unSILOed with Greg LaBlanc

We’ve all had to deal with problematic bosses or coworkers at some point in our career journeys. But the issue is how can you deal with them in a productive way, so everyone still feels comfortable in the workplace and gets their work done.Tessa West is a Professor of Psychology at New York University and a leading expert in the science of interpersonal communication. Her research focuses on questions such as: How can we improve communication across cultural and national divides, and what hurdles do we need to overcome to make hybrid communication work? She is also the author of “Jerks at Work” which focuses on coping with toxic colleagues.Tessa joins Greg to talk about how toxicity can affect productivity in an office environment, maybe having some empathy for the jerks, credit stealing, and finding allies within the workplace.Episode Quotes:Three rules to consider before quitting your jobI have a couple rules. One is, the person who's creating these problems, you know, or the person who's in charge of the person creating these problems, are they motivated to change? Are they motivated to fix it? So, if the motivation isn't there, you're not going to get anywhere. And then the second piece of that is, assuming they're not motivated, how much flexibility do you have at all to shift over to a new team? To a new manager? If you're stuck in this kind of power dynamic, they are not motivated to change and these behaviors are deal-breakers, it's just like any relationship—you don't really have much of a choice but to exit. But I would definitely try, you know, having some of those conflict conversations. Don't kind of jump out right away because you think the grass is greener. You know, we're seeing with the great resignation, a lot of people are surprisingly wishing they had their old job back because we have very little evidence that the new place we're going to is any better. So, I'd add the kind of last piece of advice is, when you're thinking about leaving and you know where you're going to go next, you have to put them through the same kind of gauntlet that you put your old job through to make sure that those same problems, or even worse problems you've never even heard of, don't exist. And we don't interrogate new jobs in the same way that we interrogate our existing jobs. We sort of always assume it's going to be better. But you have to really interrogate them before you make that step, because if you're not careful, you're just going to have a career of a whole bunch of horizontal moves. And it's going to be very hard to climb up.What “toxic” really meansWe use the word "toxic" a lot. We throw it around. And everyone says it, but no one knows what it means. And I think it's very much in the eye of the beholder. One person's toxic coworker, or toxic boss, is another person's someone with leadership potential who knows how to get ahead here.How smart jerks can turn your good traits into badSo, one thing that bosses do is they try to show as much trust in teams as possible. So, there's this whole movement out there to not micromanage, to trust people. We use this kind of vague language that implies that, if we're overseeing them too much, if we're communicating with them too much, they're going to burn out, they're going to get irritated, they want autonomy, you know, all that kind of good stuff. But smart jerks at work will take advantage of cultures that are trying to sort of create that level of autonomy by sneaking in and actually taking over the reins and communicating for their boss, often, for people who are not one step beneath the boss but two steps beneath them.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Diederik StapelGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at New York UniversityProfessional Profile at BrightSight SpeakersTessa West WebsiteTessa West on LinkedInTessa West on TwitterHer Work:Tessa West on Google ScholarTessa West on SubstackThe West Interpersonal Perception LabJerks at Work: Toxic Coworkers and What to Do About Them Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Has the idea of “peak performance” as the general public sees it, run its course? It seems like nowadays, there is much more of a focus & value placed upon rest and recuperation, rather than the unsustainable burnout culture & hustle to get ahead that we’ve seen for ages.Brad Stulberg is a writer and fellow at the University of Michigan’s graduate school of public health. He says his work explores principles of mastery and well-being that transcend capabilities and domains, with a focus on the philosophical and psychological foundations of excellence, and the habits and practices necessary to attain it. He is also the author of the book “The Practice of Groundedness” and coauthor of the books “Peak Performance” and “The Passion Paradox.” Greg and Brad examine the human tendency  to strive for more in this episode, and when that becomes a fault. They also touch on heroic individualism, how being diagnosed with OCD changed his coaching practice, the degradation of community, and brown rice & M&Ms. Episode Quotes:Looking through medical conditions through a philosophical lens.I think that, broadly, if we spent more time in philosophy, there'd be less mental illness because