That’s at its root, that is, that’s not at the root of it. And so what people do, I think, does stem from that. So what you see in these conversations, if I’m to oversimplify the types, you’ve got a a you know, you got the avoiders and the, I don’t know, the achievers or something, right? The avoiders, they’re not so worried about achieving great things. They’re really trying to avoid bad stuff from happening. So they will always under optimize, right? So what they want to avoid is conflict, discomfort, a bad relationship. So they will largely not bring things up. Or if they’re going to talk about them with you, they’re going to water it down, you know, they’re going to say there’s a bit of a problem, or we have an opportunity when there’s real, a big effing problem, you know, whatever it is. And of course, that that may, that may prevent them from getting into some undesirable conflict. And by the way, conflict is something to avoid, right? Because primitively, we could have been killed or ostracized by the group, which is tantamount to death, right, because we were very dependent upon each other. So and maybe we avoid the conflict, but the problem that is bothering us or the opportunity that we’re excited about never gets resolved, and we got to live with that, and that’s its own kind of torture, ironically, though oftentimes, the very attempt to avoid conflict ensures you’re going to get it. So I don’t want, I don’t want to, I don’t want to get into a conflict with you. So I’ll ask you leading questions and leading questions instead, right? You know, Todd, how do you think that interview went? As my partner, Olga, might say to me, I think went pretty well. Any opportunities for it to go better? Well, I don’t know this that. Do you think perhaps you talk too much throughout the whole interview? I mean, David said he wanted to be a conversation, and you turn it into a model up at that point, it’s not even leading. It says it’s loaded, right? But so you could see, like maybe she was thinking, I don’t want to come out and say what I’m thinking to Todd directly, because it might upset him. So I’ll ask a bunch of leading questions, which is, sure he’s going to get upset. So so you have that so often, the attempt to overprotect ourselves, actually provides very little protection whatsoever in a world that’s more complex than the primitive world within which we work lived, but also in terms of human social interactions. Now you look at the achievers, you know, they got no problem with putting the issue on the table. They’ve got ideas about how to solve it. They’ve thought the whole thing through, but their problem is, is they might go too fast, so they might jump to action too quickly. For example, they don’t bring anybody with them, because people aren’t going to follow them. If they agree there’s a problem or opportunity, and if they agree on the solution to that problem or opportunity, there’s a lot of agreement. You got to, get to move people. It’s a nightmare. It doesn’t matter how smart you are, how good your thinking is, you’re leading, and nobody’s following. What’s the point? So the thing I say is, you’ve got to, you always got to do this in two steps. You’ve got to align on what’s true, and then you could figure out what to do. So you can align on what’s true. In terms of the real problem opportunity, get real agreement, and then let’s figure out what to do. And people, the achievers, they underdo that agreement on the problem or opportunity work, they’re too quick to the action box, and sometimes they don’t listen well enough, so that they don’t learn new things that may change their minds about what the issues are, and therefore what the solutions might be, because they’re so clear on their Nirvana that they want everybody to get to. So those are some of the the types, so to speak, you
