Why Employee Well-Being Has The Best ROI with Josh Allan Dykstra

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:00:00]:
Companies over the last few decades, if we look at a stat like engagement. Right. Or a metric like engagement, it’s historically terrible.Right.Like, so ever since Gallup has started measuring it, it’s mostly been 2/3 of people are kind of meh about work or worse. And so we’ve not actually done a very good job of creating institutional places for people to where they’re going to spend the majority of their waking adult lives doing things they’ve historically not been very motivational or inspirational to. Just imagine what we could accomplish if we created institutions that were inspirational to the people who work there.

Frank Cottle [00:00:38 ]:
Josh, welcome to the Future Work podcast. I’m really excited to have you here. I mean, gosh, you’ve worked with some of the biggest brands in the world. So right off I’m going to ask you, what pattern have you seen companies that truly engage with their employees are using versus those that are stuck in the old model of work?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:01:02]:
Yeah. Well, thank you for having me, Frank. It’s really lovely to be here. And I, you know, something that I see consistently is that the organizations who really care about people, their leaders, are consistently trying to maximize for the energy of the people that work there. So they’re, they’re trying to. There’s a whole lot of things inside the work, the way we work today, that suck the energy out of people. But the best leaders try their best to remove those obstacles to create better systems that don’t suck the life out of people that, you know, so they create better processes around everything as much as they possibly can.

Frank Cottle [00:01:48 ]:
What would be. Can you give us some examples of some of what some of those things might be? I mean, right now, in this country, in the United States, we’ve got so many political changes going on that are impacting a lot of business changes and shareholders versus boards on a variety of issues. What are some examples of companies that are really energizing and seeing the benefit of it? It’s one thing to say we got a great energy going here. Yeah. Really? What’s your year end look like? Prove it. Prove that the energy has an roi. And are you seeing that or is it really seeing other places, like longer retention, better recruiting? Where are you seeing this energy come through?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:02:41 ]:
Yeah, I think we see this in, so in the, in the study of just kind of like the work of human expansion inside organizations for the last 20 years. Right. So my, my perspective on this is that there’s plenty of really good examples and we can go all the way back to books like Firms of Endearment. Right. If so if people want a list of organizations that work this way and the ROI attached to it, you can go find that research. It’s not very hard to find. It’s been out for a really long time. My larger concern these days is why aren’t more companies doing this? Right. So why aren’t more organizations actually, since we know we’re, we, we know definitively at this point that helping humans be better at work creates better work outcomes. And you just have to look at it over a long enough time horizon. So this is where it becomes a little bit challenging is that. And I think maybe one of the, one of the foundational kind of core problems is that business is, is managed in a short term framework. Right. We’re looking especially publicly, Publicly, you know, traded companies, it is day to day. Yep, yep. And if, and if the senior leaders don’t kind of adhere to those, those metrics, they lose their jobs. And so the problem is that we’ve got this kind of like quarterly or daily to your point, structure of like how we’re measuring the success of our organizations. But humans are inherently a long term investment. Right. We have 30 to 40 year long careers. So what we find is, we find this kind of tension between leaders who really want to do the right thing and they want to do the work of human expansion inside their companies. But they’re constantly kind of being torn by the fiduciary rules that they also feel obligated to withhold, to uphold. So this becomes the larger challenge. From my perspective, we can find tons of examples of companies who do this where we can look at a Gallup engagement data for the last, I don’t know, probably almost going on three decades now. Right. There really isn’t any question, at least in my mind, that the work of human expansion is good for company outputs. You just have to look at it in a long enough time horizon for it to make sense.