we'd accept that this kind of suffering is a part of the human condition. I think a big cause of particularly depression is people having this false belief that they should never be sad. They should never experience despair. They should never question the meaning of life. When in fact, all the great arts and philosophies do just that. And I think if we can normalize that, then when people find themselves doing it, they wouldn't freak out and be so scared, which is often what causes like an anxious depressive spiral. So yeah, I think that would be good, but I think when someone's kind of in the throes of this, the medical model makes a lot of sense, but I think there's a real risk of getting stuck in the medical model. And I think the path out is to go from medical model to philosophical, thinking about these sorts of things.Defining heroic individualismIt is the constant pursuit of more. It is the false belief that you can achieve or accomplish your way to fulfillment. And it is a phenomenon where the goalpost is always 10 yards down the field. Obsessive checking & workplace performanceSo it used to be that you could get really caught up in how you're performing at work. And maybe 50 years ago, there was one or two promotion cycles a year, and you got really stressed and you either got the promotion or not. Then 20 years ago, there's a whole suite of dashboards that you can check every week. Now, there are real time metrics in just about every single knowledge working job that you can get obsessed with checking. Show Links:Recommended Resources:The Coddling of the American MindAbout | Steven C. Hayes, PhDNIMH » Obsessive-Compulsive DisorderGuest Profile:Speaker Profile at AAE SpeakersBrad Stulberg WebsiteBrad Stulberg on LinkedInBrad Stulberg on TwitterBrad Stulberg on FacebookHis Work:The Growth EquationArticles in MediumArticles in Men’s HealthThe Practice of Groundedness: A Transformative Path to Success That Feeds--Not Crushes--Your SoulThe Passion Paradox: A Guide to Going All In, Finding Success, and Discovering the Benefits of an Unbalanced Life HardcoverPeak Performance: Elevate Your Game, Avoid Burnout, and Thrive with the New Science of Success  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We don't really question the importance of studying mathematics, or the importance of studying science. We don't even question the importance of athletics! But when it comes to the arts, people don't really understand their significance. They think of them as frills, as fun and pretty, but they don't understand their deep significance for humans.Ellen Winner's research focuses on cognition in the arts in typical and gifted children. She studies the impact of arts education on the development of thinking dispositions or habits of mind such as reflection, exploration, and observation; and experimental aesthetics. She is a Professor Emerita of Psychology at Boston College and also a senior researcher at Project Zero, which is part of the Graduate School of Education at Harvard University. Ellen is the author of more than 100 articles and four books, including “An Uneasy Guest in the Schoolhouse: Art Education from Colonial Times to a Promising Future,” “Invented Worlds: The Psychology of the Arts,” and “Studio Thinking: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education.”Greg and Ellen chat about the history of art education, why sports gets a pass in terms of what is valuable in our education systems, the struggle to define “art” and studying memoirs & empathy. Episode Quotes:Great works of art improve our well-beingIf you think about the greatest works of art in any domain, whether it's music, literature, painting, these works tend to elicit negative emotions in us. They're tragic. So why do we want to keep going back to them? Why do we want to experience these negative emotions? And one of the answers to this is that when people are looking at art that elicits negative emotions; they also feel positive emotions because, a.) For the beauty of the work and b.) They make meaning from it. And it's the meaningfulness of it that gives you a positive feeling. And so, when you're feeling very moved, you always have a mixture of negative and positive emotions. And so, I think that great works of art do improve our well-meaning because they get us to think, they get us to reflect, and they get us to grow. Blindspot about artsPeople don't really understand the arts. They think of them as frills, fun, and pretty, but they don't understand their deep significance for humans. And I think that's why psychology has marginalized the arts.Cognitive empathyCognitive empathy usually means just understanding the other person's situation. You can be very good at understanding somebody else's perspective, but not care at all about their suffering. You can be kind of Machiavellian about it. You know what the person is feeling, but you don't wanna make them better.