestion. It is awesome. I would recommend it. We're gonna break it down today. And we're gonna put it into kind of a top ten lessons kinda deal, which is gonna be amazing. So before we get to do that, Jeff, why don't you introduce yourself and tell everybody who you are?
Thanks, Tom. I work for Inisio Engage and currently oversee our medical science liaison teams in North America. Have been with the company for almost 3 years now, and, primarily, we work with the large and small pharma companies, small biotechs, and engaging strategy and implementation of field teams. So I've been doing that and have stepped away from the individual contributor role, but I really enjoy my time, with Inisio.
It's a great company and certainly, great culture, but, love to stay grounded and pass on some information and further knowledge for our MSLs. And just so you guys know, it was Jeff's birthday over the weekend, so we can all collectively wish our boy, Jeff, a happy birthday. He's the best, and that's why I love having him on because he's just such a good guy and such a wealth of information. So happy birthday, brother.
Thanks, Tom. And, before we get started, I just wanna make an announcement this episode is sponsored by Inisio Engage. And if you guys don't know who Jeff's company is, Invisio is a commercialization and strategic engagement partner for the health care industry, delivering solutions to meet the needs of patients, providers, payers, and pharmaceutical companies to improve the treatment experience and outcomes.
Invisio creates personalized, impactful experiences and delivers an average of 5,000,000 engagements annually across all health care stakeholders. So these guys are legit. Thank you guys for your sponsorship, and let's jump into it. So first question, I think we should start with, is let's tell everybody who is Adam Grant, and how did you come across this guy, and what's he all about?
Yeah. So I came across his book because oftentimes when I'm when I'm leading teams or people are suggesting, hey, what books could help me become a better MSL or, you know, a self improvement type of design. I'm always looking for, you know, finding a better way to do business. And so Adam Grant came along, and I really was intrigued by the title of the book called Think Again. And think again, more or less, asked the questions about motivation and creativity, within teams.
And, you know, we've I know you've had podcasts in the past about the integrated technology of AI, But this goes back to rethinking the group dynamic and what are we doing with boots on the ground, and how are we having these conversations. And going back to the relevance of the conversations and how we can kind of stop the status quo of how we're being taught and think outside the box. So Adam Grant did this.
He's a organizational psychiatrist, psychologist at, Penn and teaches at the Wharton School of Business. He's had, I would say, 3 or 4 bestseller books. This is probably the latest that he has and has been on numerous TED Talks. So just taking that into consideration, I thought this would be a great topic to bring to the podcast today. And we haven't done anything like this. And it I think what's great about it is it does, it makes you think. It makes you rethink. It makes you better.
And I don't wanna get into how because we're gonna talk about that, but this the one thing that this book did for me was it did force me to rethink, and and step outside myself and think differently, than I I normally would or normally do. So without jumping too far ahead, why don't we start we decided to do this in kind of like the old popular kind of top ten list and maybe break it down into lessons. So what jumps out at you first?
What's the number 1 or what's the first lesson that you pull from this book? Yeah. I mean, if you go online and you look at sort of a staple of the top 10 or 15 points that he makes in his book, I think when I first when I first started doing a little bit of investigation, I saw 15, 20, 30 topics that he covered during the book. And as you said to yourself, you read it, you took a lot from it.
I wanted to take 10 top lessons and and pull out of that book into what would be, I think, relevant to the MSL role. Mhmm. And, starting sort of with the first point, intellectual humility and knowledge sharing. And I wanted to kind of break this down a little bit. I think what stands out amongst people that I interview for perspective positions, MSL positions, is not necessarily what you know, but really just finding where the humility lies within the conversation.
And, you know, not knowing something is not a merit of a lack of confidence, but it shows the viewer or whoever you're speaking with that you do have a human side to you that that brings out. So I thought really, that's an important topic. And under this bridge, if you will, there's active listening, admitting limitations and seeking answers, and then the continuous learning and professional development piece.
I think out of those sub bullets, the active listening is something that really cued me on because we have a tendency when we first start out in the MSL role is here is the information, regurgitate it, spit it out. Right? These are the facts. You know? And where I find the most engaging interactions in meetings coming from is when I stop talking and I start listening to that KOL.
And everybody wants attention, especially on Zoom and the media platforms that we have, but I felt like I I could pull more of those insights out by stopping and listening and asking the based off of the answers that that KOL is providing me. It's it performs a little bit of empathetic engagement with our health care providers. So I think that's a very valuable tool and a really good point to start this list out.