Frank Cottle [00:04:57 ]:
Well, if this data is available, which I have seen it and I believe you’re, you’re absolutely correct, by the way. I’ve had a 55 year career, so I’m, I’m, I’m really going, yes, exactly. They’re subhuman or ultra human, I don’t know. But assuming the data is all correct and everything, and everybody can see this, this obvious characteristic and benefit as you’re defining it, and we can look at companies and leaders that have proven it through time, why isn’t it more of a norm? Why do companies still think prioritizing employee well being comes at the expense of productivity and profits. Why are they stuck there? If everybody knows, the shareholders should know it too. And not all shareholders are day traders. Most institutional shareholders are looking for a stable, ongoing, continued growth cycle that they can count on. And they’d rather have something they can count on than something that’s explosive and all over the place.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:06:10 ]:
Yeah. So I think what we’re seeing here is something that, that Deming, so one of the great kind of systems thinkers of the last century, his, one of his great quotes is that a bad system will beat a good person every time. And so I think in order to get to the answer of what you’re asking, Frank, we’ve got to look, it’s a system level problem. We’ve got a system here that’s dictating these kind of short term thinking cycles and short term action cycles. And until the system is reformed, you know, is until the system is actually kind of reimagined, then we will forever kind of be stuck in this short term thinking cycle that we’re in now. And that leads to all sorts of, leads to all sorts of problems down the road. Because to your point, we want to think more long term.

Frank Cottle [00:07:05 ]:
Right?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:07:05 ]:
I think, I think many people do want longer term investments. They want companies that’ll stick around. We’re stuck in this system that demands short term returns.

Frank Cottle [00:07:20]:
So I’m going to lay blame on this in your words, by the way, in your name. What you’re saying really is that the investors are responsible for the challenges that companies have in putting long term plans together. And if the investors, the system of raising capital or capital support isn’t aligned with the companies who want to align with their employees who want to take this forward, then the system will always fail. But aren’t there always renegades to the system? No matter what people that, you know, everybody’s going left, I’m going to go right. I think we’ve seen a lot of our most successful industry leaders of various industries take contrarian positions and prove that they’re the path as opposed to the other.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:08:27 ]:
Yeah, I think from like a business entrepreneurial perspective that’s true. But I don’t really see anyone challenging the status quo of this dominant worldview that this is like a 50 year old kind of economics perspective of that the purpose of business is to maximize shareholder return.

Frank Cottle [00:08:44 ]:
Right.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:08:45 ]:
So we’re kind of living on the back of that philosophy. And I don’t really see anyone challenging that like that. That’s not true. There are kind of outliers coming in. But like in terms of the Dominant system. Right. We’re still all playing that game, by and large. And I, I think, I think that’s, I think that’s the problem.

Frank Cottle [00:09:05 ]:
What would you replace it with? What would you replace it with? What would you stand on the street corner and say we should no longer do this? Instead if we do my idea that everything’s going to work out.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:09:19]:
Yeah. I think, I think this is the kind of, the question maybe of the next decade plus is how do we transition from this current ideology which, the only, only outcome of this, this path is, is really something like annihilation. Right. We like. And that sounds really dramatic. Um, but it, but it really.

Frank Cottle [00:09:45 ]:
Annihilation.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:09:47 ]:
I did. And I think, I think this is really true because. Yeah, because we are on a, we are on a path of trying to, trying to kind of extract unending growth patterns from a planet of finite resources. Like this equation doesn’t balance. And so the, the logical path that we are on now leads to a place that none of us want. And so we have reinvent and we have to reinvent at the system level. And so one of the ways that I think about, you know, to your, to your question, what do we replace it with? I think there’s a whole lot of things we’re going to need to replace. But in terms of a philosophy, right. I think what we need to replace is we need a different kind of organizing story. So right now the organizing story of life is largely business. Right? So what, what kind of organizes our days by and large is this thing called work or business. Right. It determines how much, how much extra money you have to spend. It determines largely where you live, maybe less and less so, but for many occupations still determines where you live. If you’re in the country like the U.S. it determines whether you have health care. Right. So business and work is the organizing story of life. And the challenge is that the way business is currently structured, it’s a profit at all costs model. And so that’s where we run into these kind of really existential problems. So when we start to look into the future, we say this is not, this is not tenable. This is not going to work over the long term. And so we need a new organizing story that’s not profit centric, first of all. So if we’re going to replace something, that’s one thing we need to do. So we need a different kind of targets. First of all, go ahead.

