WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.879 Welcome back to The Deep Dive. Today, we're unpacking 00:00:02.879 --> 00:00:07.320 a tension that is quietly simmering inside almost 00:00:07.320 --> 00:00:09.640 every organization, especially those relying 00:00:09.640 --> 00:00:12.919 on global and hybrid teams. We're going deep 00:00:12.919 --> 00:00:16.539 on the, well, the rapidly shifting sands of global 00:00:16.539 --> 00:00:19.019 etiquette and what professionalism even means 00:00:19.019 --> 00:00:22.199 in 2026. It really is a fascinating area, isn't 00:00:22.199 --> 00:00:24.239 it? Because the rules were being rewritten. you 00:00:24.239 --> 00:00:26.940 know, in real time. Right. If you asked 50 different 00:00:26.940 --> 00:00:29.120 companies for their definition of professionalism, 00:00:29.460 --> 00:00:31.940 you'd probably get 50 different answers. It feels 00:00:31.940 --> 00:00:34.039 like organizations are struggling to just keep 00:00:34.039 --> 00:00:37.880 the lights on and maintain some order while also 00:00:37.880 --> 00:00:40.509 trying to be. flexible and authentic and global. 00:00:41.009 --> 00:00:42.390 Absolutely. And the sources we've pulled for 00:00:42.390 --> 00:00:44.329 this deep dive, they're actually structured like 00:00:44.329 --> 00:00:46.729 a debate. It's really interesting. It forces 00:00:46.729 --> 00:00:50.409 us to argue two very potent sides of one big 00:00:50.409 --> 00:00:52.890 question. And that question is? Has global etiquette 00:00:52.890 --> 00:00:55.009 changed too much, you know, leading to chaos, 00:00:55.310 --> 00:00:57.270 or has it actually not changed enough, which 00:00:57.270 --> 00:01:00.229 is leading to exclusion? And the forces behind 00:01:00.229 --> 00:01:02.659 all this, they're not subtle at all. We're talking 00:01:02.659 --> 00:01:05.019 about the huge shift to hybrid work or some people 00:01:05.019 --> 00:01:07.060 are in a room and others are just you know Little 00:01:07.060 --> 00:01:09.459 squares on the screen. Yeah, plus you've got 00:01:09.459 --> 00:01:12.400 global teams spread across every time zone huge 00:01:12.400 --> 00:01:15.579 generational shifts in communication AI sneaking 00:01:15.579 --> 00:01:18.239 into everything we do and of course just daily 00:01:18.239 --> 00:01:20.640 cultural collisions in every single email and 00:01:20.640 --> 00:01:23.310 slack channel So our mission today is to really 00:01:23.310 --> 00:01:26.250 distill the core arguments from both camps. On 00:01:26.250 --> 00:01:28.969 one hand, you have this very strong case that 00:01:28.969 --> 00:01:32.769 standards have become way too relaxed, too subjective, 00:01:33.209 --> 00:01:35.349 basically optional. Right. And on the other hand, 00:01:35.750 --> 00:01:37.870 you have the counter argument that's just as 00:01:37.870 --> 00:01:40.109 strong that the rigid rules we're still clinging 00:01:40.109 --> 00:01:43.530 to are just relics. They're exclusionary to anyone 00:01:43.530 --> 00:01:46.939 who doesn't fit that. historic dominant mold. 00:01:47.140 --> 00:01:48.900 What's so interesting here is that both sides 00:01:48.900 --> 00:01:50.959 they're rooted in what people are actually experiencing 00:01:50.959 --> 00:01:52.980 at work. I mean if you've ever felt that confusion 00:01:52.980 --> 00:01:56.959 that should I use dear sir or just hey then you 00:01:56.959 --> 00:01:59.099 know exactly what we're talking about. Exactly. 00:01:59.439 --> 00:02:01.739 So let's start by breaking down that first argument. 