WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.100 Welcome to the deep dive. You know, we all live 00:00:03.100 --> 00:00:05.339 and breathe this idea of continuous improvement, 00:00:05.360 --> 00:00:07.360 don't we? Especially in our professional lives. 00:00:07.599 --> 00:00:09.919 We're always striving for more efficiency, for 00:00:09.919 --> 00:00:11.880 progress, for that feeling that we're actually 00:00:11.880 --> 00:00:14.199 moving forward. But, well, despite all those 00:00:14.199 --> 00:00:16.679 good intentions, how often do we find ourselves 00:00:16.679 --> 00:00:19.239 kind of spinning our wheels? Investing time, 00:00:19.359 --> 00:00:22.640 energy into tasks that feel really important, 00:00:22.640 --> 00:00:24.940 but then they don't quite move the needle on 00:00:24.940 --> 00:00:28.339 our actual goals. It's frustrating and confusing 00:00:28.339 --> 00:00:30.690 sometimes. So today, we're going to try and dissect 00:00:30.690 --> 00:00:33.549 why that happens. We're focusing on what Gary 00:00:33.549 --> 00:00:36.210 Ackerman, in our really insightful piece on hackscience 00:00:36.210 --> 00:00:39.590 .education, calls red herrings, our mission in 00:00:39.590 --> 00:00:42.950 this deep dive, to really unpack what these deceptive 00:00:42.950 --> 00:00:45.869 distractions actually are, how they quietly derail 00:00:45.869 --> 00:00:48.229 even solid improvement efforts, and what concrete 00:00:48.229 --> 00:00:50.789 lessons we can pull from a specific, very vivid 00:00:50.789 --> 00:00:54.049 example he uses from education. The goal, really, 00:00:54.070 --> 00:00:56.109 is to help you identify and avoid them, whether 00:00:56.109 --> 00:00:58.490 you're leading a team, managing a project, or 00:00:58.509 --> 00:01:00.350 Frankly, just trying to optimize your own work. 00:01:00.469 --> 00:01:02.250 So as we get into this, maybe think about those 00:01:02.250 --> 00:01:04.890 times you felt busy, but not really productive. 00:01:05.189 --> 00:01:07.370 This deep dive should offer a new lens on that, 00:01:07.390 --> 00:01:10.069 and crucially, how to navigate past it. Now, 00:01:10.129 --> 00:01:12.450 Ackerman doesn't really spend time defining continuous 00:01:12.450 --> 00:01:15.730 improvement from the ground up, and neither will 00:01:15.730 --> 00:01:18.049 we. We know what it is, right? It's about learning, 00:01:18.269 --> 00:01:20.250 adapting, refining. It's baked into everything. 00:01:20.530 --> 00:01:22.930 Agile, lean, feedback loops, strategic plans. 00:01:23.129 --> 00:01:26.069 It's everywhere. Leaders, teams. They're constantly 00:01:26.069 --> 00:01:28.359 looking for ways to make systems more efficient, 00:01:28.480 --> 00:01:31.480 more effective. The core idea, as Ackerman points 00:01:31.480 --> 00:01:33.780 out, is pretty straightforward. Actions that 00:01:33.780 --> 00:01:35.500 genuinely boost efficiency and effectiveness. 00:01:35.959 --> 00:01:38.180 Keep doing them. Build on them. Actions that 00:01:38.180 --> 00:01:39.780 drag things down while you abandon or change 00:01:39.780 --> 00:01:42.040 them. It's sort of the basic expectation we have 00:01:42.040 --> 00:01:44.340 for any organization trying to get better. Yeah, 00:01:44.579 --> 00:01:46.719 and what's really compelling here, I think, is 00:01:46.719 --> 00:01:49.180 how this fundamental drive, this almost instinctual 00:01:49.180 --> 00:01:51.859 push towards getting better, can still get so 00:01:51.859 --> 00:01:55.049 easily sidetracked. It's usually not about a 00:01:55.049 --> 00:01:57.069 lack of commitment to improvement itself. It's 00:01:57.069 --> 00:02:00.430 more about misdirection within that commitment. 