Category: Blog

Your blog category

  • An Holistic Framework for Shared Design Leadership

    An Holistic Framework for Shared Design Leadership

    Picture this: You’re in a meeting room at your tech company, and two people are having what looks like the same conversation about the same design problem. One is talking about whether the team has the right skills to tackle it. The other is diving deep into whether the solution actually solves the user’s problem. Same room, same problem, completely different lenses.

    This is the beautiful, sometimes messy reality of having both a Design Manager and a Lead Designer on the same team. And if you’re wondering how to make this work without creating confusion, overlap, or the dreaded “too many cooks” scenario, you’re asking the right question.

    The traditional answer has been to draw clean lines on an org chart. The Design Manager handles people, the Lead Designer handles craft. Problem solved, right? Except clean org charts are fantasy. In reality, both roles care deeply about team health, design quality, and shipping great work. 

    The magic happens when you embrace the overlap instead of fighting it—when you start thinking of your design org as a design organism.

    The Anatomy of a Healthy Design Team

    Here’s what I’ve learned from years of being on both sides of this equation: think of your design team as a living organism. The Design Manager tends to the mind (the psychological safety, the career growth, the team dynamics). The Lead Designer tends to the body (the craft skills, the design standards, the hands-on work that ships to users).

    But just like mind and body aren’t completely separate systems, so, too, do these roles overlap in important ways. You can’t have a healthy person without both working in harmony. The trick is knowing where those overlaps are and how to navigate them gracefully.

    When we look at how healthy teams actually function, three critical systems emerge. Each requires both roles to work together, but with one taking primary responsibility for keeping that system strong.

    The Nervous System: People & Psychology

    Primary caretaker: Design Manager
    Supporting role: Lead Designer

    The nervous system is all about signals, feedback, and psychological safety. When this system is healthy, information flows freely, people feel safe to take risks, and the team can adapt quickly to new challenges.

    The Design Manager is the primary caretaker here. They’re monitoring the team’s psychological pulse, ensuring feedback loops are healthy, and creating the conditions for people to grow. They’re hosting career conversations, managing workload, and making sure no one burns out.

    But the Lead Designer plays a crucial supporting role. They’re providing sensory input about craft development needs, spotting when someone’s design skills are stagnating, and helping identify growth opportunities that the Design Manager might miss.

    Design Manager tends to:

    • Career conversations and growth planning
    • Team psychological safety and dynamics
    • Workload management and resource allocation
    • Performance reviews and feedback systems
    • Creating learning opportunities

    Lead Designer supports by:

    • Providing craft-specific feedback on team member development
    • Identifying design skill gaps and growth opportunities
    • Offering design mentorship and guidance
    • Signaling when team members are ready for more complex challenges

    The Muscular System: Craft & Execution

    Primary caretaker: Lead Designer
    Supporting role: Design Manager

    The muscular system is about strength, coordination, and skill development. When this system is healthy, the team can execute complex design work with precision, maintain consistent quality, and adapt their craft to new challenges.

    The Lead Designer is the primary caretaker here. They’re setting design standards, providing craft coaching, and ensuring that shipping work meets the quality bar. They’re the ones who can tell you if a design decision is sound or if we’re solving the right problem.

    But the Design Manager plays a crucial supporting role. They’re ensuring the team has the resources and support to do their best craft work, like proper nutrition and recovery time for an athlete.

    Lead Designer tends to:

    • Definition of design standards and system usage
    • Feedback on what design work meets the standard
    • Experience direction for the product
    • Design decisions and product-wide alignment
    • Innovation and craft advancement

    Design Manager supports by:

    • Ensuring design standards are understood and adopted across the team
    • Confirming experience direction is being followed
    • Supporting practices and systems that scale without bottlenecking
    • Facilitating design alignment across teams
    • Providing resources and removing obstacles to great craft work

    The Circulatory System: Strategy & Flow

    Shared caretakers: Both Design Manager and Lead Designer

    The circulatory system is about how information, decisions, and energy flow through the team. When this system is healthy, strategic direction is clear, priorities are aligned, and the team can respond quickly to new opportunities or challenges.

    This is where true partnership happens. Both roles are responsible for keeping the circulation strong, but they’re bringing different perspectives to the table.

    Lead Designer contributes:

    • User needs are met by the product
    • Overall product quality and experience
    • Strategic design initiatives
    • Research-based user needs for each initiative

    Design Manager contributes:

    • Communication to team and stakeholders
    • Stakeholder management and alignment
    • Cross-functional team accountability
    • Strategic business initiatives

    Both collaborate on:

    • Co-creation of strategy with leadership
    • Team goals and prioritization approach
    • Organizational structure decisions
    • Success measures and frameworks

    Keeping the Organism Healthy

    The key to making this partnership sing is understanding that all three systems need to work together. A team with great craft skills but poor psychological safety will burn out. A team with great culture but weak craft execution will ship mediocre work. A team with both but poor strategic circulation will work hard on the wrong things.

    Be Explicit About Which System You’re Tending

    When you’re in a meeting about a design problem, it helps to acknowledge which system you’re primarily focused on. “I’m thinking about this from a team capacity perspective” (nervous system) or “I’m looking at this through the lens of user needs” (muscular system) gives everyone context for your input.

    This isn’t about staying in your lane. It’s about being transparent as to which lens you’re using, so the other person knows how to best add their perspective.

    Create Healthy Feedback Loops

    The most successful partnerships I’ve seen establish clear feedback loops between the systems:

    Nervous system signals to muscular system: “The team is struggling with confidence in their design skills” → Lead Designer provides more craft coaching and clearer standards.

    Muscular system signals to nervous system: “The team’s craft skills are advancing faster than their project complexity” → Design Manager finds more challenging growth opportunities.

    Both systems signal to circulatory system: “We’re seeing patterns in team health and craft development that suggest we need to adjust our strategic priorities.”

    Handle Handoffs Gracefully

    The most critical moments in this partnership are when something moves from one system to another. This might be when a design standard (muscular system) needs to be rolled out across the team (nervous system), or when a strategic initiative (circulatory system) needs specific craft execution (muscular system).

    Make these transitions explicit. “I’ve defined the new component standards. Can you help me think through how to get the team up to speed?” or “We’ve agreed on this strategic direction. I’m going to focus on the specific user experience approach from here.”