Frank Cottle [00:11:40 ]:
Is that when we talk about this a lot of times we take a very US centric view. And in order to function as you’re saying, you can’t have a new US Order, in my opinion, and I’m going to get real weird here for a second, you actually need a total New World Order. Because as long as one national economy is competing against another national economy in the same way that corporations try and get more market share or try and get better product or whatever, it’s the same competition. Call all the countries in the world, each of the countries of the world, each corporate members, and they’re all trying to do the same thing as companies do. Unless you can do it that way, the national interest demand, from whatever perspective you have, that you produce and that you produce competitively against other national interests, that’s a big thing dominating the headlines today overall. And whether it’s dominating loudly or whether it’s sub rosa doesn’t matter. It’s still there. So how do you do it? And I know you say that the future of work is deliberate and people have to intentionally design new spaces and workplaces, which I totally agree with you on, but how do you rectify that on a global basis, especially as we have a global population growth? If we had zero population growth, everything would be easier. We could take our finite resources and manage them more effectively. But if you have global population growth or growth in some areas globally and not in others, especially how do you rectify that challenge?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:13:52 ]:
Yeah, I think that’s a really interesting example too, because I think at least some of the demographers that I follow will say that we have some, we have some big challenges demographically in certain places like China and Africa and, and where it’s, where it’s population the most.

Frank Cottle [00:14:08 ]:
Resources, but the least ability to, to benefit from them.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:14:14 ]:
Well, in, in places like China, where we potentially have really, really kind of striking population decline going on, you know, over, over the next ten years or so. And so I think to your point though, that only becomes really problematic if we are looking through the lens of nation states. Right? So as we, as we look through this lens of, of competition and nation states, then that’s really problematic because we have potential collapse of certain nations and we have, you know, potential booms in other nations. We have no really good way of flattening this out or kind of like serving the larger population. That is my point of humanity. Yeah, exactly. So I, I think, I think where this does go is it does lead us to a place. And this is what humans are really good at, right? This is kind of why we’re still around and why we’re as successful as we are on the planet is because of cooperation. I think there’s a, there’s, there’s a different, there’s a different possibility for us as a human species to learn, relearn how to cooperate in a global way. And you know, we’ve, we’ve done these things before historically. We’ve, we’ve, you know, learned how to cooperate in global ways. I think we’re just in a, a particular cycle of history right now, which is making that feel like it’s really hard. It’s making it feel like this is a real, like we can’t almost can. We can’t imagine something like the U.N. but I think it’s coming back around. I think what’s going to happen is this period of nationalism is going to release the new possibility of a new globalism, of a new global citizenry that we, we can’t really like even picture today what that would feel like and will feel like. But I think it’s coming.

Frank Cottle [00:16:01 ]:
You just said a moment ago that we, we need to obliterate the old system.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:16:06 ]:
I think the old system is going to obliterate us if we don’t change it.

Frank Cottle [00:16:10 ]:
But by the way, I thought we were superior because we had opposable thumbs, but, you know, also helpful. But do we need to break the system forcefully in order to remake it? And if we do, in whose image do we remake it? Who really has a successful enough example that could take, say, look at us, we’re doing it right, and they’ve got the resources and the capacity to, I don’t want to say impose it, but to lead. Lead where others would say, yeah, you’re right, we want that. Who has that in such a manner that we could gain that type of cooperation that you’re talking about? And I know we’re on topic, but we’re off topic. I know that, but it’s an interesting place to go because if you’re going to solve poor problems at the bottom, you do have to solve them at the top also.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:17:14 ]:
Yeah, yeah. And I, I was saying, right, we do need a new organizing story, right? We need something that’s different than profit at all costs. So the kind of story I think we need is one that’s more cooperative. It’s more about maybe, maybe the point of all of this isn’t just making money. Maybe the point of this is more of like a Star Trek kind of thing. It’s about exploration or maybe it’s a different thing. Maybe it’s about learning, maybe it’s about. There’s all sorts of other Ideas and ideologies we could actually like orbit our lives around that don’t involve this kind of like money centric approach. So I think that’s going to be important for humanity to contend with in the next couple decades. But in terms of your other question about like what models are there? I think we can actually go to some of the more self organizing structures, organizational structures in the world and I think they’re actually really, there’s some really good examples there for that we can look to.