00:02:00.489 --> 00:02:02.829 Misdirection. Exactly. We expect leaders to guide 00:02:02.829 --> 00:02:05.469 us towards efficiency, right? But even the most 00:02:05.469 --> 00:02:07.890 well -meaning initiatives can accidentally create 00:02:07.890 --> 00:02:10.729 these detours. Ackerman's piece really helps 00:02:10.729 --> 00:02:13.490 us zero in on how those detours happen, even 00:02:13.490 --> 00:02:15.310 when we think we're following good improvement 00:02:15.310 --> 00:02:18.069 frameworks. It's about spotting those subtle 00:02:18.069 --> 00:02:21.250 ways things get sabotaged, even when everyone's 00:02:21.250 --> 00:02:23.430 genuinely trying to do the right thing. And that's 00:02:23.430 --> 00:02:25.669 precisely where Ackerman brings in this idea 00:02:25.669 --> 00:02:27.849 of the red herring. And it's not just a random 00:02:27.849 --> 00:02:29.650 distraction. He describes it as something more 00:02:29.650 --> 00:02:32.669 insidious. It's where a leader focuses on relevant 00:02:32.669 --> 00:02:35.110 aspects of the task. And that's key. It looks 00:02:35.110 --> 00:02:37.009 totally legitimate. Right. It seems connected. 00:02:37.189 --> 00:02:39.810 Exactly. But in doing that, they inadvertently 00:02:39.810 --> 00:02:43.150 channel precious resources, time, energy, even 00:02:43.150 --> 00:02:45.189 people's mental focus towards actions that will 00:02:45.189 --> 00:02:47.889 ultimately have zeal effect on the desired outcomes. 00:02:48.330 --> 00:02:51.490 It's just a colossal waste, not just resources, 00:02:51.669 --> 00:02:55.439 but you know, trust, potential. And that really 00:02:55.439 --> 00:02:58.379 nails the subtle danger, doesn't it? It's rarely 00:02:58.379 --> 00:03:00.840 born out of malice, like you said. More often, 00:03:01.120 --> 00:03:03.659 it's this misdirection of focus. The process, 00:03:03.740 --> 00:03:06.659 or maybe the tool, becomes the objective, not 00:03:06.659 --> 00:03:09.599 the result it was supposed to achieve. Ah, right, 00:03:09.900 --> 00:03:11.860 like focusing on the tool itself. Yeah, think 00:03:11.860 --> 00:03:14.000 of it like building this absolutely beautiful, 00:03:14.099 --> 00:03:16.699 perfect scaffold. instead of the actual building. 00:03:17.060 --> 00:03:19.620 OK. The scaffold isn't necessary, sure. But if 00:03:19.620 --> 00:03:22.199 you spend all your time and resources perfecting 00:03:22.199 --> 00:03:24.199 the scaffold and the building itself never goes 00:03:24.199 --> 00:03:26.860 up, that effort was a red herring. That makes 00:03:26.860 --> 00:03:28.939 sense. And we see these constantly, don't we? 00:03:29.120 --> 00:03:31.080 Initiatives that generate loads of activity, 00:03:31.199 --> 00:03:33.520 tons of busy work, meetings, reports. Oh, yeah. 00:03:33.639 --> 00:03:36.259 But they don't actually shift the core problem. 00:03:36.379 --> 00:03:38.580 It's about telling the difference between just 00:03:38.580 --> 00:03:42.919 motion and actual progress. So to really bring 00:03:42.919 --> 00:03:45.659 this to life, Ackerman shares this incredibly 00:03:45.659 --> 00:03:49.479 compelling, almost cinematic example from education. 