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Eliot EisnerProject ZeroGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at Boston CollegeProfessional Profile at Project ZeroProfessional Profile at Edge.orgEllen Winner WebsiteHer Work:Ellen Winner on Google ScholarAn Uneasy Guest in the Schoolhouse: Art Education from Colonial Times to a Promising FutureHow Art Works: A Psychological ExplorationStudio Thinking 3: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts EducationThe Child as Visual Artist (Elements in Child Development)Studio Thinking from the Start: The K–8 Art Educator’s HandbookEducational Research and Innovation Art for Art's Sake?: The Impact of Arts EducationStudio Thinking 2: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Can we teach leaders to become better strategic decision makers? Our guest Zach Shore says we can. Part of the problem he says is that people get stuck in rigid mindsets, which often involve the failure to take alternative perspectives.. In his books “Blunder: Why Smart People Make Bad Decisions,” and “sense of the enemy’ he aims to create a taxonomy of blunder causing mindsets and recount examples of effective strategic empathy through historical story telling. Zach Shore is a historian of international conflict. He focuses on understanding the enemy. He is currently a professor of History at the Naval Postgraduate School and Senior Fellow at the Institute of European Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Greg and Zach discuss types of empathy, pattern breaking moments, definition of a “blunder,” an analysis of Putin, and the importance of truly understanding our enemies.Episode Quotes:Breaking down rigid mindsetsPart of the problem is that people get absolutely stuck in rigid mindsets. And what I tried to do in Blunder was break them down and create a topology of what those rigid mindsets were. I call them cognition traps and each chapter of the book, I tried to show how different decision-makers, over time, fell into that particular rigid mindset. Cure-all-ism was just one of them. The idea that you have a solution that works well in one situation. And then you insist that it must work well everywhere and apply it to every situation. And that's when the disasters come.Three challenges every human facesThere are three hard challenges that humans struggle with. And one of them is the ability to think like others. Another is understanding causation and the third is attaining wisdom.Why having data isn’t enoughBig data has a role, but it's a type of number worship. People have gotten carried away with what it can tell us. And usually, the reason is it leaves out the human factor. For example:polls. We've seen election after election, how wrong the polls are, and that's because they're dealing with humans, and they forget that humans lie. Humans lie sometimes. And sometimes not intentionally. Sometimes they lie to themselves. They convince themselves of things that are not true, that they will vote for someone they never would, or embarrassed to say whom they will vote for. Anytime you're dealing with humans and numbers, you have to be much more circumspect. And our number worship has let us astray like I mentioned in Afghanistan and Vietnam, in our elections. It's ridiculous to overvalue big data at the expense of human behavior.Show Links:Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at Naval Postgraduate SchoolProfessional Profile at Discourse MagazineContributors Profile at The GlobalistZach Shore WebsiteHis Work:Grad School Essentials: A Crash Course in Scholarly SkillsA Sense of the Enemy: The High Stakes History of Reading Your Rival's MindBlunder: Why Smart People Make Bad DecisionsBreeding Bin Ladens: America, Islam, and the Future of EuropeWhat Hitler Knew: The Battle for Information in Nazi Foreign Policy Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In our guest's latest book “Sick to Debt,” Peter Ubel theorizes whether it is a bigger insult to call someone a doctor or an economist. Well, Peter is actually both!Peter Ubel M.D. is a physician and behavioral scientist whose research and writing explores the mixture of rational and irrational forces that affect our health, our happiness and the way our society functions.  Ubel is the Madge and Dennis T. McLawhorn University Professor of Business, Public Policy and Medicine at the Duke University Fuqua School of Business. He uses the tools of psychology and behavioral economics to explore topics like informed consent, shared decision making and health care cost containment. His other books include “Pricing Life: Why it’s Time for Healthcare Rationing,” and “Free Market Madness: How Economics is at Odds with Human Nature—and Why It Matters,”Greg and Peter discuss a range of health predicaments like why smoking is still legal, the possibility of free market style health care in the US, the methods behind pricing healthcare & prescriptions, and the uncertainty of costs. Episode Quotes:On insurance choiceIf you buy life insurance, you're really just thinking about the risk of death that you'll face in a given year and if it's worth spending for what kind of premium and whatever the payment is called. If you're buying health insurance, you're thinking about a million possible services that you might need in a given year. Some are predictable, and those you should totally factor into the choice. If you know that you have multiple sclerosis and are going to be on expensive medicines, you better figure out how well the plans cover those kinds of medicines. And you’re probably gonna want to have a higher premium, low out of pocket