    Stay Curious, Not Territorial

    The Design Manager who never thinks about craft, or the Lead Designer who never considers team dynamics, is like a doctor who only looks at one body system. Great design leadership requires both people to care about the whole organism, even when they’re not the primary caretaker.

    This means asking questions rather than making assumptions. “What do you think about the team’s craft development in this area?” or “How do you see this impacting team morale and workload?” keeps both perspectives active in every decision.

    When the Organism Gets Sick

    Even with clear roles, this partnership can go sideways. Here are the most common failure modes I’ve seen:

    System Isolation

    The Design Manager focuses only on the nervous system and ignores craft development. The Lead Designer focuses only on the muscular system and ignores team dynamics. Both people retreat to their comfort zones and stop collaborating.

    The symptoms: Team members get mixed messages, work quality suffers, morale drops.

    The treatment: Reconnect around shared outcomes. What are you both trying to achieve? Usually it’s great design work that ships on time from a healthy team. Figure out how both systems serve that goal.

    Poor Circulation

    Strategic direction is unclear, priorities keep shifting, and neither role is taking responsibility for keeping information flowing.

    The symptoms: Team members are confused about priorities, work gets duplicated or dropped, deadlines are missed.

    The treatment: Explicitly assign responsibility for circulation. Who’s communicating what to whom? How often? What’s the feedback loop?

    Autoimmune Response

    One person feels threatened by the other’s expertise. The Design Manager thinks the Lead Designer is undermining their authority. The Lead Designer thinks the Design Manager doesn’t understand craft.

    The symptoms: Defensive behavior, territorial disputes, team members caught in the middle.

    The treatment: Remember that you’re both caretakers of the same organism. When one system fails, the whole team suffers. When both systems are healthy, the team thrives.

    The Payoff

    Yes, this model requires more communication. Yes, it requires both people to be secure enough to share responsibility for team health. But the payoff is worth it: better decisions, stronger teams, and design work that’s both excellent and sustainable.

    When both roles are healthy and working well together, you get the best of both worlds: deep craft expertise and strong people leadership. When one person is out sick, on vacation, or overwhelmed, the other can help maintain the team’s health. When a decision requires both the people perspective and the craft perspective, you’ve got both right there in the room.

    Most importantly, the framework scales. As your team grows, you can apply the same system thinking to new challenges. Need to launch a design system? Lead Designer tends to the muscular system (standards and implementation), Design Manager tends to the nervous system (team adoption and change management), and both tend to circulation (communication and stakeholder alignment).

    The Bottom Line

    The relationship between a Design Manager and Lead Designer isn’t about dividing territories. It’s about multiplying impact. When both roles understand they’re tending to different aspects of the same healthy organism, magic happens.

    The mind and body work together. The team gets both the strategic thinking and the craft excellence they need. And most importantly, the work that ships to users benefits from both perspectives.

    So the next time you’re in that meeting room, wondering why two people are talking about the same problem from different angles, remember: you’re watching shared leadership in action. And if it’s working well, both the mind and body of your design team are getting stronger.

  • From Beta to Bedrock: Build Products that Stick.

    From Beta to Bedrock: Build Products that Stick.

    As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

    Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster. Here’s why:

    The pitfalls of feature-first development

    When you start building a financial product from the ground up, or are migrating existing customer journeys from paper or telephony channels onto online banking or mobile apps, it’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of creating new features. You might think, “If I can just add one more thing that solves this particular user problem, they’ll love me!” But what happens when you inevitably hit a roadblock because the narcs (your security team!) don’t like it? When a hard-fought feature isn’t as popular as you thought, or it breaks due to unforeseen complexity?

    This is where the concept of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) comes in. Jason Fried’s book Getting Real and his podcast Rework often touch on this idea, even if he doesn’t always call it that. An MVP is a product that provides just enough value to your users to keep them engaged, but not so much that it becomes overwhelming or difficult to maintain. It sounds like an easy concept but it requires a razor sharp eye, a ruthless edge and having the courage to stick by your opinion because it is easy to be seduced by “the Columbo Effect”… when there’s always “just one more thing…” that someone wants to add.

    The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

    The importance of bedrock

    So what’s a better approach? How can we build products that are stable, user-friendly, and—most importantly—stick?

    That’s where the concept of “bedrock” comes in. Bedrock is the core element of your product that truly matters to users. It’s the fundamental building block that provides value and stays relevant over time.

    In the world of retail banking, which is where I work, the bedrock has got to be in and around the regular servicing journeys. People open their current account once in a blue moon but they look at it every day. They sign up for a credit card every year or two, but they check their balance and pay their bill at least once a month.

    Identifying the core tasks that people want to do and then relentlessly striving to make them easy to do, dependable, and trustworthy is where the gravy’s at.

    But how do you get to bedrock? By focusing on the “MVP” approach, prioritizing simplicity, and iterating towards a clear value proposition. This means cutting out unnecessary features and focusing on delivering real value to your users.

    It also means having some guts, because your colleagues might not always instantly share your vision to start with. And controversially, sometimes it can even mean making it clear to customers that you’re not going to come to their house and make their dinner. The occasional “opinionated user interface design” (i.e. clunky workaround for edge cases) might sometimes be what you need to use to test a concept or buy you space to work on something more important.

    Practical strategies for building financial products that stick

    So what are the key strategies I’ve learned from my own experience and research?

    1. Start with a clear “why”: What problem are you trying to solve? For whom? Make sure your mission is crystal clear before building anything. Make sure it aligns with your company’s objectives, too.
    2. Focus on a single, core feature and obsess on getting that right before moving on to something else: Resist the temptation to add too many features at once. Instead, choose one that delivers real value and iterate from there.
    3. Prioritize simplicity over complexity: Less is often more when it comes to financial products. Cut out unnecessary bells and whistles and keep the focus on what matters most.
    4. Embrace continuous iteration: Bedrock isn’t a fixed destination—it’s a dynamic process. Continuously gather user feedback, refine your product, and iterate towards that bedrock state.
    5. Stop, look and listen: Don’t just test your product as part of your delivery process—test it repeatedly in the field. Use it yourself. Run A/B tests. Gather user feedback. Talk to people who use it, and refine accordingly.

    The bedrock paradox

    There’s an interesting paradox at play here: building towards bedrock means sacrificing some short-term growth potential in favour of long-term stability. But the payoff is worth it—products built with a focus on bedrock will outlast and outperform their competitors, and deliver sustained value to users over time.

