You may know best-selling author Dan Pink for well known books like "When," "To Sell is Human" and "Drive," but you've never heard him like this. A must-listen for subscribers.
Enjoy this Nexxt exclusive.
PODCAST TRANSCRIPTION sponsored by:
Jim Stroud: Hey. Jim Stroud here, and you are listening to the Chad and Cheese podcast, HR's most dangerous podcast. It's awesome. It's colossal. I listen to it every day. You should too.
Jim Stroud: All right, that's it. What? Wait, you said $20.
Intro: Hide your kids. Lock the doors. You're listening to HR's most dangerous podcast. Chad Sowash and Joel Cheesman are here to punch the recruiting industry right where it hurts. Complete with breaking news, brash opinion, and loads of snark. Buckle up, boys and girls. It's time for the Chad and Cheese podcast.
Joel: Rolling, rolling, rolling, rolling. Keep that podcast rolling. Rawhide.
Joel: Welcome to the Chad and Cheese podcast, everyone. I'm Joel Cheesman.
Chad: And I am Chad Sowash. Today is a very special day for me and our listeners because one of my favorite authors of all time and favorite speakers of all time is on the show today. We all know him as Dan Pink.
Chad: Yup, that's right, that's right.
Joel: If he's one of Chad's favorite authors, it must mean that he adds illustrations in his books. Is that true?
Chad: Of course, yeah. Especially in The Adventures of Johnny Bunko. There was a lot of illustration in that.
Dan Pink: Oh yeah.
Chad: But, Free Agent Nation, a big one. My favorite, A Whole New Mind. Drive because I'm in sales. To Sell Is Human, and today, we're going to do a lot of talk around When. But, until we get ... Give us a second first, Dan. For all of our listeners who don't know who you are, give us a little synopsis of Dan Pink, will you?
Dan Pink: Well, you just gave a great synopsis of Daniel Pink because I'm a writer who writes books, and you've just named all of them, and they're books that I think go straight to a lot of stuff that you all talk about, which is work, how it's changing, how we can do it a little bit better, what sorts of skills do we need, how do we motivate people, how do we configure a workplace that where people get good stuff done.
Joel: Would you consider yourself a futurist, Dan? And do you prefer Dan or Daniel?
Dan Pink: Dan is good, and I do not ever consider myself a futurist.
Joel: Fair enough. Because you are the quite the Nostradamus on some of these books. You wrote the Free Agent Nation in 2001, and it seems to be coming true. Has it come true in the way that you thought it would?
Dan Pink: That's an interesting question. Yes and no. That book talks about the rise and all these people who are working for themselves, and at some level, I underestimated it, particularly the forces that were contributing to it as I tried to explain what was happening way back then. That book's like 18 years old.
Dan Pink: When I tried to explain what was happening then, I said here are the things that are going on, and I talked a lot about not only this ... It was a mix. It was kind of an intriguing mix of personal desire, self actualization, people wanting to be themselves, those kinds of very heavy psychological factors, but that was enabled by technology.
Dan Pink: I totally underestimated the technology. When I wrote that book, it was a totally different world technologically. I mean, it's kind of mind boggling to me. I mean, there were not smart phones. There was not social media. There was barely wifi. There was not widespread broadband.
Joel: Were eBay resellers the inspiration for the book because that's about the only thing I can remember back in 2001.
Dan Pink: Yeah. So, the technology has enabled this in a really, really powerful way that I did not really envision. Some of the other forces, basically the changing nature of firms and people's desire, in a world where they didn't have any job security, to do work that they actually cared about and that was actually an expression of themselves, those things are continuing.
Dan Pink: A hundred years ago, I worked in politics, I think that book is a case of what we sometimes say about politicians is that she was ahead of the voters.
Chad: That's right, that's right. Former Al Gore speech writer, correct?
Dan Pink: Back in the pre-World War I days.
Chad: So, you don't consider yourself a futurist, but yet, another book you wrote, I think it was in 2005 or 6 or something like that, A Whole New Mind. And you talk about automation abundance in Asia, which are smacking us clearly in the face today, is it not?