costs. So that should inform your choice.Society is a reflection of your individual risk.We, as individuals, are pretty crazy about risk understanding, right? But I think the government and the society at large are a reflection of our individual risk attitudes too. And so, we end up with some crazy policies as a result.Healthcare system in SingaporeIn Singapore, they have an interesting system. The prices aren't set by some competitive market. The government says the price. So one of the reasons they spend 4% [of GNP] is the prices are much lower, and I'm not talking about prices for drugs. That's I don't know, particularly, although I'm guessing they almost, everyone in the country has lower drug prices than we have in the United States because the governments, you know, negotiate that. But even for hospital care for physician fees, things like that are much lower prices because of government regulation. What's really interesting about their model is, they have everybody mandated. And this is, again, not quite a free market. They mandate that they have some of their pay go into a health savings account.Show Links:Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at Duke Fuqua School of BusinessProfessional Profile at University of MichiganProfessional Profile on Psychology TodayContributor’s Profile at ForbesPeter Ubel WebsitePeter Ubel on LinkedInPeter Ubel on TwitterPeter Ubel on FacebookHis Work:Peter Ubel on Google ScholarSick to Debt: How Smarter Markets Lead to Better CareYou're Stronger Than You Think: Tapping into the Secrets of Emotionally Resilient PeopleFree Market Madness: Why Human Nature is at Odds with Economics--and Why it MattersCritical Decisions: How You and Your Doctor Can Make the Right Medical Choices Together Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When was the last time you learned something just out of curiosity? Not for school or to advance your career, with no end goal in sight. To learn something new just to learn it? Zena Hitz is a Tutor at St. John’s College in Annapolis and the author of “Lost in Thought: The Hidden Pleasures of an Intellectual Life.” Her book explores the meaning and the value of learning through images and stories of bookworms, philosophers, scientists, and other learners, both fictional and historical. She writes and speaks on the human need to learn for its own sake and what it means for educational institutions to take that need seriously. Fun fact: she tweets at @zenahitz, where she is a frequent interlocutor with the rapper-turned-philosopher, MC Hammer.In this conversation, Zena and Greg talk about what “learning for its own sake” means, solitary learning and detaching from the world, wasting time and attention and living life on autopilot.Episode Quotes:How would you define learning for its own sake?So say I'm thinking about a mathematical theorem. I'm not doing it for work. I'm not doing it to get a grade in my class. I'm just doing it because I'm interested in it. I want to know what the answer is. Now in a way I'm working towards a goal. But in another way, what I'm doing is from the outside kind of pointless. That's an example of learning for its own sake. Real thinkingReal thinking is a way of connecting with others. It's an engagement with someone else's thoughts. Usually, at the outset, something provokes you: a conversation, a book, a theorem, an idea, an observation, and you think about it.How social class shapes religionIn our culture, religion is for working class, lower class people. And the higher you go, the less religion you have. The fewer commitments your religion requires of you. So, it's something I think about sometimes, it's the unspoken obstacle to diversity, which is supposed to be this thing that all the universities want.Show Links:Recommended Resources:The Clouds - WikipediaDorothy DayThe Room Where It HappensCitizenship in a RepublicGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at St. John’s CollegeSpeaker Profile at Princeton University PressZena Hitz WebsiteZena Hitz on TwitterHer Work:Catherine Project WebsiteLost in Thought: The Hidden Pleasures of an Intellectual Life Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When the general public thinks about physics, they’re usually thinking about the origins of the universe, quantum theory; other terms that have bled into pop culture. But true physics isn't elegant in the way it is seen in textbooks. Our guest says the science is much more chaotic than that and Economics has a lot to learn from physics.Mark Buchanan is a physicist and science writer with Bloomberg, and is the author of the book "Forecast: What Physics, Meteorology and the Natural Sciences Can Teach Us About Economics."In this episode, Mark joins Greg as they discuss physics envy, negative & positive feedback, equilibrium vs disequilibrium, the similarities between economics and weather patterns and predicting traffic flows. Episode Quotes:Natural instabilities are all around us.Storms, in the sense of weather, are the result of natural instabilities that the system churns up. The same thing as financial crises, economic crises, debt crises, all those things are natural instabilities that get churned up by the normal workings of the economy. It's just going to create those things. And, it