I think going on to that is really just admitting limitations and seeking those answers. You know, one of the first things that I was taught when I first started out as an MSL was, you know, don't fudge it. If you don't know the answer, you know, admit that you don't know the answer and follow-up. And I think that's sort of a staple that's kind of drilled into everyone's head when they go into talk to a KOL.
But I can't underemphasize the point that, you know, this creates a boundary in our knowledge. And some of that times that vulnerability brings out more of a relationship in the end because that person says, hey. You know what? I need to build trust with this person. And I, knowing all the answers is, to me, not really it doesn't bring the the the relationship to to buy.
People wanna see that vulnerability and admitting that you have limitations or you don't have the answers is not necessarily meaning that you're not an expert or, you know, you don't, you know, have what they want. Go back, find that answer, respond back as soon as you can. And maybe there isn't an answer to it. And maybe that's another conversation that you can have, you know, with that KOL. But we all understand this is a continuous learning process. Right?
And that's part of our professional development. I always say too to step outside of your boundaries when you are learning and you're trying to professionally develop. You know, a lot of what is catered to us in terms of scientific information is provided for the company that we we work for. Right?
Mhmm. But part of going to congresses and doing the CMEs, looking at what the competition is coming out with, opens our mind a little bit more, and participating in the training programs, finding out what the latest research, you know, in the particular compound or drug that you might be talking about. Also, opens up maybe that FAQ document to say, alright. Well, I know I'm gonna might go back into this meeting, and my KOL might ask me about the competitor space. What do I know about it?
What do I know about the most recent trends? So I think those are the the big take homes from that first point, Tom. Yeah. And and, like, guys, keep in mind too, having anyone that hasn't read the book, which I assume there's a lot of people that haven't read this. You know, doctor Grant talks about or Adam Grant talks about, how to it's all about rethinking or thinking again, questioning, kinda questioning yourself and how you're doing things.
And a lot of times, when you're an MSL, you think you have to have all the answers. You think you have to be the subject matter expert. You think that you can't be vulnerable, or you can't have limitations, or you have to be the go to person because that's your job. And you're in front of a very important KOL, and you but that's the whole point of this first topic is you don't have to. And you can show there's a human side to you, and you can be vulnerable.
And by doing so, that can actually solidify your relationship. So you have to open yourself up to thinking that way. So let's go to number 2. What's the second lesson you wanna talk about? 2nd lesson is rethinking the accurate information and how to disseminate it. And under that is just a continual evaluation of the information. We don't stop where the data ends and may maybe having a critical eye to the approach of learning that information.
How we do that is I thought this was an interesting piece to this puzzle is meeting overload. When we, as leaders or leading a team, schedule meetings, I think everyone could agree, including yourself. You go to your calendar and it's like meeting on top of meeting, but you really have to be able to, you know, as a leader, organize and structure these meetings where it's not a standard agenda.
And you're inviting people that are critical to the conversation instead of the, you know, a laundry list of people to join. You know, because I want the meetings that I organize to be active meetings where everybody is participating. And oftentimes, you know, there's a tendency for us to just go ahead and take the standard laundry list of folks that are normally on this meeting and invite them all. You know? But take a take a better look, take a step back and say, alright.
Who do I need to invite into this meeting that would have a contribution? Someone that, you know, is an active listener, somebody that can contribute to the data, the information. Maybe it's someone that is, you know, not necessarily a proponent to what we have to say and can have an outside of the box conversation about, well, did you think about this?
You know, I always invite the critics because they can give us very valuable information about how we disseminate and how we can critically evaluate the information that we receive.
Part of that too, and and I thought this was an an interesting way to organize that type of meeting is to instead of standard topic agendas and sending it out to the group, is to kind of start with questions instead of the answers and provide questions to the group that you intend to have the meeting with and have them answer and ready to prepare to discuss when you move forward. And I don't, I'll tell you.
I've been guilty of not doing that, but it's making me rethink my approach, if you will, of how to organize team building and have some conversations that could, you know, develop into something that we normally don't do. I love this one because this is this is one of those that you don't really think about it because you just do it. It's just something. Well, this is how we do it around here.
This is how many meetings you have, and this is how the meetings are structured, and this is how it works. And it's interesting. I just got done reading a book that talked about how, to be more effective, you should try not to have a lot of internal meetings early in the morning. Get the critical tasks done, get the most important things done earlier in the morning.