Dan Pink: They are. So, that book makes the argument that the skills that are most in demand are changing and that it used to be these more metaphorically left brain skills, logical, linear, SAT spreadsheet skills. Today, those are necessary, but they're no longer sufficient, and it's a different set of abilities, more 'metaphorically right brain abilities', artistry, empathy, and inventiveness big picture thinking. Those are the ones that are most important because it's fairly easy to outsource and automate those left brain reductive, routine algorithmic skills, and we see that happening big time.
Dan Pink: Again, let's talk about what I missed if you're interested in that. What I missed there was, what I underestimated was how quickly technology would be able to do certain kinds of these right brained tasks that I thought were way far off in the future.
Joel: So, Chad's always giving me grief about not being a very good salesperson. So, I have a question about your book, To Sell Is Human, the Surprising Truth About Moving Others. Talk about that book and how all of us really are sellers and how Chad should shut the fuck up.
Dan Pink: Well, I don't know if I'm going to weight in on that second point, but I can tell you what the book is about. The book is ... I'll make a determination on whether you shut up when this conversation is a little bit more fully formed.
Dan Pink: That book says if you look at the guts of what people actually do on the job, it's very different from what job descriptions say. This is probably intuitive since you guys spend so much time in this world, but I always had this suspicion that what people actually did all day, when you actually, if you were to follow them around and watch what they did all day, and then look at their 'job description', there would be a pretty large gap between those two.
Dan Pink: One of the things in particular that I was curious about is that I had this hunch that people are basically selling and persuading all the time, no matter what job they're in, whether they're in sales or not. So, what I found in doing some of this research was that if you look at the lived experience of people at work, if you actually look at what they do when they come into the office and do their work, a big portion of it is kind of sort of like selling.
Dan Pink: So, one idea in that book is that, like it or not, we're all in sales now. There are still, even in a world of automation, an extraordinary number of people in sale sales even today. But, one in nine people in the U.S. workforce are in a sales function, but the other eight or nine are also selling in some sense.
Dan Pink: But, the other curious thing here is we're doing it on a remade landscape. It used to be that if you were to sell, persuade, you were doing it in a world of information asymetry where the seller always had more information than the buyer. Today, that world is disappearing. Now, buyers have not as much information as sellers, all kinds of choices, and all kinds of ways to talk back.
Dan Pink: So, the idea here is hey, we're selling all the time. We're doing it in a new world. How do you do it effectively and ethically?
Chad: So, going toward and keeping the sales conversation going, your book Drive, an entirely different book. Today, Joel and I talk about purpose, which is why people go to work and how, in most cases, drive behind the drive doesn't mean that it's actually dollars and cents. There's more than just that.
Chad: So, the commissions behind sales really don't motivate people as much as the purpose and passion do. So, what was behind that book? What was the impetus behind it? What made you write about that?
Dan Pink: What got me interested in and to answer your question was if we are moving ... was basically in its predecessor book, A Whole New Mind, which is that if it's right that we're moving to this world where people are doing things that they haven't been doing before, where they have to be empathic, or they have to be artistic, they have to be creative, how do you motivate people to do that?
Dan Pink: I went to the research to look at what the science told us about that. What the science tells us about motivation, in general, is very different from what many organizations and many companies believe. As I said, Chad, it's a little nuanced. It's fairly nuanced in that it's, at some level, money is a little bit of a head fake when it comes to motivation.
Dan Pink: What we know is this, to make it as straight forward as possible. Fifty years of social science tells us that certain kinds of rewards that we use in organizations. Psychologists call them controlling contingent rewards. I call them if-then rewards, as if you do this, then you get that. If you do this, then you get that. It turns out that if-then rewards are very good for simple tasks and very good for tasks with short time horizons. They're extremely effective. Human beings love rewards. You dangle a reward in front of somebody, they focus, and that's good if the task, you're just following a recipe, like following a set of steps and if the finish line is very close.