00:03:49.939 --> 00:03:54.240 Picture this. A meeting room. Maybe some lukewarm 00:03:54.240 --> 00:03:57.020 coffee, right? A new curriculum director, all 00:03:57.020 --> 00:03:59.080 set to launch a brand new curriculum mapping 00:03:59.080 --> 00:04:01.919 initiative. You can almost feel that sort of 00:04:01.919 --> 00:04:05.400 collective, hopeful anticipation. Teachers, always 00:04:05.400 --> 00:04:07.680 eager to help students do better, ready to dive 00:04:07.680 --> 00:04:10.680 in. The standard setup. Right. But here's where 00:04:10.680 --> 00:04:12.860 it takes a sharp turn. Instead of talking about, 00:04:12.860 --> 00:04:15.580 say, how to support struggling students or innovative 00:04:15.580 --> 00:04:18.019 teaching methods, the teachers found themselves 00:04:18.019 --> 00:04:21.680 spending a full, mind -numbing 30 minutes. 30 00:04:21.680 --> 00:04:24.660 minutes? 30 minutes just discussing the templates 00:04:24.660 --> 00:04:26.139 they were supposed to use, just the template. 00:04:26.220 --> 00:04:28.660 They were asking how these new forms were different 00:04:28.660 --> 00:04:30.740 from the ones they just finished under the previous 00:04:30.740 --> 00:04:32.600 coordinator. You could feel the frustration. 00:04:32.860 --> 00:04:34.420 They were wondering why they had to duplicate 00:04:34.420 --> 00:04:36.779 the same information on multiple documents. Oh, 00:04:36.800 --> 00:04:40.079 the old chestnut. Yeah, exactly. out where to 00:04:40.079 --> 00:04:42.800 slot in outcomes they'd spent ages defining just 00:04:42.800 --> 00:04:45.800 two years before. To them these new maps just 00:04:45.800 --> 00:04:48.040 felt like reshuffling what they already had, 00:04:48.540 --> 00:04:51.680 but with new kind of ill -defined bits added. 00:04:52.180 --> 00:04:55.019 In Ackerman, watching this unfold, his immediate 00:04:55.019 --> 00:04:57.879 conclusion was sharp. The curriculum templates 00:04:57.879 --> 00:05:00.699 were a red herring. Plain and simple. What's 00:05:00.699 --> 00:05:03.959 so insightful there is how fast the means just 00:05:03.959 --> 00:05:07.160 completely overshadowed the end. The template, 00:05:07.199 --> 00:05:09.060 which is just a tool for organizing information, 00:05:09.279 --> 00:05:11.959 right? It became the entire focus of the conversation. 00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:14.240 Yeah, the tool took over. Totally. The discussion 00:05:14.240 --> 00:05:16.560 just spiraled into the mechanics of documentation. 00:05:16.779 --> 00:05:18.959 It completely bypassed any talk about the actual 00:05:18.959 --> 00:05:21.180 impact on student learning or teaching practice. 00:05:21.259 --> 00:05:23.720 And this is where Ackerman's own experience really 00:05:23.720 --> 00:05:25.740 has weighed, I think. He's not just some outside. 00:05:25.959 --> 00:05:28.740 Observer. He explicitly says he's written many 00:05:28.740 --> 00:05:31.040 curriculum documents over 30 years. He's led 00:05:31.040 --> 00:05:33.439 initiatives to redefine them. And importantly, 00:05:33.759 --> 00:05:35.939 he's used plenty of useless ones. Right. He knows 00:05:35.939 --> 00:05:38.339 the territory. He knows it inside out. So his 00:05:38.339 --> 00:05:41.220 perspective confirms it. Those templates. Just 00:05:41.220 --> 00:05:43.740 a procedural distraction, not a real path to 00:05:43.740 --> 00:05:46.379 improvement. Which brings us right to that critical 00:05:46.379 --> 00:05:49.689 distinction. What was the real work needing to 00:05:49.689 --> 00:05:51.990 be done versus what became this overwhelming 00:05:51.990 --> 00:05:54.949 distraction? Ackerman points out that while the 00:05:54.949 --> 00:05:56.949 teachers were stuck arguing about templates, 00:05:57.290 --> 00:05:59.449 their deepest professional drive, their actual 00:05:59.449 --> 00:06:01.750 need, was to focus on the heart of teaching. 