And then if there's any internal meetings that you have to have, and again, it's easier for me as on the service side of the the equation, obviously. But I'm saying, if you can to cater to the most important thing, which is the customer and the external meetings and what you need to do to excel in your job, and then any of the internal stuff that could be pushed off until the second half of the day, Now you're sharpest.
You're getting the most out of that morning those morning hours for the most important, what's gonna really move the needle within your job. So that goes kinda goes along the same lines with this Adam Grant his philosophy and what you're talking about. So I love that one. So what about number 3? This is unlearning to foster growth, and I think we're all geared as scientists to champion evidence based medicine, and, you know, I would further foot stop that.
We are the advocates for evidence based medicine, based on our health care relationships that we have with our professionals and our organization and making sure that what we're having is a conversation based off of transparency. But sometimes you're gonna get into a situation where, like I would mention before, you don't know the answers, or you make a mistake in conveying that information.
And I think admitting that you're wrong isn't an admission of incompetence, especially if you are there to discuss, hey, here are the reasons why. Recognizing these mistakes, I think, can't be underestimated. I believe that, one of the stories that kind of stands in my mind is when I first started out as an MSL, I was in cardiovascular research. My director said, hey, I need you to go to this conference for interventional cardiologists. And it was a very technical focused, conference.
And, one of the best sessions that was held during the conference was a group of cardiologists that stood up on a podium for an hour, and they went over various case studies where they screwed up. And it was resounding, you know, and it was it it helped sometimes to laugh at yourself, to say, you know, I'm not perfect. Yeah. And, you know, I've I've looked I perused through the various years that they had this conference.
And this topic session has stayed on point every year because it was so well received. I mean, standing ovation, Tom. Really? By the guy, and then they judge at the end after everybody has done their, you know, cases, they they have a vote and on who made the biggest mistake and and how it was presented. And it was sort of like highlighting not necessarily the the cloud class clown, but really showing who was the most humble.
And the people that ended up winning these competitions were the ones that, hey, openly admitted, hey. This was a mistake of mine. Yeah. And especially, you know, mistake of mine. Yeah. And especially, you know, your your specialists, as as you're aware of, they're probably the least personality trait to admit that they made a mistake.
But that's what made it so, you know, enticing to hear is that people on both sides, not just the an MSL, but maybe the person that you're speaking to, they're human. They make mistakes. And when they can open up, that also opens up that relationship, I believe. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. I love that. That's a good one. That's a good one. You don't you don't think about that.
You don't think that but by the standing ovation, it's obvious that people want they wanna see again, I we're getting back to this vulnerability piece, but they wanna see real. They wanna see transparency. And I think that that's that's an important key, which is not the norm. The norm is put your best self out there, especially with social media. It's like you see all this stuff and it's like, what's real, what's not?
So when you do get a dose of reality from somebody and it's, and it's the blooper reel, people love the blooper reel. So Right. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Cool. What about number 4? Yeah. This is talking about really finding a way to embrace discomfort in communication. Mhmm. I think by right, we always want to feel like not only are we bringing accuracy to the conversation and relevancy, but sometimes, you know, there's gonna be pushback.
And I feel like we don't, as a profession, do a good enough job of creating a challenge network. And what do I mean by that? That's really internally with your teams, create embracing the uncertainty and coming up with, you know, exposure therapies to say, all right, what if someone came back and pushed on this? How would you respond during that conversation?
It's not an a matter of if, it is when it's going to occur, because I can tell you that there's probably numerous occasions where, you know, you always get a stickler in the crowd that's gonna be hell bent on, you know, trying to discredit you or disprove you or, you know, make you squirm in your chair. And I think a good practice is learning internally to adapt to those diverse audiences and welcoming the constructive feedback that they give you. That's part of building that relationship.
So, you know, I I think this is something that we don't do a good enough job with. And, when I was reading the book, I wanted to find out, well, what suggestions does Adam Grant have about this? And he says, internally, you know, you you want to evaluate or self evaluate your performance. Right? And so if you gave a speech and you came back and someone asked, how do you think you did? You know, the tendency is always to kinda upgrade yourself. Right?
Yeah. Adam suggests that you give yourself a second score. Think about it, sleep over it overnight, you know, come back the next day and then think about, like, okay, how was the execution? Did I deliver this accurately? What about the naysayers in the group? How did I handle that? And give yourself more of a objective score, you know, at that point. But that conditions you a little better to receive that negative feedback. The other thing is making a list of the negative feedback.
