E150 – Mindfulness and leadership with Dr Jutta Tobias Mortlock

So here we are today with this week's guest, Jutta Tobias Mortlock from City University. You to welcome to the show. Thanks for joining us. Can we start just by asking you to tell the audience a little bit about yourself and your background?

I have to get this one. And it's such a joy to be with you. It's always a joy to be with you and James, so this is a special treat. And hey, thanks for having me. About me. I had a real job for the first decade of my academic or my not academic. Look how I'm saying I'm an academic. I had a real job in a real organization. I was an IT consultant for a decade, and realized that working with people is really exciting for me, solving problems is really satisfying, and that people issues are the hard stuff, not the soft stuff. And so I went back to school after a decade of working in IT and management, and I now call myself a social psychologist, and I work for an academic institution, and I'm officially an academic, which I suppose switches many people's ears off immediately. But my quest is to help people at work be and do well. It's the intersection of well being and performance, and that's what I think is exciting. And dare I say, sexy. Am I allowed to say that?

We're totally allowed to say stuff like that here. Yes, we are, as you know, you two, we love geeking out on anything like this, so for us, even if it's not for everyone else, so loosely, the topics we're talking about today are mindfulness and leadership, which I know is, is covers some of the areas of your research as an academic, could you start maybe by just telling the audience a little bit about what you mean by mindfulness and what you mean by leadership. Fab.

So many people understand mindfulness as the definition that Jon COVID Zin had spawned in the early nineteens, which is all about paying attention in the moment on purpose. And that's a really nice definition for getting into mindfulness in organizations, mindfulness is a bit more mindfulness in organizations is both about individuals paying attention in the moment on purpose, but it's also about whole teams, or maybe even the organization itself, being mindful. And that's all about managing stress, but managing stress both individually and managing stress collectively. So for me, mindfulness is more than individual things that I personally can do, and its potential is to bring healing to organization and to actually help the whole organization manage difficulty more effectively, and have everybody be responsible for managing stress and challenges, not just you or I individually, having to cope with it by ourselves. Does that make sense? Yeah, that makes

total sense. Thanks for sharing that. And when we talk about, I guess, leaders and leadership, what do we mean by that? What are you thinking in the broadest sense of people's roles and abilities to lead, or are you thinking more in terms of the people who run the organization from from a managerial

point of view? So leadership is really fascinating, because I would say, in the last 20 years or so, those of us who study and watch and research leadership have seen a significant shift in how we understand leadership. So we don't understand leadership as a trait or something that a person has and is endowed with, and you know, and it's stuck, and it stays with them, independent of whatever context they're in. And I suppose anybody who's a leader in an organization that has children or siblings at home knows that their authority as a leader is not always accepted, and so leadership is is almost a property that shape shifts and it and you or I might have it in this conversation different at different points, but it's Also something that we collectively could build and grow. And nowadays we believe that leadership as a property of a group or an organization is more powerful than us thinking that leadership belongs to a person by themselves. And so that's, I think again, where the power lies. The potential of leadership is to. To empower all of us and see the interdependencies between us, and that's what makes leadership powerful, which

is, I think, what people listeners will recognize much more than any one person. So I think that, like, when I think about the organization, certainly I've worked in, okay, there's been there's been an organogram, and there's been someone at the top, and there's been but even that person at the top is answerable to a board or to shareholders, and it's more complicated, but who drives that organization at different points? Who is, I don't know, I guess I always think about it in sports terms. You know me Utah, I'm immersed in sports world, so I always think about it as like, in some senses, like a peloton in cycling, like people take the reins at different points, and different people pick up different responsibilities to shape direction and support and keep people together. Does that make sense? Is that, is that what you mean a little bit when you talk about leadership, that

is so fascinating that you that you talk about leadership being a peloton, because this is why I'm studying both mindfulness and leadership together, because it's not as well known as you know, John COVID. Since mindfulness a stress reduction, but mindfulness in organizations for the last 30 years has been understood as collective stress management capability. And so when it started, when, when researchers started to realize that organizations that manage stress Well, collectively are a little bit like a flock of birds. And this is what my image is, a flock of birds, but that's your image of the peloton. And so literally, since the early 90s, we've got reams of valid and reliable evidence that says when an organization has individuals that are interdependent, where individual action is coordinated, by constantly checking whether my goal is in line with the overall goal of the group, and where I adjust my individual actions to fall in line with where the flock of birds or where your peloton is going, that's when performance can become more reliable, and that's really sexy, because it's not just about individuals not being left out by themselves to perform and manage and be strong, but actually it the power of a group being interdependent makes that that group perform more reliably, especially during stressful and unexpected challenges. And we now live in this world of not only unexpected challenges, like what we've seen in the last few years, but we also live in an increasing world of interdependence, where actions that are happening, you know, five countries further currently, are absolutely going to impact you and me here in this country, that where we're living in. So that's really fascinating to me. And so both mindfulness and leadership really overlap, because we're increasingly realizing that both are collective or social ideas, you know, things that are in the space between me and me and you, and I think that gives us a lot of hope.