Frank Cottle [00:18:09 ]:
What would those be? A couple of them.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:18:12]:
Yeah. So there’s, yeah, there’s a number throughout the world and I’ll give you all the listeners here a website to go if you want to really get into this. The best website I found is there’s a group called Corporate Rebels. And so, and they’re based in Europe and they’ve just done this extraordinary kind of global search for organizations that are really thinking differently about organizational structures. And so they’ve cataloged these folks and they’ve interviewed them and so it’s just a great, they can tell you way more stories about these companies than I can in our short time today.

Frank Cottle [00:18:45 ]:
Corporate rebels.com.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:18:47 ]:
Yeah, corporate D rebels.com I think. But yeah, there’s, there’s some big ones. Yeah, there’s some really, really big company. These are not just small companies, right? They’re, you know, they’re really, really large ones. Some companies like BSORG, companies like higher in China, they’re really self managing self organizing structures that are inherently more humanistic at their core. I think we can use some of those organizing principles actually as we look at new forms of governance that are more cooperative across the planet.

Frank Cottle [00:19:25]:
That’s interesting. It kind of takes us back to the leaders worrying about priority, the wellness of the employees or the teams at the expense of profit overall. And yet profit is required to raise capital and capital is required to be competitive, etc. So I always think, and this is my personal life’s view, I guess, that we all have an inherent responsibility to be productive until we’re no longer able to be. And I don’t equate productivity myself with profit. After you have enough, right? I don’t know what enough is. It’s different for everybody. But one of the things that I look at, I look at several large entrepreneurial individuals, particularly a few of them around the tech industry that say, well I have enough and now I’m going to start contributing it back to humanity or back to charities, charitable giving, et cetera, which had a really rough time in 2024 by the way, overall. But once you have enough for yourself, then you should work for others. This all kind of brings us to prioritizing well being and bold statements and reorganizing structures. We just went through the pandemic, we all know it. Almost all companies self organized or self reorganized to work remotely. Okay. To the benefit, the health benefit at the time of their employees and then to the work life balance benefit. Is it drug on a little bit to the employees? And now a great number of very loud and very powerful companies are saying, no, get your ass back to the office.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:21:30 ]:
I know.

Frank Cottle [00:21:31 ]:
Okay. Why? Well, yeah, one of the big finance fellows over Morgan, JP Morgan says, well, we have to all be in the office to preserve our corporate culture. Yeah, really? Do you even have a culture? Then I question that. And others say, no, we have to do it because we can’t manage our creativity. If you were creative during the pandemic. So how does work life balance and how does remote work versus back to the office? How do these dictates that say you have to do this or you have to do that? Are those really working or is that all going to break apart? Is that the break breaking apart of that? Is that going to be part of this new order that you’re talking about?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:22:17 ]:
I think it’s probably contributing to the breakdown. Yeah. Because what we’re seeing there is a, is a, a strong lapse of judgment from leadership and a really like on the.

Frank Cottle [00:22:28 ]:
Not leadership.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:22:30 ]:
Yeah, it’s, it’s and it’s not, and it’s not well thought through because of what you just mentioned. Right. Like everyone can kind of see through this. Right. And say, oh, well, we just, we just did this in the pandemic. Like, and now you’re saying we can’t. Like, we know that’s not like it, it doesn’t, it doesn’t line up in people’s minds. And the thing about flexibility is once you have it, it’s like toothpaste going back in the tube, baby.