So if you're going into a prospective meeting with someone, don't always put the list of positives down, but think about the negatives and think about the harshest comments that could come out of that conversation. This is part of pre meeting planning, but I think it's good to expect the worst sometimes because sometimes it softens the blow a little bit and it gives you a little bit of a mental break to be able to handle that, you know, objectively. Yeah. It's like the accountability partner.
You know, it's sometimes you have to be the accountability partner and sometimes point some things out internally, externally, obviously, in a very calculated way, very careful way. But, you know, conflict is a part of a healthy relationship. How you handle it is the most important piece of it. So, and I don't mean conflict. Confrontation. Not Right. Not what I mean, but challenge.
Yeah. I I think too when we we talk about medical insights, you know, there's always a tendency to prioritize things under listening priorities, what the company is obviously gearing towards from a strategic standpoint, and I would agree with that piece of it. But I think equally as important is to from your conversations with those the the people that do push back, on the negative comments, those negative comments can be impactful Mhmm. To the company.
So sometimes you gotta have to hear from others to say, well, wait a second. Did we did we think about that? And and I found that, you know, going over medical insights in a large committee with a with a company, you know, there's not enough, well, at least the ones that stand out in my mind are the ones that do push back and you go, god, I can't believe we didn't think about that. But that came out of, you know, some of that negative, you know, feedback. Yeah. People need to hear that.
Yeah. Yeah. That's how you learn. That's how you grow. That's it. That's it. Awesome. So so we're we're going to number 5. Right? We're let's see. We're looking at probably around over on time. That's alright, though. We're we we'll we'll be good. We're gonna go a little longer than we normally do, but we're on number 5, I believe. Right? Yeah. And this one I can go through pretty quickly.
I mean, this kinda went back into a little bit more of what I was saying before is just balancing the certainty with the uncertainty. And part of that is just, you know, deciphering and filtering through all the mud to find out. Alright. You know, what tools can we find to kind of base our decisions on available evidence? I think part of it's just going in with an open mind and staying informed.
Those are just really basic beliefs and I think entrenched into his balancing of, you know, the give and take. And this goes also back to the conversation about hearing active listening instead of speaking all the time, and promoting that open balance. And essentially, those are consistent updates of just ensuring that you're well prepared for the meeting. Yep. Awesome. Yeah. I like that one. I like number 7 too. Let's talk or what what are we on? Number 6. I'm sorry.
6. Yeah. This is my favorite one. I'll be honest with you. It's really the givers, takers, and matchers. So Adam Grant, through his research, defined that, you know, there are 3 personality traits within a team that exist. There are your givers, your matchers, and your takers. And I would I would, imagine most of the audience will know what the tag takers are. They're the self promoters. They're they're basically, draining a team for information.
They are the ones that rise very quickly and they fall very quickly. So, you know, you kinda wanna when you're when you're trying to form a team, you wanna try to avoid the straight takers. Interestingly enough, your matchers sort of play the equal balance, but it's always a quid pro quo. So if if they're gonna give you something, they're gonna want something in return. And usually, the, the the takers are the ones that fall to the matchers.
And and your givers create the the most, I would say, fruitful leaders in a group. But, you know, there's a caveat to that. So by being a giver, you also have to avoid being a doormat to the takers in the group. And, it's interesting when Adam Grant was talking about, you know, how do you how do you pull out, you know, a taker from an interview?
And, I mean, this this is your wheelhouse, Tom, you know, particularly when you're you're interviewing so many candidates, is how do you discern you've got maybe an hour to talk to a candidate to find out, are they a good fit? Right? And we always talk about a good fit. How do you discern those takers from the rest of the group? And what Adam Grant suggested was a sort of a questionnaire. He says, you know, you're going to get takers that will agree and disagree. Right?
So the disagreeable takers are gonna be easy to spot. Right? They're gonna be no saying that you're naysayers. Nothing's right. You're wrong. You know? And it's an easy, quick, you know, interview for me. It's a little harder when you get a taker that's agreeable. Mhmm. Because on the surface, you you have to dig a little deeper to find out, you know, what the true personality is. So there was a great question that that, Adam suggested on those type of personality traits.