00:02:02.359 --> 00:02:05.239 The very real cost of all this informality. Okay 00:02:05.239 --> 00:02:08.300 let's unpack that. The core idea from this first 00:02:08.300 --> 00:02:11.270 camp is that Global etiquette has changed way 00:02:11.270 --> 00:02:14.990 too much and way too fast. In this big rush to 00:02:14.990 --> 00:02:17.830 be flexible and authentic, we've basically just 00:02:17.830 --> 00:02:21.159 lost clarity. And that lack of clarity is actually 00:02:21.159 --> 00:02:23.500 damaging business. That loss of clarity, that's 00:02:23.500 --> 00:02:25.419 the central danger, according to this side of 00:02:25.419 --> 00:02:27.580 the argument. When your standards become all 00:02:27.580 --> 00:02:29.879 inconsistent and subjective, you get these immediate 00:02:29.879 --> 00:02:33.120 practical problems that cost you time and, more 00:02:33.120 --> 00:02:35.360 importantly, trust. Right, because once those 00:02:35.360 --> 00:02:37.639 professional boundaries get blurry, the rules 00:02:37.639 --> 00:02:39.580 aren't shared expectations anymore. They're just 00:02:39.580 --> 00:02:43.240 personal preferences. So one person's authenticity 00:02:43.240 --> 00:02:46.319 in an email could easily come across to a colleague 00:02:46.319 --> 00:02:48.819 from another culture as, I don't know, gross 00:02:48.819 --> 00:02:52.300 disrespect, or even incompetence. And without 00:02:52.300 --> 00:02:54.319 those shared expectations, especially these really 00:02:54.319 --> 00:02:56.960 complex global projects, misunderstandings don't 00:02:56.960 --> 00:03:00.060 just happen. They, like, multiply. So the sources 00:03:00.060 --> 00:03:02.120 ground this in some real -world examples, right? 00:03:02.419 --> 00:03:04.599 Yeah. They point to some very specific concrete 00:03:04.599 --> 00:03:07.699 things, causing real friction. Think about that 00:03:07.699 --> 00:03:11.020 super casual emoji -filled email tone that's 00:03:11.020 --> 00:03:13.319 become standard in a lot of places. For sure. 00:03:13.780 --> 00:03:16.659 Or the fact that it's now normal for meetings 00:03:16.659 --> 00:03:19.159 to start five, 10 minutes late with just a quick 00:03:19.159 --> 00:03:22.620 sorry running behind in the chat. No real apology. 00:03:22.699 --> 00:03:24.599 What about the disappearance of professional 00:03:24.599 --> 00:03:27.659 titles? I mean, dropping titles can feel really 00:03:27.659 --> 00:03:31.039 democratic, right? But in some very hierarchical 00:03:31.039 --> 00:03:33.639 business cultures, I'm thinking Japan, Germany, 00:03:33.840 --> 00:03:36.689 a lot of Latin America, failing to use a title 00:03:36.689 --> 00:03:39.650 for a senior leader isn't seen as modern. It's 00:03:39.650 --> 00:03:41.969 seen as a major lapse in respect. And that can 00:03:41.969 --> 00:03:43.909 damage a relationship before it even gets off 00:03:43.909 --> 00:03:45.810 the ground. Exactly. And then there's the big 00:03:45.810 --> 00:03:49.289 one, the total confusion around dress code. The 00:03:49.289 --> 00:03:51.689 sources use this great example. Imagine a global 00:03:51.689 --> 00:03:54.629 team video call. OK. The US team is all in hoodies 00:03:54.629 --> 00:03:56.949 and baseball caps because their office is super 00:03:56.949 --> 00:03:59.909 relaxed. Right. But the team from the Asian subsidiary. 00:04:00.110 --> 00:04:02.789 They're in full business form aware because for 00:04:02.789 --> 00:04:05.189 their culture, any client facing call requires 00:04:05.189 --> 00:04:08.090 maximum respect. So everyone feels awkward. Totally. 