Dan Pink: However, the same body of research tells us that if-then rewards don't work nearly as well for tasks that require more conceptual thinking, that are more creative, and that also have longer time horizons. The problem in organizations that we use if-then rewards for everything.
Dan Pink: So, what we should be doing if we're going to follow the evidence is using them for jobs that require simple task and short time horizons, but coming up with something different for tasks that require more complex thinking and longer time horizons. I think what's interesting, sort of the connective tissue that you are all pointing out here is that if you look at sales today, particularly B2B sales, it's not simple.
Dan Pink: It's very complicated. I think that B2B sales today is essentially management consultant. You're going into a company, and you're trying to figure out what are the company's needs, how do I understand that company's business, what are their pain points, what are they missing that I'm seeing based on my own expertise, and
how can I fashion a solution that is right for them?
Dan Pink: So, for that kind of more high-level management consultant style work, and especially if you're dealing with much longer time horizons in B2B, heavy heavy commissions is not that great of an idea in the same way that we don't pay McKinsey or Bain consultants based on commission. We say these people are serious professionals and serious experts, so what we're going to do is we're going to hire great people. We're going to pay them well, and we're maybe going to have some variable comp tied to some reasonable measures, but we're not going to say that every single person in sales is purely coin operated and that sales is this kind of dumbed down profession where the only way people will perform is if you put a quarter in the slot.
Chad: And there are connective pieces there though, right? The individual had to feel like they were getting paid a fair wage, so there was that kind of connection. What other connections were there as well?
Dan Pink: When you say connections, in what sense?
Chad: So, in the sense of if you did want to go away from 'commission/bonus'—
Dan Pink: Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, here's what we know as a general set of design principles for compensation, and again, there's a lot of variance from place to place and circumstance to circumstance. It isn't a case where there's a very simple recipe that applies in every situation.
Dan Pink: But, what we know is this. First of all, money is a motivator, and one of the things that bugs me is that people maybe look at that book, Drive, and say, "Oh, money doesn't matter." No, I say many many times in there, money matters. Money matters a lot. It just matters in a slightly different way.
Dan Pink: One of the things that we know is that, again, for relatively simple straight forward tasks, getting people to think about money is effective. If I want someone to stuff envelopes, I should pay them per envelope and give them a bonus for every 500 envelopes they stuff. I'm going to get more envelopes stuffed that way.
Dan Pink: But, if I'm bringing somebody in to consult with my business, I don't want them thinking about the money. I want them thinking about my problem. I want them thinking about the work. So, what you want to do in those cases is pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table. Pay people enough so they focus on the work and not on the money.
Dan Pink: Once you do that, they're all kinds of things that you can do. First is you get people a sense of sovereignty, a sense of self direction, autonomy. You help them make progress and get better at something that matters, mastery. We know from the work of Teresa Amabile at Harvard that the single biggest day to day motivator on the job is making progress in meaningful work and, as you guys suggested earlier, we also know that if people have a sense of purpose, that can be a motivator. So, you pay people well. You offer these other kinds of motivations.
Dan Pink: Now, as I said before, I'm not four square against any kind of variable comp, but I think that if you're going to offer variable comp, the structure of it should be fairly simply, transparent, and key to things that really matter. One of the things that happens is every salesperson knows is that you have these commission schemes or even other kinds of incentive comp schemes, and people figure out how to gain the system. So, the designers of the system then make the system more complicated, and people figure out how to gain that. So, they make it even more complicated.
Dan Pink: A lot of these incentive comp structures end of needing this giant administrative apparatus to run it, to monitor it, to litigate disputes about it when, in fact, you can do something cleaner and simpler. Pay people well. First of all, hire great people. Pay them well. Offer autonomy and mastery and purpose, and if you want, offer some variable comp that's very simple, transparent, and tied to metrics that matter.
Joel: Dan, we love criticizing millennials on this show, and I want to pick on Drive for my question. Did you find any differences in terms of what drives the generations, or are generations just a bunch of baloney?