    So, how do you start your journey towards bedrock? Take it one step at a time. Start by identifying those core elements that truly matter to your users. Focus on building and refining a single, powerful feature that delivers real value. And above all, test obsessively—for, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker (whomever you believe!!), “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

  • Design for Amiability: Lessons from Vienna

    Design for Amiability: Lessons from Vienna

    Today’s web is not always an amiable place. Sites greet you with a popover that demands assent to their cookie policy, and leave you with Taboola ads promising “One Weird Trick!” to cure your ailments. Social media sites are tuned for engagement, and few things are more engaging than a fight. Today it seems that people want to quarrel; I have seen flame wars among birders.  

    These tensions are often at odds with a site’s goals. If we are providing support and advice to customers, we don’t want those customers to wrangle with each other. If we offer news about the latest research, we want readers to feel at ease; if we promote upcoming marches, we want our core supporters to feel comfortable and we want curious newcomers to feel welcome. 

    In a study for a conference on the History of the Web, I looked to the origins of Computer Science in Vienna (1928-1934)  for a case study of the importance of amiability in a research community and the disastrous consequences of its loss. That story has interesting implications for web environments that promote amiable interaction among disparate, difficult (and sometimes disagreeable) people.

    The Vienna Circle

    Though people had been thinking about calculating engines and thinking machines from antiquity, Computing really got going in Depression-era Vienna.  The people who worked out the theory had no interest in building machines; they wanted to puzzle out the limits of reason in the absence of divine authority. If we could not rely on God or Aristotle to tell us how to think, could we instead build arguments that were self-contained and demonstrably correct? Can we be sure that mathematics is consistent? Are there things that are true but that cannot be expressed in language? 

    The core ideas were worked out in the weekly meetings (Thursdays at 6) of a group remembered as the Vienna Circle. They got together in the office of Professor Moritz Schlick at the University of Vienna to discuss problems in philosophy, math, and language. The intersection of physics and philosophy had long been a specialty of this Vienna department, and this work had placed them among the world leaders.  Schlick’s colleague Hans Hahn was a central participant, and by 1928 Hahn brought along his graduate students Karl Menger and Kurt Gödel. Other frequent participants included philosopher Rudolf Carnap, psychologist Karl Popper, economist Ludwig von Mises (brought by his brother Frederick, a physicist),  graphic designer Otto Neurath (inventor of infographics), and architect Josef Frank (brought by his physicist brother, Phillip).  Out-of-town visitors often joined, including the young Johnny von Neumann, Alfred Tarski, and the irascible Ludwig Wittgenstein. 

    When Schlick’s office grew too dim, participants adjourned to a nearby café for additional discussion with an even larger circle of participants.  This convivial circle was far from unique.  An intersecting circle–Neurath, von Mises, Oskar Morgenstern–established the Austrian School of free-market economics. There were theatrical circles (Peter Lorre, Hedy Lamarr, Max Reinhardt), and literary circles. The café was where things happened.

    The interdisciplinarity of the group posed real challenges of temperament and understanding. Personalities were often a challenge. Gödel was convinced people were trying to poison him. Architect Josef Frank depended on contracts for public housing, which Mises opposed as wasteful. Wittgenstein’s temper had lost him his job as a secondary school teacher, and for some of these years he maintained a detailed list of whom he was willing to meet. Neurath was eager to detect muddled thinking and would interrupt a speaker with a shouted “Metaphysics!” The continuing amity of these meetings was facilitated by the personality of their leader, Moritz Schlick, who would be remembered as notably adept in keeping disagreements from becoming quarrels.

    In the Café

    The Viennese café of this era was long remembered as a particularly good place to argue with your friends, to read, and to write. Built to serve an imperial capital, the cafés found themselves with too much space and too few customers now that the Empire was gone. There was no need to turn tables: a café could only survive by coaxing customers to linger. Perhaps they would order another coffee, or one of their friends might drop by. One could play chess, or billiards, or read newspapers from abroad. Coffee was invariably served with a glass of purified spring water, still a novelty in an era in which most water was still unsafe to drink. That water glass would be refilled indefinitely. 

    In the basement of one café, the poet Jura Soyfer staged “The End Of The World,” a musical comedy in which Professor Peep has discovered a comet heading for earth.

    Prof. Peep: The comet is going to destroy everybody!

    Hitler:  Destroying everybody is my business.

    Of course, coffee can be prepared in many ways, and the Viennese café developed a broad vocabulary to represent precisely how one preferred to drink it: melange, Einspänner, Brauner, Schwarzer, Kapuziner. This extensive customization, with correspondingly esoteric conventions of service, established the café as a comfortable and personal third space, a neutral ground in which anyone who could afford a coffee would be welcome. Viennese of this era were fastidious in their use of personal titles, of which an abundance were in common use. Café waiters greeted regular customers with titles too, but were careful to address their patrons with titles a notch or two greater than they deserved. A graduate student would be Doktor, an unpaid postdoc Professor.  This assurance mattered all the more because so many members of the Circle (and so many other Viennese) came from elsewhere: Carnap from Wuppertal, Gödel from Brno, von Neumann from Budapest. No one was going to make fun of your clothes, mannerisms, or accent. Your friends wouldn’t be bothered by the pram in the hall. Everyone shared a Germanic Austrian literary and philosophical culture, not least those whose ancestors had been Eastern European Jews who knew that culture well, having read all about it in books.

    The amiability of the café circle was enhanced by its openness. Because the circle sometimes extended to architects and actors, people could feel less constrained to admit shortfalls in their understanding. It was soon discovered that marble tabletops made a useful surface for pencil sketches, serving all as an improvised and accessible blackboard.

    Comedies like “The End Of The World” and fictional newspaper sketches or feuilletons of writers like Joseph Roth and Stefan Zweig served as a second defense against disagreeable or churlish behavior. The knowledge that, if one got carried away, a parody of one’s remarks might shortly appear in Neue Freie Presse surely helped Professor Schlick keep matters in hand.

    The End Of Red Vienna

    Though Austria’s government drifted to the right after the War, Vienna’s city council had been Socialist, dedicated to public housing based on user-centered design, and embracing  ambitious programs of public outreach and adult education. In 1934 the Socialists lost a local election, and this era soon came to its end as the new administration focused on the imagined threat of the International Jewish Conspiracy. Most members of the Circle fled within months: von Neumann to Princeton, Neurath to Holland and Oxford, Popper to New Zealand, Carnap to Chicago. Prof. Schlick was murdered on the steps of the University by a student outraged by his former association with Jews.  Jura Soyfer, who wrote “The End Of The World,” died in Buchenwald.