I do love talking to you, so you always manage to bring it down to a really positive stance as well, which is such a joy. So I think what you're talking about really so flock of birds, peloton all these different ideas of groupings, right? I love because all of them have, and I'm going to, I'm not, as you know, my colorful, colorfulness of language is not, is not great. I'm not the most creative English writer. But there is something almost I don't know supple about the image of both a flock of birds and a peloton like they they flow. It's not it's not jagged edges, it's not turns and corners. And I think when we think about agility, and particularly agile organizations in the grander scheme of things, so rather than any specific methodology, the ability to for all of us to flex and meet the needs, I keep coming back to the word like reflexive, or the words reflexive and responsive, so where people can be, and I've never really linked the two until you just said that, but I've as in, never really linked mindfulness and reflects and responses. But what we're really talking about is being able to live in the moment of your organization, understand the context and and shift and subtly move your team to fulfill the needs that that exist for your organization at any given moment, is that, is that really what you're talking about?

Yes, it is. And your point is really important. And so the the conventional understanding of mindfulness is paying attention, and, you know, awareness of, you know, whatever is going on present moment experience. But what we're finding nowadays, more and more in the scientific evaluations of which types of mindfulness training are actually effective in helping people be and do well, we are realizing that acceptance of the present moments is much more important than only paying attention. Information, or, you know, awareness of what's going on. So you're saying, you're calling this almost receptivity or agility, and I'm calling this, in my world, a proactive acceptance. And that's not just acceptance in, you know, from a you know, you almost want to see it like as improv. So we realize that organizations and teams that are saying yes and that are basically able to improvise and do almost what the improv comedians do, they perform better, but but the it's because the the stance that underlies an improv comedians yes and acceptance is the same stance that you say makes a team agile, but it's not based on focusing my attention on the here and now. It's actually the focusing attention on the here and now, in many cases, actually makes people's experience, especially of stressful situations, bigger. And therefore, we now find that mindfulness when you only understand it as paying attention in the moment without this active acceptance, actually doesn't have teeth, isn't it's not powerful. It's not effective. But mindfulness as an acceptance of what I find, and my willingness to play with it and to be with it and to improvise. That's what is powerful, not only for individuals who manage stress, which we know, but also for teams and organizational leaders to perform and to find solutions in an increasingly complex world, because that's the currency that we're dealing with,

which makes actually, when you think about it, and you think of some of the other psychological theories and tools that are around total sense. Because if we think about things like, whoop, if we think about self regulation, we know self awareness alone isn't enough. In fact, it can be, in some cases, a problematic thing, because you get immersed in the problem rather than, rather than and where the problems come from, versus trying to be solution focused. So it makes total sense. You know, you say it, but I guess it then leads me the question of, does that mean that people who maybe have less confidence or comfort with changing contexts find it harder to be mindful, or it's going to be bit more challenging for leaders who maybe like a plan and like a structure and then want to go forward and execute because they're not as able to be in the moment. Or is it more about, you know, just having skills to be able to do that? Really

good question. And what comes up for me as I'm listening to your question is something that I think you are also a big expert on values. So I think the mindfulness story, and the reason why, if I'm allowed to say this, I've co founded a center of excellence in mindfulness research here at City with truly edgarton, was because we want to help contribute to the next generation of Mindfulness Trainings, mindfulness interventions, mindfulness programs that help people in all sort walks of life succeed. And so we have, what we're finding here is that mindfulness was we're starting to understand the utility of mindfulness. But if you tell me that mindfulness is just I need to just be present, just be here I go. And now what do I do, especially when it's difficult, especially when I'm not naturally comfortable in that situation? And that's where different schools of mindfulness that we're bringing together here at City and this is why I'm at City University. There are schools of mindfulness that focus more or less on, you know, the attention focus bit, and that are focusing more, for example, on the values piece. So if I'm paying attention on the here and now and then, I have as a backbone clear in my mind what's important to me, what my values are, then I have a scaffolding against which I can make the right decisions. But if I don't have the scaffolding of knowing what's important, what values are good, and you guys do this so well at the World of Work Project, you guys help people understand what values are and how to clarify these values in order to make better decisions, and in order to make in order to choose what works for both the individual and the organization. So values is really important to help people get through difficult in the moment situations. And