00:04:08.430 --> 00:04:10.990 Both teams are following a rule, but the collision 00:04:10.990 --> 00:04:14.389 of those standards just creates this visual dissonance 00:04:14.389 --> 00:04:17.959 and judgment. You start wondering, am I... underdressed 00:04:17.959 --> 00:04:20.759 overdressed am i sending the wrong signal here 00:04:20.759 --> 00:04:23.040 and this camp argues that while these things 00:04:23.040 --> 00:04:27.040 seem small the uh the cumulative effect on trust 00:04:27.040 --> 00:04:29.720 is actually huge so here's the so what here the 00:04:29.720 --> 00:04:32.300 analysis while informality might feel modern 00:04:32.300 --> 00:04:35.680 and flexible the underlying cost is confusion 00:04:35.680 --> 00:04:39.180 when etiquette becomes optional the sources say 00:04:39.180 --> 00:04:43.399 that trust just It quietly erodes. Because you 00:04:43.399 --> 00:04:45.980 can't rely on a shared structure. Exactly. If 00:04:45.980 --> 00:04:48.420 I can't be sure you'll be on time, or that your 00:04:48.420 --> 00:04:50.339 communication will be clear, or that you'll respect 00:04:50.339 --> 00:04:52.439 my title, then I have to constantly second -guess 00:04:52.439 --> 00:04:53.939 your commitment. Wait, but couldn't you argue 00:04:53.939 --> 00:04:56.720 that's just lazy management? or maybe a failure 00:04:56.720 --> 00:04:59.279 to train people properly on global teamwork? 00:04:59.879 --> 00:05:02.180 Are we confusing a loss of respect with just, 00:05:02.180 --> 00:05:04.759 you know, not knowing how to use Slack properly? 00:05:05.019 --> 00:05:06.500 That's a great question. And the sources see 00:05:06.500 --> 00:05:08.540 it coming. They argue that structure itself is 00:05:08.540 --> 00:05:10.879 a form of respect, especially in high stakes, 00:05:11.259 --> 00:05:13.819 cross -cultural or hierarchical situations. They 00:05:13.819 --> 00:05:15.920 say that by getting rid of these guardrails, 00:05:16.160 --> 00:05:18.620 we've created something you could call a respect 00:05:18.620 --> 00:05:21.379 debt. You spend all this mental energy just trying 00:05:21.379 --> 00:05:23.180 to figure out what the other person means, and 00:05:23.180 --> 00:05:25.839 that cost, that debt, it makes collaboration 00:05:25.839 --> 00:05:28.839 harder, not easier. So the drive for authenticity 00:05:28.839 --> 00:05:32.639 has kind of ironically created ambiguity, which 00:05:32.639 --> 00:05:35.480 is the exact opposite of what a high -functioning 00:05:35.480 --> 00:05:38.500 global team needs. Precisely. For this group, 00:05:38.920 --> 00:05:41.220 structure and respect still matter, and we've 00:05:41.220 --> 00:05:43.399 stripped away too much. OK. Now let's pivot and 00:05:43.399 --> 00:05:45.779 look at the flip side, which argues we haven't 00:05:45.779 --> 00:05:47.860 changed nearly enough. And this is where the 00:05:47.860 --> 00:05:50.300 tension gets really, really sharp. Because if 00:05:50.300 --> 00:05:52.300 that first side is arguing for more clarity, 00:05:52.480 --> 00:05:54.980 more structure, the second side is basically 00:05:54.980 --> 00:05:58.060 saying those very structures are the source of 00:05:58.060 --> 00:06:00.459 exclusion and inequality. That's it, exactly. 