Iiiintersting. When you're talking about group projects, you're talking about the difference between running a group as a business and running a group as a collaborative process based on individual skills and interests where they can feel a sense of ownership of their contribution to the project. Most digital creators who become production companies that then hire, build a brand and then define their image and voice. So, the "right person for the job" is going to be someone who can either adapt to the voice or enhance it in some way. It's the same thing with any studio subsidiary, especially someone who works in news broadcasting or creative services and marketing. So sure, delegating roles is going to be of the mind of a business manager, whereas collaboration is going to be of the mind of an empathetic creator. I see more collaborative processes in independent filmmaking, which is why I seek that out, and then as production companies get bigger, they transition into role delegation via employment. A healthy company is going to have a balance.
This one is quite convincing, thanks. And did you finally read what Baker Henistole has to say? If you g’'ogle him, you’ll learn it takes about 30 days to finish the whole program, and you can take it a step further if you really want to look athletic.
You know, I'm pretty mad that I watched your 3 hour interview with Thomas twice now, and I never remember you or him mentioning that you had a channel like this.... I had to find you through looking up Todd. But great to freaking see.
Hi ! The dividers that are in the suitcase, could I have their reference please? Do you think this is also compatible with the Nanuk 935? By the way excellent vidéo; thumbs up
Would be interesting to have him on again since he's seemed to pivot towards other business like you talked about here. (unsure if its fully running a law firm or something else)
Agora entendi pq esse vídeotem tão poucas views sendo que é tão bom. Pq tem 1 milhão de anúncios!!!! To no meio do vídeo e já vi pelo menos 10 anúncios.. Quase desistindo de assistir aqui
I appreciate the nuance of what Peter says and how friendly this conversation is, but I personally disagree with some of his perspectives. When Peter assumes you're German and claims you were robbed of your culture he's completely avoiding he's making the exact same assumptions about you within irrelevant social constructs. We know that "German", "Irish", and "Norwegian" are as much a social construct and, overall, as irrelevant to the quality of a human being as their race is. It's fine that many people choose to appreciate and cherish the culture and identity that their ancestors lived in in the past, but it's only as relevant to the quality of their character as much as they choose to make it be. Worse, of course, is that many use THAT irrelevant social construct to be prejudice against others as well. It's not like prejudice and bigotry didn't exist before race became this categorized construct. The constructs people used before were things like a people's culture, social standing, religious beliefs, ethnicity, and the country they were from, among others. ALL OF THOSE THINGS are also social constructs that people used to judge and condemn others and NONE of them are defined within biology or genetics. Think of the concept of "tribute states" in regard to China and of the caste system in India. Both of them created categories of inferior/superior people and power imbalances that despite no evidence of biological meaning (and actually evidence to the contrary), persist to some degree in those areas to this day. I also reject both the narrow definition of racism and that racism cannot happen to "white people". The first, because arguing that racism has this very narrow definition and rejecting other definitions is, to me, of very little difference than someone saying woman has a narrow definition while rejecting all other definitions. Words can obviously have very narrow definitions and meanings which change and evolve, and I AGREE that as long as you explain the framework of how you're using those words you can use them in that narrowly defined way, but I reject that you can categorically reject the other definitions without VERY sound reasons. The second I reject because even though "white people" invented the social construct that became race, everyone is free to use it as a tool or a weapon however they see fit. Saying that it can't be used against white people is like saying that guns can't be used by anyone but the Chinese because they invented it. Once a tool, imaginary or not, exists out in the real world, anyone with the capability of using that tool can use it however they want. Anyone who chooses to reinforce instead of reject the social construct, and who uses it as a weapon to practice prejudice within the confines of said social construct, can be argued to be committing some form of racism. Even if 90-95 percent of the narrow definition of systemic racism in America is done by "white people", which I'd be comfortable with someone arguing it is, I think it's difficult to impossible to say all of it is. EVEN THEN, you can't say you can't be racist against "white people", only that you can't CURRENTLY be racist against white people, because if at any time there was a change in the power imbalance anyone else would then become capable.
Well, of course RU-vid became more open after seeing how the audience began to reach out to TikTok and Instagram where everyone can get views without worrying about tags, descriptions and other nonsense. And when there is a choice to upload just a video from the phone camera to TikTok and get 1 million views or to spend time on creating more quality content learning the rules, algorithms and theories of how to do RU-vid better, of course the consumer will choose TikTok where everything is easier and the reward is greater. That's why I think RU-vid is coming out of the shadows and explaining how to succeed on their platform. After all, after some time of trying, if the views will not be at the person he will go where it is easier for him to get these cherished "viewers" that will satisfy his ego, without looking for advice from gurus or testing theories.