Dan Pink: Well, that's a great question, and there's differences of opinion on that. I am of the opinion that I'm more leaned toward the baloney side of the spectrum. I'll tell you why without trying to empty the room of your listeners here.
Dan Pink: When you look at the research on generations, there are two different phenomenons going on here. One is called, is the cohort effect. The other is the time of life effect. A cohort effect means that wow, I'm a Generation X guy. Generation X, Xers are different from Baby Boomers, and they're different from millennials, and they're different from Gen Z. The cohort, the group of people who are around the time that you were born, are fundamentally different in their approaches to life and work and blah blah blah blah.
Dan Pink: There's also something. The time of life effect says, "Hey, listen. When people are 30, they typically act in this way and do these things." When people are 35-ish, they typically act in a way and do these kinds of things. My reading of the evidence is that the cohort effect is woefully, woefully, woefully, woefully oversold. I think that it's one of those things where our cultural view of it is very stark, but the evidence beneath it is very flimsy.
Dan Pink: So, to me, what you have is you have every incumbent ... I believe that every incumbent generation since the beginning of human civilization has looked at the generation coming behind it and said, "Ah, they don't work very hard. They're complainers. They didn't have it as rough as I did. They're soft." And I don't think that there are massive, massive material differences between the generations. Now, that's just my point of view. Intelligent people will argue the other side of it.
Joel: It's commercial time.
NEXXT: Okay. So, we've already established texting is probably the best way to connect with candidates, right? Plus, Nexxt's stats show 73% of professionals are open to receiving job opportunities via text, and with a 99% delivery rate, you cannot go wrong.
NEXXT: Those are two big reasons why you've got to love Text2Hire from Nexxt. That's right. Text2Hire from Nexxt, with the double X, not the triple X. Nexxt has over eight million candidates who have opted into receive jobs via text, and you and your clients need qualified candidates.
NEXXT: Nexxt can help you find and target qualified candidates who have opted in for job opportunities via text. And, in today's competitive market, you need an edge to reach qualified candidates faster. You need Text2Hire from Nexxt.
NEXXT: Just go to chadcheese.com, and click on the Nexxt logo to learn more about how you can gain a competitive edge with opt-in texting. Text2Hire from Nexxt, it just makes sense.
Chad: It's showtime.
Chad: So, here is a big difference, Dan, and we're going to switch to your—
Dan Pink: And I think there is one big difference, but we can get to that.
Chad: Yeah, no. We're going to get to it right now. In your book, When, if you think about it, Boomers went to college, and they weren't strapped with a crazy amount of debt verus millennials, who are living in their mom and dad's basement because they have $100,000 in debt. So, the opportunity for Boomers and Xers were much different from that of millennials.
Chad: So, in your new book, in When, you talk about this. So, dive deep into that if you would because timing matters.
Dan Pink: Yeah, that's a really good point actually. It actually wasn't what I was going to say. I was going to make a less intelligent point, but thank you for rescuing me.
Dan Pink: So, what that research shows is there's some very intriguing research. I's in economics. About how important the condition of the economy is the year you graduate from ... These are from people who graduate from college, from college graduates. How much the economic conditions when you graduate from college, how
those have a profound longterm effect on your earnings power.
Dan Pink: What this research shows is that if you take two people. Person X, I
don't want to say X and Y here. Person J graduates in a recession, and person K graduates in a boom time. Let's say that each of these people are fairly similar. They're smart people, graduated near the top of their class at the University of Maryland with a major in accounting or something like that.
Dan Pink: On average, the person who graduated in the boom economy will be outearning, and you look at them 20 years later in their careers, 20 years into the careers, the person who graduated in a boom economy is going to be outearning the person who graduated in a recession, 20 years later. The cause of graduating in a recession can be upwards of several hundred thousand dollars in lifetime earnings.
Chad: Well, let's put this to another level. The idiot who graduated in a boom economy is probably going to make more money than the standout who—
Dan Pink: Maybe.
Chad: Yeah, possibly, who graduates in a recession. Opportunity and timing means a lot, or at least, that's how I read into it.