00:06:00.860 --> 00:06:03.279 The core point from the second view is that far 00:06:03.279 --> 00:06:05.959 too many workplaces are still enforcing these 00:06:05.959 --> 00:06:08.500 rigid rules that were designed for a world that 00:06:08.500 --> 00:06:11.339 just doesn't exist anymore. A nine to five, everyone 00:06:11.339 --> 00:06:13.740 in the same office, same culture kind of world. 00:06:14.000 --> 00:06:17.209 Right. And that rigidity, they argue, is actively 00:06:17.209 --> 00:06:20.889 hurting diversity, progress, and even psychological 00:06:20.889 --> 00:06:24.009 safety. So what are some of those specific rigid 00:06:24.009 --> 00:06:26.810 expectations that are seen as the problem? It's 00:06:26.810 --> 00:06:29.649 mostly about two things. Communication style 00:06:29.649 --> 00:06:32.350 and this idea of performance visibility. OK. 00:06:33.310 --> 00:06:36.519 Think about the unspoken rule. that quick, direct, 00:06:36.839 --> 00:06:39.079 short communication is always the best way. You 00:06:39.079 --> 00:06:41.500 know that rapid fire style that's common in some 00:06:41.500 --> 00:06:43.399 Western country? No, I get to the point. That 00:06:43.399 --> 00:06:46.360 style actively penalizes people from cultures 00:06:46.360 --> 00:06:49.699 that prioritize high context communication, nuance, 00:06:50.100 --> 00:06:51.800 and building a relationship before you get down 00:06:51.800 --> 00:06:54.199 to business, like many Asian and Nordic cultures. 00:06:54.319 --> 00:06:56.720 And the visibility thing, that's tied into that, 00:06:56.720 --> 00:06:59.720 I imagine. Directly. That old poxic rule. If 00:06:59.720 --> 00:07:02.100 you're not physically seen in the office, or 00:07:02.100 --> 00:07:04.000 if you're not answering every email instantly, 00:07:04.250 --> 00:07:06.850 you must not be working hard. Which is just impossible 00:07:06.850 --> 00:07:09.930 on a global asynchronous team. It makes zero 00:07:09.930 --> 00:07:13.050 sense. If you force someone in Singapore to be 00:07:13.050 --> 00:07:16.110 on every mandatory call scheduled for New York 00:07:16.110 --> 00:07:19.350 at 8 a .m., you're actively damaging their health 00:07:19.350 --> 00:07:22.569 and their performance. The rigidity of that time 00:07:22.569 --> 00:07:26.079 structure is itself an etiquette failure. And 00:07:26.079 --> 00:07:27.759 the sources really dig into the history here, 00:07:27.920 --> 00:07:29.959 saying this wasn't neutral. Traditional etiquette 00:07:29.959 --> 00:07:32.160 was often a code of conduct that really favored 00:07:32.160 --> 00:07:35.759 one dominant culture. One dominant, often white? 00:07:36.300 --> 00:07:39.199 Western, male, and neurotypical communication 00:07:39.199 --> 00:07:41.920 style became the default for what professional 00:07:41.920 --> 00:07:44.779 means. And by clinging to those old rules, we 00:07:44.779 --> 00:07:47.720 ignore these critical modern realities, we ignore 00:07:47.720 --> 00:07:50.040 cultural differences, and we ignore neurodiversity. 00:07:50.220 --> 00:07:52.019 Let's pause on neurodiversity for a second, because 00:07:52.019 --> 00:07:54.180 that's a huge piece of this. Yeah, what does 00:07:54.180 --> 00:07:56.180 that mean in terms of these professional rules? 00:07:56.279 --> 00:07:58.319 It means we have to recognize that a big chunk 00:07:58.319 --> 00:08:00.779 of the workforce, people with conditions like 00:08:00.779 --> 00:08:04.819 autism, ADHD, dyslexia, they just operate differently. 