seemed to me that economics would be well placed to put more emphasis than it does today on understanding the instabilities that create all these kinds of things so that we can understand when they're likely to occur, perhaps see how we might be able to head them off, avoid the conditions where they tend to occur. And maybe some of them are things that have to occur. Maybe there's no suppressing them. We have to live with them and try to make them as least damaging as we can.Valuable experiments gives us systemsSome of the most valuable experiments in physics and mathematics are those things that give us systems that work in such a totally [different] way that our intuition would have never expected anything to work.On equilibrium mindsetThe equilibrium mindset makes you originally think that anything crazy that's happened or out of the norm must have been caused by something unusual, some external factor that came into the system and triggered some big offense.Show Links:Recommended Resources:unSILOed: Heroes and Villains: Stories Behind the Flash Crash feat. Liam VaughanGuest Profile:Professional Profile at BloombergSpeaker’s Profile at Chartwell SpeakersMark Buhanan on LinkedInMark Buchanan on TwitterHis Work:Mark Buchanan’s BlogArticle on AeonForecast: What Physics, Meteorology, and the Natural Sciences Can Teach Us About EconomicsThe Social Atom: Why the Rich Get Richer, Cheaters Get Caught, and Your Neighbor Usually Looks Like YouNexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of NetworksUbiquity: Why Catastrophes Happen Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Sibling rivalry seems to exist in all families, whether human or non-human.. So why would animals want to compete, and maybe even kill their nearest relations??This is the focus of the work of Douglas Mock. He is a Professor in the Department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma and co-author of “The Evolution of Sibling Rivalry.”Doug and Greg analyze some of our most intimate relationships in this episode, touching on scarcity mindsets, siblicide, birth order, and progeny selection.Episode Quotes:Why being wrong might help you find the right answersSo the advantage of being wrong is that it tells you that there's one or more variables you haven't been thinking through properly. And when you're right, you think, you pat yourself on the back and say, okay, that's wonderful. I must've understood everything perfectly. When you get answers exactly the opposite of what you expect, you realize, oh, I messed up. And that means that the entire literature that I read in preparing this prediction also was missing something, which means I have an opportunity to find out something subtle and interesting, and that everybody else has missed.On defining siblicideI defined it as something that involves significant amounts of overt aggression. So as opposed to just jostling or getting positioned for the next lump of food or out-consuming your rivals that are sharing limited budgets. Technological leap in evolutionary biologyThe biggest technological leap of all that has happened in evolutionary biology has been relatedness. The DNA assays of finding out who's related to whom and, in particular, where the male gametes are ending up in the population because nobody was quite sure who the father was of all of these nestling birds.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Hamilton’s rule  Scott Forbes Stephen Jay GouldRobert TriversStuart Firestein - Ignorance: How Is Drive Science Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at the University of OklahomaHis Work:More than Kin and Less than Kind: The Evolution of Family Conflict The Evolution of Sibling Rivalry Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Its hard to believe that a book like The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth,” hasn't been written before, which surfaces the structures that we need in order to convert contention into facts and knowledge. Jonathan Rauch is a senior fellow in the Governance Studies program at the Brookings Institute, and the author of eight books and many articles on public policy, culture, and government. He is a contributing writer for The Atlantic and recipient of the 2005 National Magazine Award, the magazine industry’s equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize. His many Brookings publications include “The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth,” as well as “The Happiness Curve: Why Life Gets Better after 50.” Although much of his writing has been on public policy, he has also written on topics as widely varied as adultery, agriculture, gay marriage, height discrimination, and animal rights. Jonathan and Greg tackle a range of topics as well today, focusing on how journalism maintained a sense of professionalism purely based on voluntary norms, viewpoint diversity, American universities & cancel culture, and why people seek out difficult challenges. Episode Quotes:Mainstream journalism vs. social media The reason mainstream journalism is still so much more reliable and grown up than social media is editors, human beings who sit there and look at stuff and ask reporters and other people, have you checked this? What have you done to check it? Let me see your