    In 1939, von Neumann finally convinced Gödel to accept a job in Princeton. Gödel was required to pay large fines to emigrate. The officer in charge of these fees would look back on this as the best posting of his career; his name was Eichmann.

    Design for Amiability

    An impressive literature recounts those discussions and the environment that facilitated the development of computing. How can we design for amiability?  This is not just a matter of choosing rounded typefaces and a cheerful pastel palette. I believe we may identify eight distinct issues that exert design forces in usefully amiable directions.

    Seriousness: The Vienna Circle was wrestling with a notoriously difficult book—Wittgenstein’s Tractus Logico-Philosophicus—and a catalog of outstanding open questions in mathematics. They were concerned with consequential problems, not merely scoring points for debating. Constant reminders that the questions you are considering matter—not only that they are consequential or that those opposing you are scoundrels—help promote amity.

    Empiricism: The characteristic approach of the Vienna Circle demanded that knowledge be grounded either in direct observation or in rigorous reasoning. Disagreement, when it arose, could be settled by observation or by proof. If neither seemed ready to hand, the matter could not be settled. On these terms, one can seldom if ever demolish an opposing argument, and trolling is pointless.

    Abstraction: Disputes grow worse when losing the argument entails lost face or lost jobs. The Vienna Circle’s focus on theory—the limits of mathematics, the capability of language—promoted amity. Without seriousness, abstraction could have been merely academic, but the limits of reason and the consistency of mathematics were clearly serious.

    Formality: The punctilious demeanor of waiters and the elaborated rituals of coffee service helped to establish orderly attitudes amongst the argumentative participants. This stands in contrast to the contemptuous sneer that now dominates social media.  

    Schlamperei: Members of the Vienna Circle maintained a global correspondence, and they knew their work was at the frontier of research. Still, this was Vienna, at the margins of Europe: old-fashioned, frumpy, and dingy. Many participants came from even more obscure backwaters. Most or all harbored the suspicion that they were really schleppers, and a tinge of the ridiculous helped to moderate tempers. The director of “The End Of The World” had to pass the hat for money to purchase a moon for the set, and thought it was funny enough to write up for publication.

    Openness: All sorts of people were involved in discussion, anyone might join in. Each week would bring different participants. Fluid borders reduce tension, and provide opportunities to broaden the range of discussion and the terms of engagement. Low entrance friction was characteristic of the café: anyone could come, and if you came twice you were virtually a regular. Permeable boundaries and café culture made it easier for moderating influences to draw in raconteurs and storytellers to defuse awkward moments, and Vienna’s cafés had no shortage of humorists. Openness counteracts the suspicion that promoters of amiability are exerting censorship.

    Parody: The environs of the Circle—the university office and the café—were unmistakably public. There were writers about, some of them renowned humorists. The prospect that one’s bad taste or bad behavior might be ridiculed in print kept discussion within bounds. The sanction of public humiliation, however, was itself made mild by the veneer of fiction; even if you got a little carried away and a character based on you made a splash in some newspaper fiction, it wasn’t the end of the world.

    Engagement: The subject matter was important to the participants, but it was esoteric: it did not matter very much to their mothers or their siblings. A small stumble or a minor humiliation could be shrugged off in ways that major media confrontations cannot.

    I believe it is notable that this environment was designed to promote amiability through several different voices.  The café waiter flattered each newcomer and served everyone, and also kept out local pickpockets and drunks who would be mere disruptions. Schlick and other regulars kept discussion moving and on track. The fiction writers and raconteurs—perhaps the most peripheral of the participants—kept people in a good mood and reminded them that bad behavior could make anyone ridiculous.  Crucially, each of these voices were human: you could reason with them. Algorithmic or AI moderators, however clever, are seldom perceived as reasonable. The café circles had no central authority or Moderator against whom everyone’s resentments might be focused. Even after the disaster of 1934, what people remembered were those cheerful arguments.

  • Design Dialects: Breaking the Rules, Not the System

    Design Dialects: Breaking the Rules, Not the System

    “Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a totally coherent system bound to context and behavior.” — Kenneth L. Pike

    The web has accents. So should our design systems.

    Design Systems as Living Languages

    Design systems aren’t component libraries—they’re living languages. Tokens are phonemes, components are words, patterns are phrases, layouts are sentences. The conversations we build with users become the stories our products tell.

    But here’s what we’ve forgotten: the more fluently a language is spoken, the more accents it can support without losing meaning. English in Scotland differs from English in Sydney, yet both are unmistakably English. The language adapts to context while preserving core meaning. This couldn’t be more obvious to me, a Brazilian Portuguese speaker, who learned English with an American accent, and lives in Sydney.

    Our design systems must work the same way. Rigid adherence to visual rules creates brittle systems that break under contextual pressure. Fluent systems bend without breaking.

    Consistency becomes a prison

    The promise of design systems was simple: consistent components would accelerate development and unify experiences. But as systems matured and products grew more complex, that promise has become a prison. Teams file “exception” requests by the hundreds. Products launch with workarounds instead of system components. Designers spend more time defending consistency than solving user problems.

    Our design systems must learn to speak dialects.

    A design dialect is a systematic adaptation of a design system that maintains core principles while developing new patterns for specific contexts. Unlike one-off customizations or brand themes, dialects preserve the system’s essential grammar while expanding its vocabulary to serve different users, environments, or constraints.

    When Perfect Consistency Fails

    At Booking.com, I learned this lesson the hard way. We A/B-tested everything—color, copy, button shapes, even logo colors. As a professional with a graphic design education and experience building brand style guides, I found this shocking. While everyone fell in love with Airbnb’s pristine design system, Booking grew into a giant without ever considering visual consistency.  

    The chaos taught me something profound: consistency isn’t ROI; solved problems are.

    At Shopify. Polaris () was our crown jewel—a mature design language perfect for merchants on laptops. As a product team, we were expected to adopt Polaris as-is. Then my fulfillment team hit an “Oh, Ship!” moment, as we faced the challenge of building an app for warehouse pickers using our interface on shared, battered Android scanners in dim aisles, wearing thick gloves, scanning dozens of items per minute, many with limited levels of English understanding.

    Task completion with standard Polaris: 0%.