Dan Pink: Yeah, that kind of comparison is tougher. But basically, you take somebody. Let's take a mediocre talent graduating ... If you're a mediocre ... For all the mediocrity listening to your show, if you are a mediocre college graduate with not a lot of brain power or skills, make sure you graduate in a booming economy. That's my advice to you young men and women.
Joel: Do you guys remember the old Saturday Night Live when Eddie Murphy goes on and says, "Life is luck. You're either lucky, or you're a bum." And his driver comes out, and he says, "Your car is ready, Mr. Murphy", and he says, "Thanks, Sammy." He says, "Sammy went to Harvard." Do you guys remember that skit?
Joel: No, okay. Nevermind.
Dan Pink: But, I mean, here's the thing. The deeper point is really, really important is that we have, in the stories that we tell ourselves and each other about who flourishes and who doesn't, we leave out two very important factors. One of them is where do you start from? And the other one is just pure unadulterated luck.
Dan Pink: I think about this all the time. If you take, I'll use me as an example. So, I grew up in central Ohio. I grew up in a middle-class family in central Ohio in post-World War II, 1970s and 1980s America. My parents both had a college education. I won the birth lottery. If I had been born in Guatemala to people without a college education, who knows where I would be today?
Dan Pink: Do you know what I mean?
Joel: Are you a Northwestern grad that roots for Ohio State?
Dan Pink: Oh, that's a more important question obviously, and I am absolutely not a Northwestern grad who roots for Ohio State. I take the purple and white over to scarlet and gray.
Joel: Why are we talking to this bum so much?
Chad: Yeah, I don't know, I don't know.
Dan Pink: The problem is that Northwestern never beats Ohio State.
Chad: No, no. But, they have a pretty good school though. So, let's keep talking about the kids since we're talking about Ohio State and Northwestern. In the book, you actually, and I'm going to try to correlate this to the workforce, you actually said that more recess is best. What about in our work schedule?
Dan Pink: Good point, yeah.
Chad: Can we have a better attitude? Can we get more out of our workers if we just allow them to relax more often like the research showed with kids and recess?
Dan Pink: Yeah, it's a great point. There's a whole line of research about breaks. What we know, in general, about breaks is that breaks are more important than we realize. Breaks matter more than we realize. This is something that this whole conversation about what all the things that I got wrong. This is something else I got wrong in my own life in that I was always someone who believed that the way to get more work done, the way to get better work done was to power through, that breaks were for amateurs, that professionals didn't take breaks.
Chad: That's what Xers did because we had Boomers telling us, "Get off your ass and go to work."
Dan Pink: It could be. Yeah, absolutely. But, when you look at the evidence, the real science of people who have looked at human performance, it turns out that that's totally, totally, totally wrong, that powering through is not the best way to get more work done and better work done, that I actually it completely flipped in that the truth is that professionals take breaks and amateurs don't take breaks.
Dan Pink: So, what we should be doing is actually taking ... I'm not talking about going crazy and having four hour breaks every afternoon. What I'm talking about is actually building in a few breaks into our work lives because we are going to feel better, and we're going to do better. What we know about breaks from this research is that we have some good design principles for effective breaks.
Dan Pink: We know that, for instance, something is better than nothing. So, literally a one minute break is better than no break at all. We know that social is better than solo, so breaks with other people are more restorative than breaks on our own. We know that breaks should be fully detached, not semi-detached, so you shouldn't talk about work. You shouldn't stare at your phone. We know that breaks outside are better than inside, and breaks where you're moving are better than breaks when you're stationary.
Dan Pink: So basically, what this says is that we would have, across the U.S. workforce, no joke, we would have greater productivity, greater satisfaction, and greater engagement if everybody in the U.S. workforce, each afternoon, took a 15 minute walk outside with someone they liked, leaving their phone behind, and talking about something other than work. That would be a productivity enhancer for the U.S. workforce.
Joel: Now, Dan, as a guy who loves a good nap, are you including naps in these breaks?