notes. And then they think about, so is this story ripe? What are the effects of publishing this story right now? Does it need to be more balanced? So, those are the trade-offs we make all the time. And I think one of the strong suits of mainstream media and why it's so important to keep it financially viable.Learning happens in a place where you can take emotional risksLearning happens when we are forced to encounter ideas that we find offensive, wrong-headed, bigoted, sometimes hateful, and difficult. And we need to encounter them in physically safe settings, where they are stated in non-threatening ways. Fake news in the 19th Century:In the 19th century, American journalism was as cesspool of hyper-partisanship and fake news, H.L. Mencken. The greatest American journalist of his era writes in his memoirs about how he and the other Baltimore reporters at the other newspapers would get together over drinks and fabricate stories for the next day's paper. And since they all reported the same thing, everyone assumed it was true. So how do we get out of that? Some people decide that enough is enough. They're starting to lose readers and credibility. The American Society of Newspaper Editors forms. First thing it does is formulate some rules and standards for journalists, things that seem obvious now, like, you know, check your facts, run corrections, be accurate, give people a chance to respond. Someone had to think of those. Meanwhile, we start to see the opening of journalism schools at universities in the early 20th century. And they start training people and inculcating those norms.Show Links:Recommended Resources:John Stewart Mill book: On Liberty University of AustinGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at Brookings InstituteProfessional Profile at American PurposeJonathan Rauch WebsiteJonathan Rauch on LinkedInJonathan Rauch on TwitterHis Work:Articles in The AtlanticArticles in National AffairsThe Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of TruthKindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free ThoughtPolitical Realism: How Hacks, Machines, Big Money, and Back-Room Deals Can Strengthen American DemocracyDenial: My 25 Years Without a SoulThe Happiness Curve: Why Life Gets Better After 50Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The science of parenting…isn't really a science. It's a lot of myths and advice and stories from elder generations. But let's think about where we are getting that advice. Our guest Michaeleen Doucleff wrote her New York Times bestseller “Hunt, Gather, Parent ”after traveling to three continents with her 3-year-old daughter, Rosy. She says Maya, Inuit, and Hadzabe families showed her how to tame tantrums, motivate kids to be helpful, and build children’s confidence and self-sufficiency. Michaeleen Doucleff, PhD, is an author and a global health correspondent for NPR’s Science Desk, where she reports about disease outbreaks and children’s health. Greg and Michaeleen look at modern parenting all over the globe, why it isn't valued and respected as a “job” in many cultures, the loss of the extended family, whether or not babies are actually manipulative, and the pros of alloparenting.Episode Quotes:The auntie/uncle networkSuzanne Gaskins told me about this. She calls it the auntie network, where she teamed up. She lives part-time in this Maya village as anthropologist, but she also raised her three boys in Chicago, and she teamed up with like two other families, and they shared the childcare and child rearing together. And so, you know, one family would pick up from school one day and another family would pick up school from the other day. And then the weekends, they would drop the kids off at other people's houses. And so you create this little mini pod. It is what we would call it now after COVID where, you know, those are the alloparents, right? These families become the aunts, the uncles, the cousins. And, so that's really all you need. So I think focusing more on like quality of these families and how they overlap with your thinking of how kids should be treated is more important than quantity. It doesn’t take a village to raise a childPeople always say you need a village. No, you really don't. You need like two other adults that are helping. And that really care. And you work together and you can find that because people are hungry for it.What's negative about positive parentingMy problem with positive parenting is that the families ignore half of the child's life, the negative side. It's just ignored. And so there's this kind of very disingenuine approach. Just acknowledging what the child is doing, whether it's good or bad. And, I think positive parenting is missing that side of it.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Self-Esteem in Time and Place: How American Families Imagine, Enact, and Personalize a Cultural Ideal (Child Development in Cultural Context Series)Suzanne Gaskins | Northeastern Illinois UniversityGuest Profile:Professional Profile on NPRMichaeleen Doucleff WebsiteMichaeleen Doucleff on TwitterHer Work:Michaeleen Doucleff ArticlesHunt, Gather, Parent: What Ancient Cultures Can Teach Us About the Lost Art of Raising Happy, Helpful Little Humans Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.