    Every component that worked beautifully for merchants failed completely for pickers. White backgrounds created glare. 44px tap targets were invisible to gloved fingers. Sentence-case labels took too long to parse. Multi-step flows confused non-native speakers.

    We faced a choice: abandon Polaris entirely, or teach it to speak warehouse.

    The Birth of a Dialect

    We chose evolution over revolution. Working within Polaris’s core principles—clarity, efficiency, consistency—we developed what we now call a design dialect:

    ConstraintFluent MoveRationale
    Glare & low lightDark surfaces + light textReduce glare on low-DPI screens
    Gloves & haste90px tap targets (~2cm)Accommodate thick gloves
    MultilingualSingle-task screens, plain languageReduce cognitive load

    Result: Task completion jumped from 0% to 100%. Onboarding time dropped from three weeks to one shift.

    This wasn’t customization or theming—this was a dialect: a systematic adaptation that maintained Polaris’s core grammar while developing new vocabulary for a specific context. Polaris hadn’t failed; it had learned to speak warehouse.

    The Flexibility Framework

    At Atlassian, working on the Jira platform—itself a system within the larger Atlassian system—I pushed for formalizing this insight. With dozens of products sharing a design language across different codebases, we needed systematic flexibility so we built directly into our ways of working. The old model—exception requests and special approvals—was failing at scale.

    We developed the Flexibility Framework to help designers define how flexible they wanted their components to be:

    TierActionOwnership
    ConsistentAdopt unchangedPlatform locks design + code
    OpinionatedAdapt within boundsPlatform provides smart defaults, products customize
    FlexibleExtend freelyPlatform defines behavior, products own presentation

    During a navigation redesign, we tiered every element. Logo and global search stayed Consistent. Breadcrumbs and contextual actions became Flexible. Product teams could immediately see where innovation was welcome and where consistency mattered.

    The Decision Ladder

    Flexibility needs boundaries. We created a simple ladder for evaluating when rules should bend:

    Good: Ship with existing system components. Fast, consistent, proven.

    Better: Stretch a component slightly. Document the change. Contribute improvements back to the system for all to use.

    Best: Prototype the ideal experience first. If user testing validates the benefit, update the system to support it.

    The key question: “Which option lets users succeed fastest?”

    Rules are tools, not relics.

    Unity Beats Uniformity

    Gmail, Drive, and Maps are unmistakably Google—yet each speaks with its own accent. They achieve unity through shared principles, not cloned components. One extra week of debate over button color costs roughly $30K in engineer time.

    Unity is a brand outcome; fluency is a user outcome. When the two clash, side with the user.

    Governance Without Gates

    How do you maintain coherence while enabling dialects? Treat your system like a living vocabulary:

    Document every deviation – e.g., dialects/warehouse.md with before/after screenshots and rationale.

    Promote shared patterns – when three teams adopt a dialect independently, review it for core inclusion.

    Deprecate with context – retire old idioms via flags and migration notes, never a big-bang purge.

    A living dictionary scales better than a frozen rulebook.

    Start Small: Your First Dialect

    Ready to introduce dialects? Start with one broken experience:

    This week: Find one user flow where perfect consistency blocks task completion. Could be mobile users struggling with desktop-sized components, or accessibility needs your standard patterns don’t address.

    Document the context: What makes standard patterns fail here? Environmental constraints? User capabilities? Task urgency?

    Design one systematic change: Focus on behavior over aesthetics. If gloves are the problem, bigger targets aren’t “”breaking the system””—they’re serving the user. Earn the variations and make them intentional.

    Test and measure: Does the change improve task completion? Time to productivity? User satisfaction?

    Show the savings: If that dialect frees even half a sprint, fluency has paid for itself.

    Beyond the Component Library

    We’re not managing design systems anymore—we’re cultivating design languages. Languages that grow with their speakers. Languages that develop accents without losing meaning. Languages that serve human needs over aesthetic ideals.

    The warehouse workers who went from 0% to 100% task completion didn’t care that our buttons broke the style guide. They cared that the buttons finally worked.

    Your users feel the same way. Give your system permission to speak their language.

  • Your Team Reflects Your Leadership Values

    Your Team Reflects Your Leadership Values

    Your Team Reflects Your Leadership Values written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

    Catch the Full Episode: Episode Overview In this episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, host John Jantsch sits down with executive coach and author Aiko Bethea to explore the deeper reasons why teams struggle with communication, trust, and accountability. Drawing from her book Anchored, Aligned, Accountable, Aiko introduces a powerful framework for self-leadership that […]

    Your Team Reflects Your Leadership Values written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

    Catch the Full Episode:

    Episode Overview

    In this episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, host John Jantsch sits down with executive coach and author Aiko Bethea to explore the deeper reasons why teams struggle with communication, trust, and accountability. Drawing from her book Anchored, Aligned, Accountable, Aiko introduces a powerful framework for self-leadership that goes beyond surface-level tactics and addresses the internal beliefs and patterns—what she calls “BS”—that derail effective leadership.

    The conversation unpacks how leaders can move from reactive behaviors driven by external validation to intentional actions grounded in core values. Aiko shares practical insights on navigating difficult conversations, fostering psychological safety, and recognizing the “shadow side” of values that can unintentionally hinder growth.

    This episode is a must-listen for leaders seeking to build stronger relationships, create healthier team dynamics, and lead with clarity and accountability.

    Guest Bio

    Aiko Bethea is the founder and CEO of Rare Coaching & Consulting, where she serves as an executive coach to Fortune 100 companies and nonprofit organizations. She is the author of Anchored, Aligned, Accountable: A Framework for Transcending BS and Transforming Our Lives and Work, with a foreword by Brené Brown.

    Aiko is a former director at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a Dare to Lead™ Certified Facilitator. Her work focuses on helping leaders build self-awareness, navigate complexity, and create cultures rooted in trust and accountability.

    Key Takeaways

    1. Leadership Problems Are Often Values Problems

    What appears as a communication breakdown is often rooted in misalignment with personal values. Leaders must identify and consistently act from their core values to build trust and clarity.

    2. The “Anchored, Aligned, Accountable” Framework

    • Anchored: Know your core values
    • Aligned: Ensure your actions reflect those values
    • Accountable: Take responsibility for the impact of your actions

    3. The Hidden “BS” That Derails Leaders

    Limiting beliefs—such as scarcity, perfectionism, or the need for external validation—prevent leaders from operating authentically and confidently.