00:06:02.769 --> 00:06:05.189 He reminds us, teaching is about relationships 00:06:05.189 --> 00:06:07.870 between students and teachers. It's about the 00:06:07.870 --> 00:06:10.750 experiences teachers plan and students' participation 00:06:10.750 --> 00:06:14.439 in the planned experiences. The core stuff. Exactly. 00:06:14.879 --> 00:06:16.439 Curriculum documents, he says, yeah, they're 00:06:16.439 --> 00:06:18.480 a part of those plans, but they can often be 00:06:18.480 --> 00:06:21.240 red herrings. What he actually saw was the teachers' 00:06:21.819 --> 00:06:23.160 desperate need to think about their students. 00:06:23.779 --> 00:06:25.660 They weren't just vaguely worried. He specifically 00:06:25.660 --> 00:06:28.259 recalled them mentioning one of those classes, 00:06:28.459 --> 00:06:30.420 you know, the kind with a disproportionate number 00:06:30.420 --> 00:06:33.040 of students facing academic, social, and other 00:06:33.040 --> 00:06:36.000 challenges. Right, the real tough classroom realities. 00:06:36.279 --> 00:06:39.180 You could sense, he said, their absolute burning 00:06:39.180 --> 00:06:41.740 desire to brainstorm practical improvements. 00:06:42.279 --> 00:06:44.019 For their classrooms, their schedules, their 00:06:44.019 --> 00:06:46.959 daily lessons. all aimed at helping those specific 00:06:46.959 --> 00:06:50.100 kids succeed. Their focus was laser sharp on 00:06:50.100 --> 00:06:54.220 the learners, a complete contrast to the paperwork 00:06:54.220 --> 00:06:56.339 parade they were being forced into. And that 00:06:56.339 --> 00:06:58.240 just raises such a fundamental question, doesn't 00:06:58.240 --> 00:07:01.980 it, for all of us? How often do we or our organizations 00:07:01.980 --> 00:07:04.800 get so tangled up in the administrative process, 00:07:05.079 --> 00:07:07.740 in the documentation, the how of tracking things, 00:07:08.220 --> 00:07:10.459 that we completely lose sight of the core mission? 00:07:10.540 --> 00:07:12.779 It happens all the time. It's a stark disconnect 00:07:12.779 --> 00:07:14.759 here. You've got teachers on the front lines 00:07:14.759 --> 00:07:17.459 facing real urgent problems in their classrooms, 00:07:17.920 --> 00:07:19.740 basically begging to talk about solutions that 00:07:19.740 --> 00:07:22.139 would directly affect their students. Yet all 00:07:22.139 --> 00:07:24.180 their energy gets channeled into this discussion 00:07:24.180 --> 00:07:26.540 about formatting and template versions. It's 00:07:26.540 --> 00:07:28.740 like the classic example of confusing activity 00:07:28.740 --> 00:07:32.439 with actual meaningful progress. Activity versus 00:07:32.439 --> 00:07:35.120 progress. That's good. The teacher's urgent need 00:07:35.120 --> 00:07:37.560 for student -focused improvement was just being 00:07:37.560 --> 00:07:39.879 completely sidelined by what the curriculum coordinator 00:07:39.879 --> 00:07:43.100 was defining as work. And, okay, so when Ackerman 00:07:43.100 --> 00:07:45.800 directly questioned the coordinator about this 00:07:45.800 --> 00:07:49.040 dynamic, what happened? The coordinator's response 00:07:49.040 --> 00:07:51.620 was apparently unwavering, almost authoritative. 