Frank Cottle [00:22:54 ]:
You know, you can’t put the genie back in the bottle here.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:22:57 ]:
You, you just can’t. Right. So. And yeah, so this is, it really is a lapse in, in, in judgment. And I do think it’s gonna, and it’s gonna cause further cracks in the foundations of our systems and in our faith in institutions and, and, and leaders at the senior level. And um, the, the best way I’ve found to think about this is that the office should be viewed as a tool. So just like any other tool you use to do Your job. Some people need different tools. Some people don’t actually need an office at all. Some people, some people might, right. If they need to like, get together in the same space because they’re building some kind of hardware or what, right? There are some jobs that need the tool of an office. Some. But some jobs do not. Some jobs need it more frequently. Some. And some jobs don’t need it at all, right? So a much better way to think about the office I found is think about it like a tool and is it a tool that you need and when do you need it and how much do you need it? And then the other thing about that’s, that’s really like failing in this whole conversation is that there’s a, there’s kind of a lack of trust implied in these decisions where it’s like, okay, if the office is actually a tool and supposedly I’ve hired you to come do a job and you’re an expert and that’s why I’ve hired you. And you should actually know how to use your tools because you’re an adult with a, you know, fully formed adult with a fully formed brain in your head. That’s that I’ve hired for your expertise. And we’ve got. Yeah, you got those thumb right. It’s going to be great. And then at the. But then in the other breath, I’m saying that I don’t trust you to know how to use your tools because you got to get your ass back in the office. And this, this kind of dissonance doesn’t, it’s not going to hold.

Frank Cottle [00:24:41 ]:
I think it does come down to, to that one word of trust and proof. If I’m going to ask you to trust me every day, then every day I owe you the proof of my worthiness.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:24:56 ]:
Overall.

Frank Cottle [00:24:57]:
And that is hard for companies, particularly hard for companies that are multinational and multicultural. As a result of that, technology business doesn’t know anything about boundaries, you know, borders anymore. Borders are national things, countrywide. They have nothing to do with business anymore overall. And I wonder, you know, where, where it really leads. All revolutions that have been successful are founded on seeking freedom. So if freedom is what people are seeking in business or in the control of their own life, well, Randstadt, the biggest HR recruiting company in the world on behalf of the Global Fortune 1000. Generally, they get a 5 to 1 return of resumes of CVs if the words remote or opportunity to work remote are in the job description, five times as many people. So I think the challenge now, I think Tim Ferriss Actually said this the other day, that companies that don’t allow for freedom will find themselves losing talent and ultimately will lose not just the war for talent or the battle for talent, but the war corporately and economies. Economies that have very high taxes. Portugal just completely redid their tax structure to allow for people, I believe it’s under 35 to have a. That were within a certain revenue income level to have a reduced tax structure until they establish themselves. The problem, the wage levels in Portugal are lower anyway, so they can’t keep talent in the country. Even so, countries have to compete for this, not just for profitability of their economic system, but to keep the people within their economic system. Now, if they don’t allow to consider the work life balance or the value that people are able to create. So how it. It’s a. I think it takes it all back around to energy. Keeping the energy in the companies, not just the time that people contribute, but that energy that you were talking about really is the true currency. Desire to produce.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:27:39 ]:
Yeah, exactly. And it’s the place where we’re kind of losing people the most. We’re really overall in companies over the last few decades, if we look at a stat like engagement. Right. Or a metric like engagement, it’s. It’s historically terrible. Right. Like, so ever since Gallup has started measuring it, it’s mostly been 2/3 of people are kind of meh about work or worse.

Frank Cottle [00:28:09 ]:
Yeah.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:28:10 ]:
And so like, we. We’ve not done this very. We’ve not actually done a very good job of creating institutional places for people to where they’re going to spend the majority of their waking adult lives doing things. They’ve historically not been very motivational or inspirational. And just imagine what we could accomplish if we created institutions that were inspirational to the people who work there.