    4. Values Have a Shadow Side

    Even positive values like kindness can backfire. Avoiding difficult conversations in the name of kindness can lead to poor performance and misalignment.

    5. Self-Awareness Is the Foundation of Leadership

    Leaders must recognize how their behaviors impact others, especially when the outcomes don’t match their intentions.

    6. Psychological Safety Starts with the Leader

    Creating a safe environment requires modeling openness, inviting feedback, and responding constructively when challenged.

    7. Accountability Goes Beyond Metrics

    True accountability includes how results are achieved, not just whether targets are met. It’s about behaviors, relationships, and long-term impact.

    Great Moments (Timestamps)

    • 00:01 – The real reason teams struggle with hard conversations
    • 01:46 – Why self-leadership is missing in organizations
    • 02:56 – Defining the “BS” that blocks effective leadership
    • 05:25 – The difference between having values and being anchored in them
    • 07:04 – The “shadow side” of positive values like kindness
    • 10:10 – Why self-awareness is essential for leadership success
    • 13:01 – Rethinking accountability beyond numbers
    • 15:17 – Navigating leadership as a woman of color
    • 17:38 – Practical ways to build psychological safety
    • 20:19 – Diagnosing when something feels “off” in relationships

    Memorable Quotes

    “What looks like a communication problem is often a values problem hiding underneath.”

    “Your values have a shadow side—when overused, they can actually pull you out of alignment.”

    “Accountability isn’t just about results—it’s about the impact of how you show up.”

    Where to Connect with Aiko Bethea

    John Jantsch (00:01.848)

    What if the reason your team can’t have hard conversations with you, with each other, with clients isn’t a communication problem, but a values problem hiding underneath one? Hello and welcome to another episode of the Duck Tape Marketing Podcast. This is John Jantsch. My guest today is Aiko Bethea. She’s the founder and CEO of Rare Coaching and Consulting, an executive coach to Fortune 100 companies and nonprofits and the author.

    of a book we’re going to talk about today, Anchored, Aligned, Accountable, a framework for transcending bullshit and transforming our lives and work with a forward by Brene Brown. She’s a former director of at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and a Dare to Lead certified facilitator. So Iko, welcome to the show.

    Aiko (00:50.733)

    Hi, thanks for having me, John.

    John Jantsch (00:52.352)

    So, you know, these books, they’ve become really popular now that have curse words in the title. You know, that’s kind of a new thing. And then you put these, you know, you don’t want to have the full word. So you put the little aster, or the, what do we call that? An asterisk in there. So how are we supposed to pronounce that when it has the asterisk in it? I just went, blew through it and said the real word, but I always find that funny.

    Aiko (00:56.995)

    Ha ha ha!

    Aiko (01:05.953)

    Asterisk. huh. You’re right.

    Aiko (01:15.257)

    Well, one, I think you said it perfectly. When I’m with audiences, oftentimes maybe I’ll say BS instead, but you were perfect.

    John Jantsch (01:17.006)

    Hahaha

    John Jantsch (01:21.678)

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So you have worked with major institutions, Fortune 500 companies mentioned earlier, the Gates Foundation. Now you’re working with businesses of all sizes, really. What did you see inside those bigger organizations that made you want to build a framework for something, I don’t know, some people might see as unglamorous, like self leadership?

    Aiko (01:46.979)

    Yeah, I would say that the same thing I saw within organizations when I was supporting them with their culture reflected what I saw in the leaders at all levels. So not just the C-suite that I work with, but also folks who might be entry level. And it was this, what could have been built for them is knowing who they are and who they want to be as a leader.

    versus always looking for external validation, second guessing themselves based on whichever way the wind was blowing. Is my boss glad today? Are they in a bad mood? Who do I need to be? Did I get an argument with my partner today? What is the news saying? I remember that voice of my grandmother that was saying X, and Z, but supporting them and getting right back to their own grounding of who is it that they want to be and to have that intrinsic motivation.

    versus going any way which the wind blows and feeling insecure or unsupported.

    John Jantsch (02:46.158)

    When you, we already mentioned the BS in the subtitle, was there a pattern that you were actually naming when you chose that for your framing?

    Aiko (02:56.341)

    Absolutely. We say the framework itself is very simplistic. The framework for self leadership at home or at work is being anchored into your values, aligned in terms of your actions, aligning with those values, and then being accountable for whatever that impact might be as well. And I would say that just with that alone, it helps people to come back to the forefront. And I had to think about what gets in the way of somebody actually practicing this framework.

    And it’s what I call the BS. So they could be the things in terms of we all have a community or family of origin, this belief that you need to always be producing to earn your worth, a belief of perfectionism or scarcity, which is like, hey, there’s only enough of juice to go around, right? Or here comes John being hired, so I need to either sabotage him or keep one upping him versus thinking there’s enough of space for everyone.

    And once I go into scarcity, it completely goes, it’s like the cousin of catastrophizing. Because once I realize, man, John’s a new guy on the block, he’s gonna, there’s only space for one of us. And I think, wow, you’re doing so well and you’re outshining me. Next thing I do is I see that I’m gonna be fired. I’m not gonna be able to pay my bills. We’re gonna be homeless. It happens like in a second. So the BS is really all of these things that…

    we default to and may not always even recognize where they’re coming from, but they stop us from being able to be anchored, aligned, and accountable.

    John Jantsch (04:28.718)

    I love that talking about that because so many people, it’s it’s cliche, but it’s from childhood, right? A lot of the stuff that we carry around. I have nine siblings, so there were 10 children in my family. And so I should have a scarcity mentality, right? But my mom was always, her big thing was up, there’s always room for one more. There’s always room for one more.

    Aiko (04:40.126)

    woah.

    Aiko (04:48.471)

    I love that, yes.

    John Jantsch (04:49.0)

    And, and, and I think that that just really, you know, I feel like I do have that, like, Hey, I have no competitors. There’s like the world’s this big place, you know? And so, so it is funny that we do carry that into however we show up.

    Aiko (05:02.095)

    And that’s a beautiful gift that your mom gave you. That’s a great gift.

    John Jantsch (05:03.662)

    So there’s a, mean, you’re talking about being anchored in values. think a lot of business owners would say, well, yeah, I bring my values to it. My business is all about what I believe and what I value. So what’s the difference between having those values and actually, in your words, being anchored in?

    Aiko (05:25.155)

    Yeah, so I could probably show you better than I could tell you. So I start off with asking people just top two values, because once you get to four, five, and six, it’s just dilution. So John, what would you say one of your top values is? What is your top two?