00:07:51.860 --> 00:07:54.540 They said, once we document the curriculum, the 00:07:54.540 --> 00:07:56.860 ways we can help our needy students will become 00:07:56.860 --> 00:08:00.180 clear. Wow. Okay. If we connect that to the bigger 00:08:00.180 --> 00:08:03.459 picture. That statement reflects such a deeply 00:08:03.459 --> 00:08:07.259 ingrained, yet often really flawed organizational 00:08:07.259 --> 00:08:10.660 belief. It's the misconception that comprehensive 00:08:10.660 --> 00:08:14.439 documentation, just by existing, somehow solves 00:08:14.439 --> 00:08:16.600 problems or magically creates clarity. Right, 00:08:16.600 --> 00:08:19.379 as if filling out the form is the solution. Exactly. 00:08:19.459 --> 00:08:21.860 It treats the documentation not as a tool, but 00:08:21.860 --> 00:08:24.259 as the end goal itself. And Ackerman's immediate 00:08:24.259 --> 00:08:26.379 internal reaction to that idea, he says it was 00:08:26.379 --> 00:08:29.240 a firm, unambiguous no. No, it will not. Huh, 00:08:29.500 --> 00:08:33.820 just a flap. No. A flat, no. And he's absolutely 00:08:33.820 --> 00:08:37.100 right, isn't he? The act of documenting, sure, 00:08:37.139 --> 00:08:39.120 it might help create a framework, it has its 00:08:39.120 --> 00:08:41.679 place, but it does not inherently create a pathway 00:08:41.679 --> 00:08:44.320 for actually helping students. In fact, as we 00:08:44.320 --> 00:08:46.740 just saw in that example, it can actively delay 00:08:46.740 --> 00:08:49.320 things, distract from the real work, and even 00:08:49.320 --> 00:08:51.340 just deplete the energy needed for the direct 00:08:51.340 --> 00:08:53.320 hands -on effort required to tackle those root 00:08:53.320 --> 00:08:55.379 problems. Yeah, it drains the energy for the 00:08:55.379 --> 00:08:58.659 real work. It really challenges us to ask critically. 00:08:58.860 --> 00:09:02.179 Is this solution we're proposing genuinely addressing 00:09:02.179 --> 00:09:04.799 the core issue, or is it just adding another 00:09:04.799 --> 00:09:07.759 layer of activity that feels productive, but 00:09:07.759 --> 00:09:10.620 ultimately offers no measurable impact? So, okay, 00:09:10.639 --> 00:09:12.600 let's bring this home. What does this all mean 00:09:12.600 --> 00:09:15.940 for you listening right now? This education example, 00:09:16.179 --> 00:09:17.879 it's specific, yeah, but it's like a universal 00:09:17.879 --> 00:09:19.899 mirror, isn't it? How can you recognize when 00:09:19.899 --> 00:09:22.059 you're getting caught up in a red herring? That 00:09:22.059 --> 00:09:24.700 process, that task, that initiative that just 00:09:24.700 --> 00:09:27.100 eats up bandwidth, but isn't directly contributing 00:09:27.100 --> 00:09:29.259 to your main objective. Maybe here's a quick 00:09:29.259 --> 00:09:31.500 mental check. We could call it the 3D test, maybe, 00:09:31.500 --> 00:09:34.559 to help spot them. OK, I like that. 3Ds. First 00:09:34.559 --> 00:09:39.139 D, ask yourself, is this task or activity directly 00:09:39.139 --> 00:09:42.159 impacting the outcome I'm aiming for? Is there 00:09:42.159 --> 00:09:44.700 a clear straight line from this action to the 00:09:44.700 --> 00:09:49.250 goal? Or is it? Sort of tangential. Hmm. Direct 00:09:49.250 --> 00:09:53.250 link. Got it. Second D is its impact demonstrable 00:09:53.250 --> 00:09:56.389 or measurable. Can I actually see tangible evidence 00:09:56.389 --> 00:09:58.269 that this action is making a difference or am 00:09:58.269 --> 00:10:00.429 I just assuming it is because it feels like work? 00:10:00.590 --> 00:10:02.929 Demonstrable. Okay. Not just assumed value. And 00:10:02.929 --> 00:10:05.409 the third D, is this definitely the most efficient, 00:10:05.470 --> 00:10:07.629 the most impactful way to get to that outcome 00:10:07.629 --> 00:10:10.250 or are there more direct routes we're overlooking 00:10:10.250 --> 00:10:12.850 maybe because we prefer the comfort of a familiar 00:10:12.850 --> 00:10:15.929 procedure? Directly. Demonstrably. Definitely. 