Dan Pink: Well, you know what? I looked at the research on naps, and you know what? I was anti-nap, and now I'm not anti-nap. Naps are—
Joel: I like Dan now.
Chad: I'm not going to be able to get anything out of Joel now. He's going to have three hour breaks and naps.
Dan Pink: Here's the thing. Let's go back to the science here. What we know about naps is that the ideal nap is actually very short. The ideal nap is between 10 and 20 minutes long. But, nap longer than 20 minutes, and you begin to develop what's called sleep inertia, which is that groggy boggy feeling you get when you sleep too long. But, a 10 to 20 minute nap in the afternoon is very, very good for us.
Joel: I agree.
Dan Pink: But, again, you have to hit that sweet spot. Less than 10 minutes doesn't do you any good, and over 20 minutes, it does you some good, but it actually comes with a negative. The sweet spot is between 10 and 20 minutes.
Joel: So, for a guy with smaller kids or younger kids, and Chad has kids but they're a little older. For those with younger kids, you seem to have a pretty good grasp of the future of jobs and your book on right brains and timing. What advice and what kind of road should I be steering my kids down as they get older and look to join the workforce?
Dan Pink: Yeah, that's a hard one because it's hard to predict. We don't have any idea what the job, the specific jobs are going to be. So, I'm not going to say, "Oh, your kid should be lunar hospitality consultants because we're going to colonize the moon and put hotels there." That's nonsense.
Dan Pink: I think what we know is we know at the level of skill that your kids and my kids who are older but are going to be in the workplace for a long time, they're going to have to do things that augment machine intelligence rather than compete with machine intelligence, which tend to be more of these right brained things, discernment, judgment, creativity, those kinds of tasks.
Dan Pink: I think beyond that, there are a lot of these so-called, I hate the term, but it shows you what kind of prison we're in and how constipated we are in the way that we think about this, is what are called 'non-cognitive skills.' So, what you want is you want kids to be curious. You want them to know how to learn. You want them to be able to ask good questions. You want them to be persistent and have grit and have a growth mindset, that those kinds of habits of the heart, particularly curiosity, grit, and learning how to learn, those are going to be as important as any specific particular skill.
Chad: Talk about age and well-being because there's this dip that happens. We're really happening in our 20s because we have no clue what's going on in the middle of life, 30s, 40s, 50s, early 50s, and we have this big droop because we're not meeting expectations. But then, it skyrockets up. So, tell us a little bit about this mid-life crisis droop thing.
Dan Pink: Yeah, this is something that researchers all over the world have found. When you look at people's sense of well-being, sense of satisfaction, over time, it's exactly as you said. It's shaped like a gentle sloping U. People are happier in their 20s and 30s. It starts declining in their 40s, hits the bottom in their 50s, and then rises back up.
Dan Pink: I think what's curious about this is that the scholars who have investigated this have found this in something like 70 countries. I don't think we know why exactly it happens, but it does seem to be a part of the lived experiences as human beings in the 21st century.
Dan Pink: As for the reasons, again, we don't know the reasons for sure. Part of it is that it could be dual pressure. So, at that age, people will often have kids and aging parents, so they're squeezed on both ends. It could be that there's a certain kind of reckoning that people tend to have at that part of life in that they realize, "Hey, wait a second. I'm been climbing the greasy pole of this company, and wait a second. Only one person gets to be CEO, and it's not going to be me." Or you're a writer and watching to be seen. You think, "You know what? I'm probably not going to win a Pulitzer Price in my lifetime." Again, a totally hypothetical example.
Dan Pink: At some level, early on, our expectations are too high. In our 50s, sometimes our expectations are too low. What you see is that when people in their 60s and 70s, in general, are actually fairly happy and satisfied. A reason for that is that they have matured into doing things that are meaningful to them. They have, in many cases, some really, really interesting research from Laura Carstensen at Stanford, they actually have a very different approach to their friendship networks. That is, they have gotten rid of a lot of their friends and concentrated on the people whom they're closest to, and that's a big source of satisfaction.