I think, I think you make a really good point there. And I think what's really nice about the way you've just described, it explains so much that we struggle sometimes to explain to people in leadership positions, or indeed people wanting to lead around, where the connection is between some of that social bonding and understanding and transparency and relationship and the realities of making decisions and why it matters. So sometimes we find, certainly in our experiences, that we find people in those situations. In those positions, who tend to be quite focused on the future, and like looking at right, where do we want to go to next? Where do we want to go to next? And can you explain to me why it matters so much that I need to build these relationships, but actually by building an understanding of the people around us and the context and people's values in the way they will work and what matters to them, but also what matters to their peers and their team. They're much more able to exist in that present moment, and I have an understanding and make decisions about that team. Is that, is that? What you mean by that?

what that brings up is that here at City. So I teach mindfulness and I teach leadership, but I teach both mindfulness and leadership as a team sport. And you and James, when you came in to teach for our students, you were so popular, and by the way, you were and people are still talking about you guys and your presentations, because you explained that the way you understand the leadership development that you do is you work with individuals and groups, almost as a peloton, and you ask, you ask my students first of what their value sets was, before you even taught them about the cool stuff that You do as leadership developers and so being clear about the values creates community among my students that I still have based on this intervention, this tiny intervention that you've done. And so what does this mean for you know, I'm a I'm an analyst of behavior, and I'm a theorist in that sense. So that sounds terribly theoretical. And you and I want, we want to be practical. Practically. What you've just said means that we create leadership culture. And really, we create solid leadership structures by helping people be pro social, by helping people to be engaged with each other, each other, and to become, you know, have this engaged acceptance that we've talked about just a little while ago. So we we make people be pro social, and we make people care about each other, and then we realize that the work becomes just a task, because all the interpersonal stuff is the buffer and almost the fertilizer that makes them manage literally anything. And so investing in people, this is what you guys do at the World of Work Project, and this is what I research, is what probably one of the most strategic things that people can do to manage difficult work challenges later on.

Yeah, it's, it's interesting, isn't it? When you see, when you take a step back and you can see how it's all some of so much of it's connected. Um, I guess that leads me on to Question, what, what do you think stops people from doing this? What do you think it is, is it a lack of understanding that they even need to do this? Or is there, barriers in the way that stops people being able to occupy this place of mindfulness?

Yeah, and mindful is a leadership right? Because it's so similar, because, if you say, because the definition that I like the best about leadership is, it's keith Brent, I think coined it. He said leadership is convincing the collective to become collectively responsible for collective problems. I'm not really saying this very well, but it's basically, it's all about me saying to you, you and I have to really care about the geopolitical situation currently here, and because it's collect we're collectively responsible, and it's collectively our problem, and that's what leadership is, right? We're shifting, and we're improving the world in the way that's beneficial for all of us. So there's two things you asked me about, what stops people from buying into this? And the first thing is the narrative currently, and that's actually creating all this contradictory evidence on mindfulness research now that's coming about is the narrative is I'm independent. I need to worry about myself. I need to enhance myself. I'm alone in this world. I'm going to be looked at alone. I'm evaluated through my social media, alone. So the world tells me I'm not interdependent, even though I am and we all are, but so my my belief that I'm alone and I have to worry about myself, first and foremost, stops people to buy into this collective responsibility or collective enabler stuff. Because if we don't believe that other people can help us. Why would we invest in other people? So there's a huge body of evidence that says we are much more interdependent than we believe we are, and ignoring that really hurts us. So not knowing interdependence is a problem the other. Thing is, people have assumptions about what drives performance. I think it's related. So people assume that performance is evaluated individually, and I think that also is practices in organizations are simplistically evaluating me on how well I do, and you on how well you do, rather than us. So if I don't believe that my performance will will go up, if I start caring about you, start being interested in you, then I will also not buy into mindfulness or leadership as a team sport, but these are assumptions, and these assumptions are based on a on a Cartesian culture that's valuing individual action perhaps more than reality. Reality is not based on independent action. It