    John Jantsch (05:38.51)

    top values? Well, I kind of shared one of them, I think that abundance, you know, is that the world’s an abundant place is certainly one of them. And then I would like to say also kindness that, you know, that that that’s something that’s hard to in practice when you’re especially as a business owner, when you’re forced with like people punching you, or it feels like it. But I would say those those are pretty high.

    Aiko (06:04.269)

    Yeah, yes. So when you’re in an abundance in that value, what are you doing? You kind of told us a little bit, but just say a couple of actions.

    John Jantsch (06:15.086)

    One, as I said, know, really certainly not viewing in the business context, not viewing people as competitors, but really viewing people as as collaborators, know, partners more often, regardless of how the world might label them.

    Aiko (06:30.957)

    Lovely and then kindness. What does that look like? What are you doing?

    John Jantsch (06:34.774)

    Well, probably starts with words, know, really choosing words carefully and not, you know, not letting like the fact that I’m stressed out about a deadline or something of impact, how I maybe show up in a meeting before that or something.

    Aiko (06:49.495)

    Yes, so have this degree of intentionality about what you say and maybe there are these behaviors that sounds like you maybe even pause before you say or do something. So one of your. You do I want to let you know.

    John Jantsch (06:58.582)

    I sound like a really good person, don’t I?

    Aiko (07:04.597)

    And if we go back to your question that you asked, you said, why does it get in the way in terms of people being able to be anchored in their values? And because your values are so lovely, I’m going to take a different turn on this of what could get in the way of that is that our values also have a shadow side, like when we over index on them. And so it might be, John, that there’s somebody who, let’s just say your business, you have somebody who is, you know, perpetually coming in late, leaving early.

    John Jantsch (07:09.272)

    Yeah.

    John Jantsch (07:20.642)

    Hmm.

    Aiko (07:34.64)

    something and your value is kindness so you want to you know you want to be able to not like be yelling you’re being very intentional about the words you use etc and this is not the case for you because I know that you’re a mature leader period but what might get in the way of somebody really being in that anchored in that value of kindness might be the shadow side where I’m not gonna give Bob the feedback might land really

    John Jantsch (08:01.966)

    Mm-hmm.

    Aiko (08:03.821)

    in a hard place because my value is kindness. And so I don’t want to hurt him. I also don’t want him to feel like there’s not enough space or room at the table for him. So I might not live into truly what that value of kindness is, which you’ll go to the impact. Your impact isn’t likely that you want Bob to keep underperforming. And if you keep thinking about you’d be like, the impact is I want Bob to be able to do his best.

    And so we would have to look at the impact, and you’re like, well, if I don’t say anything, I’m actually not moving into my value. So that critical self-awareness and curiosity would take you to, wow, actually my value would tell me that I need to give him this feedback. And that’s the kindest I could be. Because I want the impact to be that he is able to show up and do his best work. But that shadow side can sometimes deter us from truly being in that value. And instead, we’re deflecting

    John Jantsch (08:36.493)

    Yeah.

    Aiko (09:01.101)

    or going over indexing in other ways. So that’s the other side of it.

    John Jantsch (09:06.552)

    Well, that’s really interesting. talk about that kind of flip side of it, because I will say that I’ve learned through trial and error that sometimes that kindness can show up in the negative and that I hate confrontation. And sometimes confrontation is necessary, but I avoid confrontation sometimes. that’s an instance where it actually having maybe that self-awareness is

    Really an important understanding, isn’t

    Aiko (09:37.968)

    Absolutely and you’re drilling and peeling back on that value. It’s still the value of kindness, but you realize wow kindness means being able to have this impact. Helping Bob to be the best he can and helping you to be able to be honest and authentic versus just sparing somebody’s feeling and actually I’m trying to avoid conflict. So that’s how values we can live into them by being so clear about it and being clear of the impact.

    John Jantsch (09:46.914)

    Yeah, yeah.

    Aiko (10:04.267)

    Usually people don’t get to that next point of the check and balance, is, but am I having the impact I want? Wait, I’m not in alignment.

    John Jantsch (10:10.413)

    Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I already let the self-awareness term out of the bag. I swear every leadership book that’s ever been written, I’ve had a lot of leadership authors on here. I mean, I can’t think of one leadership book that didn’t start with the need for self-awareness. If you’re going to be a leader, you have to realize all the ways that you’re sabotaging yourself or all the behaviors that aren’t coming across like you think they are. So how…

    I mean, when you work with somebody who is clearly not seeing what’s obvious, you know, in a lot of cases, I mean, how do you get a business owner who believes they’re in alignment to actually see where the gap is?

    Aiko (10:53.551)

    Yeah, usually, and there are my coaching practices, I really do go in knowing that and believing that my clients are completely resourceful. I don’t need to tell them or direct them what to do. As a matter of fact, me telling them isn’t going to help them. Otherwise, they just read an HBR article and do what it says, right? So the idea is that intrinsic innovation so that they are living into who they want to be. So first we’d start with what impact do they want to have?

    And what does that impact look like? And if the impact is not correlating, we know there’s this motivation now like, well, we’ve got to do something different. So they can notice what is actually happening in real time and name it. People don’t give me feedback. When I ask for ideas, they don’t give them to me.

    When I actually try to have transparent conversations, people are quiet in the room. They always agree with me. And they’re like, but I want people to bring some tension and to be able to give me certain feedback. OK, so you’re not getting the behavior you want or the impact. What are you actually doing? How do you want it to be? How are you going to actually get that from people? What could be getting in the way? And then they might learn, wow, I found out in practically getting feedback or observing what I do is that

    when you know Beth actually tries to raise her hand or say something I talk over her or I say my idea first and everyone kind of falls in. All I help them to pause to note what are they noticing how do they want it to be and now what do you need to do to get there and why is this even important to you and that’s usually when it goes to not only desired impact but what are your values and who do you want to be right.

    John Jantsch (12:38.69)

    Yeah, and I do think sometimes people, they can identify is the symptoms, so to speak, and not necessarily the root cause, right?

    Aiko (12:46.223)

    Absolutely, and that’s why that working backwards is so important because sometimes just like when you say people to ask people how do you want it to be? They may not even be able to tell you but they’re able to say this is what I don’t like and this is what I don’t want and we can work from there.