Dan Pink: So, I just think it's something for us to think about, particularly when I'm at the age where I'm basically the smack dab bottom of that U-shaped curve.
Joel: In the new book, after each chapter, you have what you call life hacks. What were the inspiration behind those, and what were maybe one or two that you would like to highlight for the interview here today?
Dan Pink: Well, the inspiration was is that you can write about science. You can write about research. You can write about ideas, and that's cool, and that's interesting, and you want people to learn. But, if you just leave people hanging there with nothing to do about it, then I think you're doing your readers a disservice.
Dan Pink: I certainly feel that way about certain kinds of books. I'll read the books, and I will say, "Wow, it's a big idea book. Wow, this is interesting. Wow, what a persuasive argument. Wow, I'm looking at the world in a different way." Then, I say, "Wow, I should probably do things differently", and the book ends, and I have no idea what to do.
Dan Pink: So, each chapter ends with what I call the Time Hacker's Handbook, which is a set of these tools and tips. There are gazillions, not gazillions, but there are dozens and dozens of them. One of the things that people seem to be interested in is I have a whole chapter on how our brain power changes over the course of a day and some guidance on what's the right time to do certain kinds of cognitive tasks.
Dan Pink: But, one thing that people seem really interested in is exercise. What's the best time of day to exercise? Here, in the Time Hacker's Handbook, there's some good evidence-based advice on the best time to exercise. It's very simple. You should exercise in the morning if you have certain goals. Exercise in the late afternoon into the early evening if you have other kinds of goals.
Dan Pink: So, morning exercise seems to be best. I think the greatest advantage for morning exercise is it gives you a ... Exercise and aerobic and even strength training, it gives you a very significant and enduring mood boost that can last 10, 12 hours. So, if you exercise early in the day, you get that mood boost throughout the day. You exercise, say, at 7:00 at night, you're going to sleep away some of that elevated mood.
Dan Pink: Another thing. Exercise in the morning seems to be better if you want to form the habit. I think that's because people are less likely to get interrupted or distracted at 7:00am than at 5:00am. Then, exercise in the morning seems to be slightly better for weight loss, although again, yeah, the research on weight loss, it's really hard to lose weight basically. So, I don't want to oversell that proposition there.
Dan Pink: That said, exercise in the late afternoon or early evening has other advantages. First of all, it's a better way to avoid injury. There are fewer injuries later in the day. That's probably because of body temperature and the fact that you're literally warmed up. Again, it's an N-of-one, but I did a race a couple of weeks ago that started at the insanely early hour of 6:30, and it's the only race I've done that ... because I like to run half-marathons. It's the only race that I've done that I didn't finish because it started at this insanely early hour, and I ended up injuring my hamstring, probably because I wasn't sufficiently warmed up. So, it's better for avoiding injury.
Dan Pink: People who exercise later in the day report enjoying it more. For some people, morning exercise is just miserable. That's how I feel. I like afternoon exercise so much better. Then also, there are actually performance benefits if you're interested in that. Late in the afternoon and early evening are hand-eye coordination is better. We have higher lung function. There's some interesting effects on speed. Speed is greater.
Chad: Excellent. Well, Dan, we appreciate you taking the time.
Dan Pink: Thank you.
Chad: As I said, you literally are a legend. One of the guys that I love, when you have a new book come out, I always get it. The new book is When, the Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing. If you want more of Dan, you can always have more of Dan. He has a podcast called Pinkcast. You can go check out ... You're going to love this, Dan. His TV show that he did in 2014 called Crowd Control, or just go to danpink.com. Any other way that they can get more of Dan Pink, Dan?
Dan Pink: That's great. If you go to my website, danpink.com, I also do a bi-weekly email newsletter that has all kinds of reading recommendations, and also, every week, gives people that, what you mentioned, that Pinkcast, which is a very short 90 second video with a science-based tool or tip.
Joel: Always be closing.
Chad: Always be closing.
Joel: We out.
Chad: We out.