@@ChattieCathie Yeah yeah, tell that to the tiktok bloggers who have millions of subscribers and sell adverts in vid and become the advertising face of brands likemcdonalds
@@racerboyeddie from what i can see in the privacy policy they share data with advertisers. literally every company does this. although the policy says you can limit data if you install google analytics opt-out browser addon, and disable 3rd party cookies.
It's hard to dislike youtube as a company when the developers behind the scenes seem like really neat people. He genuinely seems to enjoy his job. Thank you for this discussion. STOP HUMANIZING THE EVIL VIDEO CORP. 😆
I genuinely feel uncanny from enjoying NDA so much. As an average RU-vid viewer I find these talks so interesting. I probably wouldn't a few years ago and I always kinda force myself to start watching an episode. But when I start... man it's so captivating.
It's so strange. In general I'm vehemently against parasocial bonds with people who make content I like. But yet on the other hand, these podcasts are just so interesting to learn more about the people behind the content, it's hard to not be invested. This episode with Brian is a good example because it fundamentally changes him from the brains behind Real Engineering, into a real person with hopes and dreams and fears and opinions. I suppose we need a bit more of that humanization in many aspects of society these days, but yet idk. It changes the dynamic significantly.
I HAVE BEEN SQUINTING AT THAT FUCKING IDENTITY VIDEO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY YOU LOOKED SO WEIRD SINCE I WATCHED IT. GOD. I'd mostly convinced myself that that was actually one of your brothers. Somehow it didn't occur to me until right now to check the doobly-doo.
Suggestion for future guest(s): Nick Calandra/Yahtzee Croshaw and the Second Wind team. Another bunch of creators taking ownership of their own content, would be a great follow up to the Sam Reich/Dropout episode. Loving these conversations!
Real engineering needs to be immediately removed from nebula. His political attack on Boeing, pseudoscience based, it reflects poorly on the platform. He needs to be removed.
I might be that one person who actually loved my group projects through school and uni. I also experienced an education that was almost entirely devoid of exams, but instead every single subject had a central group project. And to Michelle's point, I actually was taught intentionally, several times, how to best work in a group! Because, as my educational institutions pointed out, everything I do for my entire working life will be done in a group. And through that, I therefore have learnt an arsenal of techniques and approaches to tackle groups. And because of it, I love to work in a group, and I think I work well in a group. I was also that one person in the group who did everything themselves where occasionally freeloaders tagged along, but it has also given me a huge swath of skills and experiences to apply to absolutely any role or discipline I face, and it has made me better for it.
26:15 "Lead from the heart" - As an entreprenur who has run his own companies for... 20ish years... I LOVE this sentiment as its I think how I personally lead my teams. Now that my company has been acquired, I did wonder if my leadership style makes sense coming from a 12 people company to a 3000 people one but yeah... Lead from the heart, Michelle! 28:00 "Great leader, worst manager you'll ever have" nails it on the head - great sentence Dave :D Feel similar. Love you guys :D
It is good to know that the harmful aspects of RU-vid’s algorithm are due to ignorance rather than malice. Listening to too much music is not harmful to your brain so Todd’s ignorance is understandable. However Todd needs to look up this concept called “addiction” and how it relates to RU-vid/TikTok style shorts. My ADHD brain treats these shorts like a drug and I have vehemently requested that they be removed from my app because I love long form RU-vid content and I need to avoid having my dopamine depleted due to losing myself in said shorts. All of my requests have been in vain. So if Todd could contact the shorts person at RU-vid and tell them to back off before one of my fellow ADHD addicts snaps I really appreciate it.