He says, I always ask the perceived takers that are agreeable. List 4 people's careers that you fundamentally improved. And he said that the takers will always list people that are above their hierarchy. And because they're always wanting to jump that next cycle, he said, the ones that are he believes that are essential to have on the team, but are your agreeable takers are the ones that really will list those 4 people that are below their hierarchy.
Because he said you you can tell a lot from an individual on how they treat wait staff, an Uber driver. You know, there's where the humility points in. They can give you the answers and but, you know, you might not wanna hear it, but it needs to be heard. And and so I think discerning these these matchers, the takers, and the givers is really important. And to avoid the burnout from a leader that is a giver, one of the recommendations was have that giver give 5 minutes of a give.
Meaning that sometimes it often takes just a simple thank you or an appreciation, and they want to help you. They want to give you those answers. But as a group, you have to ask. So when you're formulating this team, you wanna have not just all givers, all takers, all matchers. You wanna have a nice rounded viewpoint, but then you also wanna encourage that positivity and allow that giver to give, if that makes sense.
Sure. Yeah. You know, and and this this is just goes back because you mentioned the interview thing because that always resonates with me. And I thought the same thing as I was reading this, and I thought it was really great, some of the examples you gave.
But you're gonna be you need to evaluate people from the time they walk in till the time they leave and how they treat everyone because you'll get an understanding how responsive they are, and you'll get an understanding of the type of person they are. And that goes both ways. Meaning, when you're doing the hiring, you wanna pay really close attention to all the details.
But when you're a candidate, you have to pay attention to how you act and make sure that you're not letting your guard not just letting your guard down, but you wanna be your authentic self where you wanna be on your best behavior. The ultimate trick, though, is in interviewing, everybody's on their best behavior. It's the honeymoon. You don't know how the marriage is gonna go until after the honeymoon. Right? So it's really hard to kinda pick these out.
So I love the example, that question that he gives, because it almost forces the person to answer not knowing that they're gonna be graded on that answer. So I think that's a great way to do it. So let's go to, number 7. Yeah. I think this is also going back to the main theme of creating psychological safety within your teams. It's okay to obviously not have the right answer.
And as a team leader, you need to encourage your team that there's a there's a common ground and a safe place internally within those team meetings to speak out. There's a really, there's several leaders in industry that have done this before, and I feel like creating a meritocracy within the group encourages involvement, not just the active listing part of it. But as a leader, you need to say, hey, look, within this team structure, you know, this is King Arthur and the round table, so to speak.
Everybody has an equal voice. I I think that the best teams that I've had in the past have always been set up that way to realize that, you know, not only does it give maybe some of the people that are on one end of the bell curve that are sort of, like, hesitant, a little bit introverted. It gives them encouragement to speak out because their voices need to be heard equally as as much as your 8 players do within your team.
And I think it's the responsibility of leadership to encourage that safety net to say, it's okay. Let's hear it. Now, having said that, there's still the respectfulness, you know, to have during the team. You know, you don't wanna trash others, so to necessary. And in order to do that, it comes from the top. And you have to have that understanding when you set up these meetings, like, hey. Look. For us to be productive, we need to create the safety net within us within our teams.
Yep. Yep. And the next one I have to jump right to because I love the expert negotiator part of the equation. I know that was number 8 for you. So let's talk about that. Yeah. It's sort of acknowledging common ground. And instead of being on the defense, allowing the conversation to develop. And, you know, if you do get pushed back, I thought this was a great response.
You know, if you go in with a proposal, you know you have a critic that you're meeting, you know there's gonna be, like, some consternation going down the the road. Find out what they see, you know, in the merit of your proposal or don't see. Mhmm. So it's sort of opening the conversation about, like, okay, you're negative about this, but tell me a little bit why you're that way. Mhmm. So I can better understand how we can improve or, you know, let me think about this.
You know, maybe this is an insight for our company to think about. It's learning more about the person behind that statement. And I think negotiating isn't a one way street as we know. It's always a two way street, but it's opening up a little bit more of that curiosity mindset Mhmm. That I often look for when I look for MSLs to build a team.
I want the curious mindset to allow those type of conversations to go into, well, tell me about why you feel this way, and opening up, but pushing it back over to them to explain.
You know, when you mentioned empathy before, and we're getting back to that with this, Tell me why is is is a great question to to find out about the other person, the other person's feelings, and that's an empathetic gesture is to show and and and try to put yourself in the other person's shoes or at least give the other person, the ability to get on the same page with you by expressing what it is that's most important. And then that way, you can uncover a lot.