00:10:16.120 --> 00:10:18.080 That's quite useful. Yeah, it's really about 00:10:18.080 --> 00:10:20.039 developing that critical eye, isn't it? That 00:10:20.039 --> 00:10:22.779 kind of healthy skepticism. To question the why 00:10:22.779 --> 00:10:25.179 behind tasks and initiatives all the time, are 00:10:25.179 --> 00:10:27.480 they truly moving us towards greater efficiency, 00:10:27.700 --> 00:10:30.000 real effectiveness, or are they just generating 00:10:30.000 --> 00:10:32.039 more work? More templates, more meetings about 00:10:32.039 --> 00:10:33.620 the templates, more reports on the templates? 00:10:33.759 --> 00:10:35.399 Right, without genuinely shifting the outcome. 00:10:35.779 --> 00:10:38.120 Exactly. You've got to constantly ask yourself, 00:10:38.480 --> 00:10:41.549 am I actually building the house here? Or am 00:10:41.549 --> 00:10:43.809 I just meticulously organizing the blueprints 00:10:43.809 --> 00:10:46.529 in a fancy new folder, convincing myself that 00:10:46.529 --> 00:10:48.370 perfect organization is the same as building? 00:10:48.509 --> 00:10:50.990 That's a great analogy. That internal tension 00:10:50.990 --> 00:10:53.730 you feel sometimes. That nagging sense of, I'm 00:10:53.730 --> 00:10:55.950 busy, but am I actually getting anything done? 00:10:56.409 --> 00:10:58.269 That's often your internal radar picking up a 00:10:58.269 --> 00:11:00.549 potential red herring. It's about channeling 00:11:00.549 --> 00:11:03.820 that discomfort into strategic questioning. What 00:11:03.820 --> 00:11:06.120 if, instead of just asking how to fill out the 00:11:06.120 --> 00:11:08.639 new template, you asked, how exactly does this 00:11:08.639 --> 00:11:11.000 document directly improve student learning? Or 00:11:11.000 --> 00:11:13.320 in another context, how does this improve customer 00:11:13.320 --> 00:11:16.220 satisfaction? Or how does this speed up delivery? 00:11:16.399 --> 00:11:19.240 Precisely. Or asking, what actual problem does 00:11:19.240 --> 00:11:21.220 this new process solve that our previous one 00:11:21.220 --> 00:11:23.899 didn't? Force the connection to the real outcome. 00:11:24.139 --> 00:11:26.399 That's such a crucial distinction, asking how 00:11:26.399 --> 00:11:31.429 versus asking why and what for. And it also ties 00:11:31.429 --> 00:11:34.289 into empowering teams, doesn't it? To feel safe 00:11:34.289 --> 00:11:37.389 enough to push back constructively. Those teachers 00:11:37.389 --> 00:11:40.090 in Ackerman's story, they clearly knew what the 00:11:40.090 --> 00:11:43.029 real issues were. But the system, the structure 00:11:43.029 --> 00:11:45.330 of that meeting, didn't give them the space to 00:11:45.330 --> 00:11:48.090 address them. That's a huge point. So as a leader, 00:11:48.370 --> 00:11:50.289 maybe part of the job is cultivating an environment 00:11:50.289 --> 00:11:51.970 where people can say, hang on, this feels like 00:11:51.970 --> 00:11:53.450 we're spending an awful lot of time polishing 00:11:53.450 --> 00:11:56.149 the scaffold here, and maybe less time on the 00:11:56.149 --> 00:11:58.690 actual building. Can we pause and reevaluate? 