00:08:04.980 --> 00:08:07.860 Okay. So a rigid expectation, like demanding 00:08:07.860 --> 00:08:10.040 constant eye contact in a meeting or pushing 00:08:10.040 --> 00:08:12.720 for rapid fire unstructured brainstorming can 00:08:12.720 --> 00:08:15.519 be actively harmful or just exhausting for a 00:08:15.519 --> 00:08:18.019 neurodiverse colleague. So etiquette that insists 00:08:18.019 --> 00:08:21.319 on that is basically exclusionary. It is. It 00:08:21.319 --> 00:08:23.620 penalizes competence just because the presentation 00:08:23.620 --> 00:08:26.240 style doesn't fit the old mold. So the argument 00:08:26.240 --> 00:08:28.680 then is that modern etiquette shouldn't be about 00:08:28.680 --> 00:08:31.579 enforcing a single set of rules. It's about maximizing 00:08:31.579 --> 00:08:33.940 inclusion by making space for different styles. 00:08:34.259 --> 00:08:37.080 Exactly. The goal isn't rule enforcement. It's 00:08:37.080 --> 00:08:39.620 creating expectations that support psychological 00:08:39.620 --> 00:08:41.860 safety. That feeling that you can show up and 00:08:41.860 --> 00:08:44.179 speak up without being punished for being different. 00:08:44.480 --> 00:08:46.960 Right. Modern etiquette should support inclusion 00:08:46.960 --> 00:08:50.379 and clarity, but... And this is key. Without 00:08:50.379 --> 00:08:52.779 forcing everyone into the exact same professional 00:08:52.779 --> 00:08:56.820 box, it demands adaptability, empathy, and context 00:08:56.820 --> 00:08:59.259 over everything else. And that's a huge distinction, 00:08:59.340 --> 00:09:04.419 moving from just blindly following rules to intentional 00:09:04.419 --> 00:09:06.639 adaptable behavior. So just enforcing a rule 00:09:06.639 --> 00:09:09.620 like all client emails must be formal might actually 00:09:09.620 --> 00:09:11.399 be less professional than adapting your tone. 00:09:11.620 --> 00:09:13.179 Precisely. You have to think about the recipient, 00:09:13.360 --> 00:09:15.759 the medium, the culture, the goal. The modern 00:09:15.759 --> 00:09:18.379 professional has to be a master of context. So, 00:09:18.539 --> 00:09:22.960 okay, we've laid out two incredibly strong and 00:09:22.960 --> 00:09:26.679 seemingly opposite arguments. One says we need 00:09:26.679 --> 00:09:28.679 more rules to get our structure back. The other 00:09:28.679 --> 00:09:30.600 says the old structures are the problem and we 00:09:30.600 --> 00:09:32.720 need to tear them down. Right. But this is where 00:09:32.720 --> 00:09:34.519 the synthesis comes in and where the sources 00:09:34.519 --> 00:09:37.720 show these two sides actually find some profound 00:09:37.720 --> 00:09:40.059 agreement. And that moment of agreement is so 00:09:40.059 --> 00:09:43.340 important because it reveals the problem isn't 00:09:43.340 --> 00:09:47.039 etiquette itself, old or new. The real issue 00:09:47.100 --> 00:09:49.960 is the profound fragmentation of our expectations. 00:09:50.659 --> 00:09:53.559 It's a massive lack of shared understanding about 00:09:53.559 --> 00:09:55.840 what the rules even are right now. So etiquette 00:09:55.840 --> 00:09:58.100 hasn't disappeared, it's just shattered. It's 00:09:58.100 --> 00:10:00.759 fragmented, yeah. Along lines of generation, 00:10:01.120 --> 00:10:03.500 culture, geography, personal style, you have 00:10:03.500 --> 00:10:05.990 everyone using the exact same tools. The same 00:10:05.990 --> 00:10:08.230 Zoom meetings, the same email inboxes, the same 00:10:08.230 --> 00:10:10.450 Slack channels, but they're all using completely 00:10:10.450 --> 00:10:12.470 different rule books. It's like everyone is speaking 00:10:12.470 --> 00:10:14.809 a slightly different dialect of professionalism, 00:10:15.070 --> 00:10:17.450 but assuming their dialect is the universal language. 