And when you uncover a lot, that could put you in a much better position. So I love that. Number 9. We're almost done. We got 2 more. Alright. Last thing is really just in my mind is the what we learn in school doesn't really equate to what we find out in the real world. And we get a lot of candidates that are fresh out of school, gone through fellowship, have been taught, you know, their respective clinical acumen. They come and they they wanna do an MSL role.
And I feel like, you know, it's not really, you know, what you think, but rather how do you think. And to expand on that a little bit more, it's sort of embracing the complexity and all the points that we've discussed prior to this point is experience is is key to learning your mistakes and failure throughout the journey. And learning to embrace that failure is as important as learning and promoting the successes that you have during your journey as an MSL.
So I feel like how you could do this, you know, prior to becoming an MSL is looking outside the box and educating yourself on books like this, where you're thinking outside the box, you're getting a perspective of the other point of view, learning to embrace that uncomfortable conversation, how you handle it, how you can explain your career paths and give whoever you're that's interviewing you a picture of your life and sort of the humility piece to it.
When you go through a a job resume and you're explaining I'm explaining to you, Tom, well, this is what happened, you get a sense that they're not blaming somebody, you know, for it, you know, or trashing the company that they did work for. But but telling the story, and that's what people wanna hear. They wanna see the human side come out to you. So I think embracing complexity encompasses all of these points. Yeah. Being open minded, embracing the uncertainty, and adapting to your audience.
Yeah. No. That's a good one. I love that one. That's one of my favorites. And it's a good way to close it out too. I mean, we got one more, but that was that's a good way to kinda round out and almost summarize because it it does a good job in in in providing a little bit of a summary.
But, you know, I would encourage everybody to read the book because it it gives you I it really gives you a lot of ideas to think differently than you normally do and talks a lot about some of the decisions that have been made historically in business that have gone either really, really well or really bad because of people, thinking the same way as this, you know, following the status quo and not challenging the their the the thought process or what the future might look like.
The BlackBerry, Kodak, some some of the the companies that you don't see around anymore because there's Sony and there's Apple. So, anyway, I don't wanna I don't wanna be a spoiler when it comes to that part of it. You have to read the book. But, so how do you wanna finish this off, Jeff? Yeah. The last point is just encouraging sampling of the personality types within your team.
When I first started out here at Inisio and other companies as well, one of the tools that we were encouraged to embrace with the teams is find out what type of personality your team is. You know, I think you've heard the the color designations with personalities, reds, blues, yellows. I think it's important to assess that from, you know, a personality standpoint.
I have listed a couple of, different sources that you can go to, to kind of engage, but I feel like this is probably an important step when you're starting to build that team, is to find out the personality within your respective teams to figure out, alright, where's my blues? Where's the data driven folks? Where are the yellows? There's different acronyms to describe it.
But I think getting a process put in place is essential to establishing what type of personality your team carries and how that continuity can be melded into a diverse, you know, productive group. There is there are some quizzes that are available too on Adam Grant's website that further kind of delineate some of these points. And like you were saying, I would encourage everyone to read the book.
But then, as a leader, also set a standard to recommend different self improvement books to your team, not just Adam Grant's, but just in general. You want to build your team. This is part of that giver, mentality, Tom. But, you know, don't stop, you know, within, you know, just the set boundaries that maybe you have when you first start out. And everybody wants to grow, everybody wants to find a place, a safe place, but find out what their passions are.
And part of doing that is encouraging them to read and research what others have done and maybe failed at or succeeded. Yeah. Well, that is awesome. And I encourage everyone to take this advice because I think it's really good stuff. And, Jeff, as always, thank you for coming on, my friend. You are the man. And guys, don't forget to check out Inizio Engage. You just it's I n I z I o. Awesome company. Congrats to you, Jeff, on all your success and the success of the organization.
And thank you for coming on and and, you're always welcome, my friend. I always love talking to you and love seeing you out at conferences, and this is one of the the favorite parts about my job. Thanks for having me, Tom. Appreciate it. Alright, guys. That's our show for today. Thank you for sharing and and, supporting us, and, we will see you next time.
Thank you so much for listening to the show, and if you enjoyed it, please subscribe so that you don't miss an episode in the future and feel free to leave a rating or a review or a comment. Thanks again, and we look forward to seeing you soon.