00:11:58.970 --> 00:12:01.870 Exactly. And sometimes these red herrings persist 00:12:01.870 --> 00:12:04.370 because, well, challenging them feels like you're 00:12:04.370 --> 00:12:07.190 challenging authority. Or maybe the process itself 00:12:07.190 --> 00:12:09.570 provides a comforting sense of control or tangible 00:12:09.570 --> 00:12:12.389 activity, even if it's completely misdirected. 00:12:12.450 --> 00:12:15.120 Yeah, ticking boxes feels productive. It can 00:12:15.120 --> 00:12:18.539 be much easier, frankly, to implement a new documentation 00:12:18.539 --> 00:12:21.139 system than it is to grapple with really complex 00:12:21.139 --> 00:12:23.299 student issues or market changes or whatever 00:12:23.299 --> 00:12:26.600 the core challenge is. So as you spot these potential 00:12:26.600 --> 00:12:28.960 red herrings, it's also worth considering the 00:12:28.960 --> 00:12:32.019 underlying reasons they exist. Is it? maybe a 00:12:32.019 --> 00:12:35.100 fear of tackling the harder problem? Is it pressure 00:12:35.100 --> 00:12:38.340 to just show activity rather than results? Or 00:12:38.340 --> 00:12:41.899 is it a genuine but simply misguided belief that 00:12:41.899 --> 00:12:44.759 more process automatically equals more progress? 00:12:44.940 --> 00:12:47.179 Understanding that root cause. Yeah, that could 00:12:47.179 --> 00:12:49.059 help dismantle the red herring more effectively. 00:12:49.200 --> 00:12:51.600 Definitely. So the key lesson from Gary Ackerman's 00:12:51.600 --> 00:12:54.980 piece, really, it boils down to the... The transformative 00:12:54.980 --> 00:12:56.960 power of just recognizing these red herrings 00:12:56.960 --> 00:12:59.700 in the first place is how we start to reclaim 00:12:59.700 --> 00:13:02.120 our most valuable resources, our time, our energy, 00:13:02.580 --> 00:13:04.500 our team's creativity, and actually point them 00:13:04.500 --> 00:13:06.879 towards what truly matters for continuous improvement, 00:13:07.159 --> 00:13:09.000 instead of just letting them drain away on things 00:13:09.000 --> 00:13:11.779 that are well -intentioned, maybe, but ultimately 00:13:11.779 --> 00:13:14.769 fruitless. Well said. And maybe this leaves us 00:13:14.769 --> 00:13:16.990 with a final provocative thought for you to chew 00:13:16.990 --> 00:13:19.830 on after this deep dive wraps up. How many of 00:13:19.830 --> 00:13:22.190 our current efficiency measures or improvement 00:13:22.190 --> 00:13:25.110 initiatives across all kinds of fields are actually 00:13:25.110 --> 00:13:27.690 just well -intentioned red herrings? How many 00:13:27.690 --> 00:13:30.029 are inadvertently diverting our most valuable 00:13:30.029 --> 00:13:33.570 resources that precious time energy focus away 00:13:33.570 --> 00:13:36.289 from the true impactful goals we're really trying 00:13:36.289 --> 00:13:39.490 to achieve? It's a question worth asking. regularly 00:13:39.490 --> 00:13:42.169 of yourself and maybe of your team too. A very 00:13:42.169 --> 00:13:44.250 important question indeed. Thank you for joining 00:13:44.250 --> 00:13:47.129 us on this deep dive into navigating the often 00:13:47.129 --> 00:13:49.169 tricky world of red herrings. We really hope 00:13:49.169 --> 00:13:51.269 these insights not only help you spot them in 00:13:51.269 --> 00:13:54.169 your own work but also empower you to steer your 00:13:54.169 --> 00:13:56.289 efforts and maybe your team's efforts towards 00:13:56.289 --> 00:13:57.870 genuine meaningful progress.