Frank Cottle [00:28:40 ]:
It’s funny, within the context of this conversation, you and I have each used the term work 50 times. A whole bunch of times. Not once of either one of us used the term career. And I think that when we talk negatively, we talk about work. When we talk positively, we talk about career. We’ve been hitting a lot of negatives here. Things that need to change overall. But if you look at your daily activities. I was going to say grind. And then I went into. But your daily activities as work as opposed to something that gives you joy. And because of what you’re able to produce, like an artist might have or a craftsperson might have to create something that had lasting value, then you’re probably not gonna be happy no matter who you work for. That you have to find that part of what you do yourself and then find the right place to practice it. And I think too many people, this is my own view, and you could argue it certainly don’t spend enough time in their younger years figuring out what they want to do. And they just automatically get into a job and then a job becomes a cage, and then a cage becomes a place to gripe about where the job they’re in. But they didn’t really think about who do I really want to be, who do I want to be? And unless people are, I don’t want to say taught to do that, but unless that, that concept comes along with people, then I don’t think whatever structure you create is going to create an equal level of satisfaction.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:30:38]:
It’s, it’s one of the reasons why I’ve, I’ve really latched on to this philosophy of human energy over the last 10 plus years. I just like, there’s something about looking through this lens of saying, does this work inherently bring me energy? Like, do I feel energized when I do it? This becomes a very, very visceral thing that I can learn how to feel like most of us when it comes to work, I think have been trained to kind of ignore that, right? We power through, we push harder, right? Like that’s kind of the language of work. Instead of saying, does this make me come alive? And does this align with, with who I’m wired to be? Most of us can have a list a mile long. All the crap that drains us at work. Most of us don’t have a clue. We couldn’t even come up with a top three when it comes to what energizes us about work. And this is, this is inherently part of the problem is we’re not trained, we’re not taught, we’re not even. This is not modeled, it’s kind of nowhere in the conversation yet is to say, what are the things that are inherently energizing for me and how do I do more of that throughout my work day? And organizations can actually be really powerful tools to create the environments to help people make those discoveries. And that’s where I’ve personally seen in my work, the real magic happens. Whereas when you combine this organization and leadership to say, we’re going to create an environment here that helps people discover what brings them energy. And when you do it that way and you come at it from both sides, that’s when you really unleash the magic of people working towards a cause.

Frank Cottle [00:32:17 ]:
Josh I’ve kind of Taken you down a path here, and I know that of determining what really works versus what doesn’t, especially for the individual, is critically important. Is there an individual assessment process that you can leave us with that will help each person listening today to get to have the guidance on how they can determine their own satisfaction level and maybe if they’re unsatisfied, do something about it.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:32:48 ]:
Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we do use a scientific assessment in my work. And so that’s available. If anyone’s curious about that, just reach out to me. But then you can also do this absolutely for free because you have a built in energy detector which is your body. And so like we were just saying, right, like we’ve learned how to ignore the fact that we’re drained all day at work and we just, we just keep going. And so the, the opportunity here is to not do that and actually pay attention to what your body tells you when you’re doing certain activities throughout your day. And so this, the simple thing here. If you don’t want to get into the scientific assessment and all that stuff or you don’t have the budget to do, right, like you can do this yourself. Just take a piece of paper, draw a vertical line down the center on one side, right, energizing. And on the other side, right, draining. And we call this an energy journal. And you just keep track. So over the course of, I would say two weeks, really like take this paper with you and make notes throughout your workday and on the end, right. And over the, the two weeks, you’ll find that there are certain activities that show up on the energizing side and there’s going to be other activities that show up on the draining side. And the goal after that is pretty simple, but it’s not easy. What you want to do is you want to do more of what energizes you and less of what doesn’t. All right, this is simple, but it’s not always easy to do.