00:10:17.549 --> 00:10:19.570 That's a perfect analogy. And that's why the 00:10:19.570 --> 00:10:21.789 debate is so heated. Both sides feel completely 00:10:21.789 --> 00:10:24.789 justified in their frustration. And if fragmentation 00:10:24.789 --> 00:10:27.690 is the root cause, then the sources say the new 00:10:27.690 --> 00:10:30.149 essential skill isn't mastering a set of rules, 00:10:30.370 --> 00:10:32.590 it's developing a kind of radical awareness. 00:10:32.909 --> 00:10:34.870 Awareness is everything. It shifts the focus 00:10:34.870 --> 00:10:37.450 from knowing the rigid rules to knowing the context. 00:10:37.710 --> 00:10:40.129 So you have to know when to adapt your own behavior 00:10:40.129 --> 00:10:42.690 to meet someone else's expectation of respect. 00:10:42.970 --> 00:10:45.879 And, just as importantly, when you need to be 00:10:45.879 --> 00:10:49.240 the one to step up and lead with absolute clarity 00:10:49.240 --> 00:10:52.080 to set a new inclusive expectation for the whole 00:10:52.080 --> 00:10:54.379 group. But wait, that sounds exhausting. Are 00:10:54.379 --> 00:10:57.019 we saying the modern professional needs to be 00:10:57.019 --> 00:10:59.919 like a cultural anthropologist just to schedule 00:10:59.919 --> 00:11:02.779 a meeting? How do we even develop this awareness? 00:11:02.980 --> 00:11:05.419 It is demanding, for sure, but it's kind of the 00:11:05.419 --> 00:11:07.340 price of admission for global competence now. 00:11:07.539 --> 00:11:10.120 The sources talk about three main ways. First 00:11:10.120 --> 00:11:12.659 is observational listening. Okay, what's that? 00:11:12.860 --> 00:11:15.139 Instead of jumping right into a new team or culture, 00:11:15.580 --> 00:11:17.799 you just hang back and observe first. Watch how 00:11:17.799 --> 00:11:21.360 others communicate pace, tone, formality. Intentional 00:11:21.360 --> 00:11:24.879 inquiry. When you're in doubt, you just ask. 00:11:25.539 --> 00:11:28.360 Explicitly. You ask, hey, what does urgent actually 00:11:28.360 --> 00:11:31.759 mean on this team? Or what's our standard for 00:11:31.759 --> 00:11:35.000 response time here? Just make the implicit explicit. 00:11:35.379 --> 00:11:38.019 Okay, and the third one. Strategic code switching. 00:11:38.820 --> 00:11:42.740 This is about consciously deciding which dialect 00:11:42.740 --> 00:11:45.279 of professionalism to use based on who you're 00:11:45.279 --> 00:11:47.580 talking to and what you want to achieve. So you 00:11:47.580 --> 00:11:49.799 might be super informal and authentic with your 00:11:49.799 --> 00:11:52.960 own team. Right. But when you're emailing a C 00:11:52.960 --> 00:11:54.860 -suite executive and a culture that you know 00:11:54.860 --> 00:11:58.019 values formal deference, You switch to a more 00:11:58.019 --> 00:12:00.779 formal high -context tone. It's an active choice, 00:12:00.980 --> 00:12:02.940 not just following a rule book. This is a huge 00:12:02.940 --> 00:12:05.559 shift. We're moving from etiquette as the static 00:12:05.559 --> 00:12:08.039 thing you learn once to etiquette as a dynamic 00:12:08.039 --> 00:12:10.019 skill you have to constantly manage and refine. 