It's always, it's always really hard for me to hear, hear things like that and not get dragged into a conversation about individualism, just because when you, when you frame it like that, it is, it is much clearer to understand why the way that we research psychology, for example, becomes quite almost problematic, because we've got, we're trying to hold all other things. We're basically arguing, if you hold all these things equal, this will happen. And you're like, Well, you can't that's, that's literally the independence is such in the way that we live as humans, it's impossible to do so. So effectively, you're starting from the wrong the wrong place, I guess. And I guess, the other thing that strikes me about all of this is this, this insight. I mean, actually, when you think about it, it's relatively misguided. Let's go with misguided, the idea that we measure people's performance individually and don't count or look at their performance within their team. Now, I know some people do, but largely, you know, most of, most of the people I work with, you know, they very proudly show me their performance management process, and it's like, this person did this, and I'm like, and what did they do in the team? And they're like, Oh, we don't look at that. And you're like, well, so if you're not measuring, and they're like, Well, you can't measure what someone brings the team and like, well, you can, firstly, you can. Secondly, just because you can't measure it doesn't mean it's not important. So important. That just means we haven't figured a way to measure it. And I find it fascinating, because I'm like, Well, if you don't tell people that's what matters, why or how do you think you can expect them to play a truly integrated role in your team? Now I realize that sounds really obvious when you say it out loud, and yet, I definitely don't see that in the workplace. Do you? I mean, is that? Is that fair? Do you? How do we, how do we go changing that?

Yeah, it's, I think it's completely fair, and it's completely in line with how we really understand how people work, like the the social context, and this is, this goes back to Kurt Lewin, you know, the godfather of modern psychology.

you do too, right? Absolutely. And so Kurt Lewin said every behavior is a function of the person and the situation. And we now know more and more that the social context, the interpersonal and actually not social, actually interpersonal much more, because I don't really care about the room that you're in. You know, you don't really care about the physical location I'm in, but the relationship that you and I have affects my motivation. It affects my attitude, and effect affects my behavior much more than my skill, my smarts, even my physical energy level, and that's a reality, but our world doesn't reflect that, because the world and even performance management systems are that simple. Just look at the individual, because they see the individual. They don't. The problem is that we don't see the emotional climate. We don't see the relational energy between you and me, but boy, do I feel it. Do I know that it's here? Jane, you know I know exactly what energy I get out of speaking with you. It's it's not impossible to measure. I understand the micro culture that we've created. It's not impossible to measure, but it's harder to measure than looking at you and measuring your height, and, you know, things like that, I'm in

danger of going off on a tangent, which, as you know, is James and I's favorite thing, but I'm going to do it anyway. Okay, watch, how much do you think our obsession with numbers and the kind of numericalization of human humans is is part of the problem? And the reason I'm asking that is that anything? And it kind of comes from our conversation about what could be measured and can't be measured, or what what people are confident measuring. I think which is more accurate. I mean, the number of times people have said to me, I've, you know, the number of times I've been doing consultancy, and I'd like, I'd said, I'd like to talk to each of your team. How are you how are you going to measure what their responses are? I don't know. I'll have heard. Them, and that's still data. It's not it's not that analytical tool of measuring that data, but I'm still a human being who can interpret what it says and use my expertise to understand it. And I guess I feel like the world is obsessed, particularly the working world, and the world of work performance is obsessed with numerical measurement. So even when we think about, like, I mean, the idea that you can grade someone's entire annual performance on a number of one to five with no nuance feels, I mean, it's, I mean, it would work. I think maybe if I was a line worker, maybe in a factory and I had one single job and I wasn't allowed to do any other job, maybe even then, I think I would still struggle that,

right? Yeah, exactly. That's even even, like, processing plants or calls, and of course it was to go. But even, like, you know, Apple packaging products, there's all sorts of social dynamics that make people actually either perform or sabotage their own performance if they don't feel that they're seen or heard, or if they, you know, if they feel so frustrated, this is the thing that makes us human because, because we have language and we have imagination, we do things not based on rational, you know, impulse and response. We do things because we disagree and because we want to get our honor back, even if it costs us ourselves, right? So even in the simplest job, this performance evaluation that you talk about is rubbish. Coming back to the topic of performance measurement, the most successful paper I've ever co authored. Co authored almost 10 years ago, and I've been one of the very junior members of the team. And most highly cited is a paper where we asked senior HR directors what the future of performance measurement is, and we conclusively found that in an area of uncertainty, does that ring any bells? Right? Most organizations operate in an area of uncertainty nowadays, not when we when we wrote this paper in 2013 when you operate on uncertainty or interdependence of your actions with competitors, you know, the social climate, etc, it is absolutely nonsensical to focus on numerical measurements, because when you're not completely clear about the long term outcomes that you actually are pursuing, focusing on numerical measurements is like having apples and pears that just really don't jive together. So then getting fixated on, you know 50 or 70 or 80% when actually you need to qualitatively. You know like you need to define with words, with imagination, what your performance management goal is. You cannot have your performance measurements not be qualitative or negotiated. They have to be negotiated and agreed. When the world in which you work is is uncertain and interdependent and complex, that's so you you are, you are tangent. This is not a tangent. This is the core of understanding leadership, and this is the core of understanding mindfulness in organizations, right?