Frank Cottle [00:34:21 ]:
Well, simple is hard for a lot of us because I think you’re talking about human beings. Be cooperative. Human beings also complicate stuff unnecessarily overall. But in thinking about what you just said, I was thinking of myself and I was thinking what energizes me personally, and maybe this is typical, is when I’m able to contribute something to others that advances a goal where everybody’s able to, everybody says, oh yeah, good idea, or hadn’t thought of it that way or something of that nature. And what drains me is going into a meeting where nobody has Any ideas? They’re just there for the 30 minutes to move on to the next damn meeting. Yeah, that drains me. No one has thought about what they’re going to do to progress whatever topic you’re working on. And whether I make the contribution or someone else makes a really good contribution, that’s what energizes me.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:35:43]:
Right. So, so what I would do if we were working together is what, I’m.

Frank Cottle [00:35:47 ]:
Sorry I say non productivity is what drains me.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:35:50 ]:
Yeah, yeah. So what, what I would do if we’re working together on this, Frank, is I would actually push you to go deeper on that because I think you’re right. There’s, there probably is some commonality to say like I like to contribute to something that matters. Right. Like that’s, that’s true and like what’s underneath it. So in our work, what we’re really pushing people to do is to build their energy intelligence to really start to understand it at a deep fundamental level. Kind of the granular things that are underneath that. So because there’s a whole lot of things that could be motivating your desire to contribute. Right. So is it actually the ideas themselves that you just, you just love the world of ideas or is it the people you’re collaborating with or is it, you know, the details or is it the like getting to work on something like an initiative kind of way? So there’s all sorts of like kind of activities underneath. I think what you just said, where we would, we would encourage people to go deeper and say get to those really granular things underneath because then you can, that’s when you find your consistent source of renewable energy for you. Right. If you can say it’s the ideas themselves or it’s the strategy of this, I just like, it doesn’t matter what environment you put me in, I just love strategy. Right. So when you can get to that level, then it becomes really cross applicable.

Frank Cottle [00:37:15 ]:
Well, no, I think you’re right. And boy, what a confusing but great place to live to, to leave the conversation today because it, it, it’s going to, it causes each of us to think about ourselves a little bit and, and really how we want to find our self satisfaction within whatever we’re doing as much as the community satisfaction. And one might be very, very good and the other might not be good at all. So I’m going to take that granular. I’m, I’m gonna, I’m gonna take that challenge. I’m, I’m actually gonna make a little T chart and write the, the next week. See If I come out ahead or how. How far ahead I come out as a result of that.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:38:00 ]:
Cool. I’ll be excited to hear what you learn.

Frank Cottle [00:38:03]:
Yeah, I’ll share it. Definitely will. Thank you very much for your time today. You’ve been really engaging and what you’re working on is kind of to fix us all globally and, and I know that you’re doing a lot of work for many good companies. And have you been publishing lately?

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:38:25 ]:
Yeah, more and more. So I’ve, I’ve been kind of out of the. I’ve been out of the game a little bit in the last few years because I’ve been focused on being a CEO for a tech company. That just took all my time and energy and. But now that that’s. That project’s done, I’m so, I’m really excited to be more in the thought leadership space. So I’m publishing pretty regularly on LinkedIn and then also in my own [email protected] and yes, either of those places that people can find what I’m writing. I publish a new article every week.

Frank Cottle [00:38:56]:
Well, we would encourage Everybody to follow JoshAllen.com and Josh, maybe you’d be kind enough at some point to publish with all work as well.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:39:06 ]:
Oh, I’d be honored. Yeah, let’s make that happen.

Frank Cottle [00:39:10 ]:
Okay, well, thank you much. We’ll look forward to meeting next time.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:39:14 ]:
Thank you.

Frank Cottle [00:39:15 ]:
Take care.

Josh Allan Dykstra [00:39:15 ]:
Appreciate you.

Frank Cottle [00:39:16]:
If it’s impacting the future of work, it’s in the Future of Work podcast by allwork Space.