00:12:10.080 --> 00:12:12.179 You have to have some humility, yeah? Yeah. And 00:12:12.179 --> 00:12:14.179 recognize that your own default setting is probably 00:12:14.179 --> 00:12:16.179 wrong at least half the time. And organizations 00:12:16.179 --> 00:12:18.100 that get this, they're the ones who are creating 00:12:18.100 --> 00:12:20.539 bridges between these different dialects. They 00:12:20.539 --> 00:12:22.659 don't just assume everyone knows what professionalism 00:12:22.659 --> 00:12:24.620 means. They create clarity by actually talking 00:12:24.620 --> 00:12:26.919 about it. So, let's bring this all back to a 00:12:26.919 --> 00:12:29.659 final takeaway for you, our listener. Global 00:12:29.659 --> 00:12:32.639 etiquette today, it's not about clinging to old 00:12:32.639 --> 00:12:35.460 rules, but it's also not about demanding total 00:12:35.460 --> 00:12:38.559 freedom to just do whatever you want. No, it 00:12:38.559 --> 00:12:41.159 requires intentional behavior. The intentional 00:12:41.159 --> 00:12:43.120 professional doesn't just fire off an email. 00:12:43.779 --> 00:12:47.100 They pause and ask, what three things do I know 00:12:47.100 --> 00:12:49.460 about this person's background that should probably 00:12:49.460 --> 00:12:52.600 change my tone? You have to strive for clear 00:12:52.600 --> 00:12:55.539 expectations and make sure that respect is a 00:12:55.539 --> 00:12:57.759 standard that can travel across every platform, 00:12:57.940 --> 00:13:00.100 every culture you deal with. The organizational 00:13:00.100 --> 00:13:02.580 challenge here is huge. The companies that are 00:13:02.580 --> 00:13:04.940 going to thrive are the ones that stop assuming 00:13:04.940 --> 00:13:07.240 professionalism is universal. Instead, they choose 00:13:07.240 --> 00:13:09.769 to learn. They discuss these tensions openly, 00:13:10.070 --> 00:13:11.990 and they intentionally evolve their standards. 00:13:12.190 --> 00:13:14.549 They move from these unwritten, often exclusionary, 00:13:14.669 --> 00:13:17.389 rules to written, inclusive guidelines that put 00:13:17.389 --> 00:13:19.870 psychological safety and clarity first. They 00:13:19.870 --> 00:13:22.029 define what their shared expectations are for 00:13:22.029 --> 00:13:24.169 their unique workforce. Which brings us to a 00:13:24.169 --> 00:13:25.830 final question for you to think about this week. 00:13:26.210 --> 00:13:28.509 We started by asking if global etiquette has 00:13:28.509 --> 00:13:31.289 changed too much or not enough. And the fascinating 00:13:31.289 --> 00:13:33.909 conclusion from all this material seems to be 00:13:33.909 --> 00:13:36.759 that the answer might just be both. The structures 00:13:36.759 --> 00:13:39.120 that really needed to change haven't changed 00:13:39.120 --> 00:13:41.500 fast enough, which has left a lot of workplaces 00:13:41.500 --> 00:13:44.259 feeling rigid and exclusive. But at the same 00:13:44.259 --> 00:13:47.879 time, that general... unchecked drift toward 00:13:47.879 --> 00:13:51.139 informality has created this dangerous ambiguity 00:13:51.139 --> 00:13:53.720 and eroded trust. And it's that dynamic tension, 00:13:53.940 --> 00:13:56.360 right? That space between too much rigidity and 00:13:56.360 --> 00:13:59.159 too much subjectivity. That's exactly why this 00:13:59.159 --> 00:14:00.980 conversation and developing your own radical 00:14:00.980 --> 00:14:03.759 awareness matters more now than it ever has before. 00:14:04.019 --> 00:14:06.100 That's the deep dive for today. Now go forth. 00:14:06.240 --> 00:14:08.840 Pause before you click send and try to be intentionally 00:14:08.840 --> 00:14:10.600 aware in your next communication. We'll see you 00:14:10.600 --> 00:14:10.879 next time.