Okay, so let's, let's think about some of the practicalities. We have people listening, and they're like, oh, this, this sounds familiar, and like I should understand this well. When you I guess, firstly, are there organizations that do this well, or have you, have you come across them? And if so, what does that look like? What are the, what are the things they're doing in the moment and outside of the moment. So planning and stuff like that, and development that allows them to create a, I guess, foster an environment of mindful mindfulness in their leadership. And then, yes,

yeah, absolutely. And so that the literature. And then this is solid scientific literature. This is absolutely, you know, valid and reliable, because scientific means nothing more than it's valid, you know, we know it's because of that and it's reliable, that means it doesn't just happen on Tuesday. And so this is the literature on high reliability organizations. It's 30 years old, and it talks about how collective mindfulness, collective care and curiosity and attention and a commitment to managing difficulty collectively and anticipating and responding to unexpected problems as a collective unit. That's the literature that says performance happens reliably in those organizations. These tend to be organizations where errors or problems result in loss of a limb or loss of life. So this literature started to come about when people looked at nuclear power plants, when people looked at intensive care units, when people looked at air traffic control centers, where if one person makes a mistake, 150 or 300 people. Die. But the really interesting thing for normal business now, because normal business is becoming more complex and difficult to even avoid problems that could really cost you daily. So the things that normal organizations should learn is that these organizations put slack into their resourcing. These organizations put a collective spin on onto their performance management. And so if an air traffic control center, for example, does this really well, you bet it does it really well by training and by rewarding people not just to look out for their own performance, but to look to their left and to look to their right and notice this is where mindfulness comes in, right? Notice when the person sitting next to them and having the computers in front of them starting to sweat a little bit, and it's starting to maybe swear a little bit, because they're starting to not manage the the airplanes that they have to, you know, get to land, or whatever air traffic control center people do, and so people are trained to pay attention not only to their own needs, but also to the needs of others, and that's when performance becomes reliable, and that's when individuals know they're not alone, and individuals have each other's back, literally. And I've been studying defense for six, seven years, and I've been working in defense and on mindfulness issues, but not from an individual relaxation perspective, or turning somebody into a better killing machine that is better at being in the moment and shooting more sharply, but by having teams really pay attention to how the team responds to under to unexpected pressures. And so those organizations which where the stakes are high, and where the cost of not paying attention to managing things in the strategic, proactive, almost like pro social, like pro human, kind of way, they invest resources into having teams, you know, to develop each other and teams that really look out for each other.

Ordinary organizations have two short time horizons to invest in this, because ultimately, this is about changing culture. This is what we're talking about. So we have to use the C word here. The C word is culture drives everything you do, and culture is the things we do, the way we do things around here. And if we're not willing to change the way we do things around here, none of the training that you, that you deliver so brilliantly, and that I research and spend a lot of time researching will have any effect. So

obviously I love everything you've just said, because that backs up my world view of how the world exists. But I want to, I want to ask you a slightly look coming at it from a different angle. So one of the things that I've observed with zero academic rigor is might the organizations I work with is that there is less attention paid to clearly defining what good looks like, either for a product, a service, a behavior, a role, sometimes like, what does this role actually look like in detail, and what does good look like if they do it well? And I there is, there is a less meticulous attention to detail than perhaps I experienced in some of the organizations I worked with 1015, years ago. Right now, it may that absolutely, may just be the organizations I'm working with, and they're definitely more creative, and they're culturally stronger and things like that, but there's there's more, less meticulousness, and one of the things that just makes me question is, alongside what you've just described, in that high pressure environment and that that high reliability, the need for high reliability, I also feel like there is An understanding you're describing, that each member of staff understands what good looks like and what good doesn't look like, so that they can be mindful of it and have that information. Does that do you, do you get a sense, or is that something that you need in order to be mindful of the environment your team's in? Do you need to understand that? Or is it actually like? Largely something that sits outside of what the leaders need?