I find this whole format so valuable, and I don't know if there's any creator I respect more than Michelle (maybe Casey Neistat and/or Hank Green?), so this was a no-brainer to watch, but I cannot express how much in awe of these two young (younger than me,at least) professionals. 38:00 this is just blowing my mind. Dave is a business genius, and this is something that CEOs across all businesses should explore. Seriously, this should be taught in every business school at the 101 level for how much insight it can provide to business owners and stakeholders: you don't know the value of your emploees if you aren't accounting for ALL of their contributions to the business, and when you fail to invest in those silent superheroes, you poison the well for all employees. 59:00 I am sorry to say, Michelle, but I don't believe it exists! I've worked in correctional facilities, small businesses, corporate environments and I am working toward my teaching certification, and I have never received the kind of training that you would benefit from. Don't get me wrong: I have been through countless HR seminars about breaking bad news, or being sensitive to others, or hiring and firing, or how to effectively coach someone, and I have read all sorts of research on teaching methods, lesson planning, classroom management behavioral analysis, neuroscience, and cognitive theory, and they all have a different story to tell about what works, but the people who advocate for them RARELY practice the methods they sell when instructing others in their usage. I have spoken with professionals at every level of an industry, and the ones I trust have told me the same thing, whereas the people who I've learned to be wary about were always completely confident in whatever philosophy they had adopted and supported. The best advice I have received that does stay the same seems to come down to: *Assume positive intent (generally, people try to do their best, so if it doesn't look that way,try to get the whole picture before reacting) *Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care (hokey, but true - there are two kinds of trust all leaders require from the people they lead: trust in their competence/vision, yes, but more importantly, trust in their intentions) *If you have someone who isn't meeting metrics but they are popular with coworkers/customers, check if those metrics are actually useful *If you have someone who always hits their goals but isn't popular with coworkers/customers, check if those metrics are actually useful *Metrics are, on the whole, a sign that you have too many employees and not enough leaders: get rid of the metrics and get more leaders *Find out who people go to to get answers/results - you probably already know who - make sure that person is on the same page as you and support them however you can - if they're not, find out if you're wrong or if they can be persuaded, and if you can't, do your best to part amicably before it becomes a problem. *Seriously, I cannot emphasize how terrible primarily relying on metrics for employee evaluations or business decisions is - don't do it. 1:04:00 OMG, Michelle, thank you! So many people assume that education or willpower is the only thing that stands in the way of planning for the future. The knowledge absolutely is critical, and frankly, if more people understood how important it was, maybe we could get some pressure on companies to provide living wages because people would have a better sense of what their labor is worth, but it simply isn't possible for so many people to put money aside at all, much less over an entire lifetime of working, in order to put enough aside for retirement.
I am a teacher at a university of applied sciences and we have tried the soft approach to guiding the group work, but students didn't respond very well to it. The common reaction was to try to figure out what we, the teachers, wanted the answer to be. I do have a feeling that perhaps that group of students had had a negative experience somewhere and were unable to trust teachers in the way we wanted them to.
I'm sure you have heard this before, but I have found that for this approach to work, you have to be CRYSTAL clear about what you are evaluating them on, and it is especially helpful to provide a point-by-point rubric to them with absolutely no ambiguity regarding how they will be scored (really this is best practice regardless of how you organize the assignment. Particularly, if you want students to get more creative with their solutions, give them points for more unique approaches to the problem: you could even play a variant of "never have I ever" where teams accrue credit for the number of viable concepts they can come up with that no other groups come up with. Importantly, don't tie the credits to a clear grade, because studies suggest that incentives with concrete rewards often hinder the creativity of participants: instead, get creative and reward the winning team with something more abstract like the option to choose a location for a future class period or some kind of dubious secondhand trophy that they can share for the rest of the semester. This activity can act as a springboard for projects or just a mental flexibility exercise. Again, the most important thing is to be purposeful and transparent with how you reward specific behaviors and work, and you should find that, over time, your students should become more comfortable with trying unique things. Oh! And maybe most importantly, try to highlight and celebrate as many failures (experimentally speaking, and only so long as they are exhibiting the right methods and trying new things). There is too much emphasis placed on groundbreaking discoveries without recognizing the billions of contributing studies that precede those to eliminate the ineffective solutions.
Yeah, you should let people go their own way. What you can do with that is have your own alumnis. Keep in touch with them and maybe even have events for them, when there's enough of them.
You can also look at it as them going somewhere else to learn something. There's always the possibility that they'll return and if you keep in touch with them, there's a strong possibility of that.
Abigail is so wonderfully brilliant, humble, and caring. She's a gift to the world far beyond being a RU-vidr and actress. She defies old classification, and that's a good thing. Abby is a model for the future of humanity where we question and throw away our labels and fear and lack of sovereignty and just be who we are. Unique, compassionate, powerful, and connected. Just purely our bright shining selves in all our unique magnificence. Thank you Abby for ALL you do and who you are. ❤