Brilliant question, and I've got something that I know plays to your to your strength and your expertise, that you and I have to talk about again today. I actually So your question is, do we need to know what good looks like in order to perform well in today's world? And my answer is a resounding no. The thing that we need to do and the thing that we need to have is psychological safety. You and I know this. That actual psychological safety that means me. Uh, trusting that you won't bite my head off when I present you with a half baked idea, and you trusting that I'm not hogging the screen space and I'm going to give you air air time here as well. So we are giving and taking. We are safe to share. We're safe to criticize. We're safe to that, you know, to have a debate, because interpersonally, we're cool, that is the biggest predictor of performance in the 21st century, much bigger than even being clear about what the goal is, having roles and responsibilities distributed, even knowing what impact we're going to have. And we know this based on a project Aristotle that Google did, where they quenched the numbers and checked what makes teams effective in the 21st century, and knowing what good looks like, that means being clear about the goal. That means being clear about your impact. That means having clarified roles and responsibilities didn't come anywhere near as high as teams that are psychologically safe.

Okay? So obviously, we've got people listening and they're like, Okay, this makes sense. I want to explore it more on my team, hopefully. But what can they be doing? So if you've got people in leadership teams and they're like, Okay, my organization is definitely not quite at the stage where they fully get this yet, and we're not embracing it. What first steps would you encourage people to to take to kind of start thinking about how they might bring it more into their themselves and their teams?

Yeah, I think you guys do this, and I remember you coming in to us. This cannot. This cannot happen from the bottom. This has to happen from the leadership team, because organizations and teams watch the actions of the leaders, even if the leaders say they're welcoming people to be more pro social, more friendly, whatever it's what the leadership or the you know, the leader of the pack does. So people, people watch the leaders actions, not what they don't listen to what they say. And so leaders need to start being a bit more vulnerable. They need to do a vulnerability lead. You guys talk about this too, don't you? And people need to. Leaders need to invite more questions. Need to invite more two way communications. Leaders need to show a bit of themselves as human beings, especially in a virtual world now, especially in a blended world where everything is more formal, so leaders need to show a bit of skin, show a bit of vulnerability. Welcome questions. Praise people for for bringing bad news and criticism, and have the strength and the backbone to be bigger than just to, you know, to be to become defensive in this so asking real questions, listening for the real answers to your questions, and saying, I don't know how to do This is all stuff that promotes a culture of pro sociality and psychological safety. It's effectively like taming wild animals to trust you, right?

Brilliant. And in terms of this idea of being more, I guess, this flock of birds idea, which I love, by the way, I love this idea of thinking of a team, like any of the teams I work with, is a flock of birds. What if you were gonna, if you were actually going to try and introduce that concept and get people talking and thinking about that, is there, is there anything you would recommend they do? Is there anything they should listen to or look at or read to understand a little bit more about this idea of this interdependency between their team and to be able to sort of flex and move and act as act as a flock, if you like.

Can I just say that I've recently co authored a paper on how to make psychological safety happen in virtual teams? It's really a practical short paper where we've just chewed through what are the practical things people can do to promote psychological safety in a virtual environment? It's one thing that people can do. Okay, that's

brilliant. Well, we're almost running out of time before we do any final thoughts that you would like to share on the topic of mindfulness. Team, mindfulness leadership.

What do I wish that people knew? Ah, yes, right. I think my my biggest wish for people is that they I wish people knew that the potential of mindfulness is much bigger than stress relief or individual self enhancement, and it is actually its original aspiration is to heal suffering that sounds a bit esoteric, but actually to help improve us deal with an increasingly complex world in. The world at large, not in our intra psychic, not in our inner world. So it's actually an outside world thing. So and that means action, that doesn't mean relaxation. That's what I wish people knew.

Well, I think that's a really good place to draw this conversation to a close, although I could probably go on for ages. Final thing, if people are interested in your work, or if they want to read more about what you do, Where's, where's the best place for them to go?

I'm at City University. I have a, you know, an academic page. If anybody wants to read my research papers and the chapters I wrote, I will chew their ears off about it, and I'd be so delighted. So there's lots of stuff written, there's lots of stuff on LinkedIn, there's lots of YouTube videos as well that people could watch, but they can find me on LinkedIn. Of course, I'd be delighted to hear from people brilliant.

Well, it's always a pleasure to talk to you, so thank you for sparing us time. We really enjoyed the chat, and that's all from me. So it's a goodbye from me. Thank you so much, Jane, what a joy to spend time with you.