    John Jantsch (13:01.688)

    So one of the true, I think, challenges, but also I think necessary skills for leaders that manage individuals is accountability. In other words, somebody knowing what’s expected of them, but then you’re holding them to that. But unfortunately, I see it turns a lot of times into like, did you meet your numbers? Like that’s the old accountability measure. How do you get people to take it kind of beyond that or actually turn it into what it should be?

    Aiko (13:31.0)

    Yeah, we asked them, there’s a lot of different techniques we use and oftentimes in the book I talk about this thing about looking forward, looking back, looking around, and I use the example of parenting. I think about how do I want it to be and so with my kids I think about what’s the relationship I want to have with them 20 years from now, 30 years from now, and am I actually nurturing and exuding the behaviors that would lead to that.

    John Jantsch (13:44.333)

    Mm-hmm.

    Aiko (13:56.836)

    where I’m not having kids who are estranged from me, but they actually want me to be around them. And I’ve curved a lot of things I do in raising my voice to make sure that one, I’m a soft place to land. I’m a transparent, honest place to land. And I’m accountable for.

    the ways that I am communicating with them or the impact I have with them. And I’m listening, et cetera. So with a business owner or something, I would want them to think about how do you want it to be X number of years from now? And it’s not going to just be, oh, I want my numbers to be here, X, Y, and Z. They want to have some type of impact in their personal life, with their employees. What type of culture do you want? And all of those things go to the how and not just the what. Not just the numbers.

    but also how do I want it to be in the organization? How do I even want to feel every morning when I know I’m going into X place? And that helps them to think about behaviors and not just this transactional component of the bottom line and the numbers.

    John Jantsch (14:57.326)

    You have likely had to navigate some rooms differently than me. You’re an attorney, you’re a senior leader, you are a woman, you’re a woman of color. What did navigating in that way, the challenges that you uniquely faced, what did that bring you to today?

    Aiko (15:17.251)

    Well, a couple of things. One, and thank you for asking that question, John. It helps me to notice people in the room who might normally be treated as invisible or not seen because I’ve been on that receiving side going to argue a case as a first year attorney and people presuming that I’m the paralegal. And so I know what some of the assumptions can be and how we can jump to conclusions and it can be demoralizing for people.

    John Jantsch (15:36.009)

    Yeah.

    Aiko (15:43.16)

    And it also makes us lose a degree of connection. And that means when I go into a room, can often, I’m often thinking about who has the least amount of power in this room and how could I actually have an impact on people that I don’t want to have. So I check my stories. I check, you know, what in the room is going to accommodate people. I realized that me just coming into the room and saying, Hey Beth, team, I want you all to be fully honest with me and transparent.

    without me actually naming also that I understand what the risks could be and why that might be scary for you. But I want you to trust that because of X, Y, and Z, this is what I’ll do instead. So I might tell somebody, I know that you may feel like you’re the only person who X, but I need to hear your voice. And I tell them what that value proposition is and getting this different innovation or different rigor, how it serves all of us and that I will not be throwing you under the bus for X, and Z and recognizing that vulnerability.

    John Jantsch (16:12.535)

    Thanks

    Aiko (16:42.353)

    is different for everyone. That also means when you’re on a team full of women. So one of the examples I give in the book is about a PTA meeting and there’s only one male father who comes to the meeting and they’re all women and there’s like you know 60 women and they start with the PTA president actually saying well as always there are no dads here no men and it’s the women leading the work and where does that leave him? He knows now his voice probably isn’t gonna matter. I need to tiptoe.

    John Jantsch (16:56.014)

    You

    Aiko (17:11.617)

    and somebody else, another mother comes and apologizes and says, you know what, that shouldn’t have been said. I want you to understand the context of why that was said, but it shouldn’t have been. And you have as much to add here as everybody else. And I want to hear your voice. So that proactive closing the gap when you recognize who might have more to lose or a larger risk in the room and proactively addressing it.

    John Jantsch (17:38.744)

    So the term psychological safety seems to be one of those that is really in the boardrooms or in the leadership circles, certainly as part of culture. A lot of my listeners, five and six person organizations, how do they kind of practically teach that to their leaders? What is a version of that look like for them?

    Aiko (18:02.755)

    Yeah, think probably often modeling it. And when I talk about the terms of safe space, brave space, and psychologically safe space, I say that none of those actually own the idea of power and identity, et cetera. So I’m also a business owner.

    I am aware that, wow, they feel like they’re talking to the CEO. And this is somebody who who hires and fires. So this idea of one inviting not only critical thoughts or feedbacks that is critical of me in my decisions, but then when people give it to me, that’s what’s most important is how do I respond? So the idea of just the spirit of gratitude, recognizing, I know that may have felt risky for you to share that with me, but it was so important that I hear that because of X, Y, and Z.

    So holding myself, one, as somebody who’s going to invite it, and then holding myself accountable when someone says, hey, that didn’t land, blah, blah, blah, blah, and saying, man, you know what? Even if I don’t agree, I’ll say, let me think about it, because I might be missing something. And I’m going to come back, and can we talk about it again?

    So they know I’ve thought with it, I get a chance to sit with it and I can circle back and say, you know what, I got that wrong. And I’m so glad that you told me that. Or I might say, I’m really glad you told me that, but I don’t know if I completely agree. So let’s talk about this a little bit more. But I want them to feel heard, not to have punishment or judgment because they’ve said something that brings some tension or rigor. And to hold myself accountable first and foremost in the moment.

    John Jantsch (19:40.366)

    Yeah, I’ve actually heard many times that some of the healthiest teams are teams that actually can have healthy arguments or healthy conflict. It’s not personal. It’s just like, I know I have permission to say that’s BS, right? So for a person listening to this, and we’ve been primarily focused on teams, but there’s certainly client relationships that a lot of people have that this applies to. So for the person listening to this and they think, something’s really off with that, can’t really name it.

    Where would you point that person first if they came to you and just with that sort of said something’s off with my relationships. I can’t really name it. What should I do first?

    Aiko (20:19.575)

    with my relationships with my clients.

    John Jantsch (20:21.786)

    clients with my team, maybe, you know, again, lot of it, I mean, parenting, you know, we’ve been talking about that. I mean, a lot of times it really all applies.

    Aiko (20:31.001)

    Yeah, so we dig in at that point and we ask, you know, what is it that you’re noticing or you’re feeling? And sometimes people say, I don’t even know, I just feel like the vibe is off. And yeah, so I’ll say, well, how do you want to feel? And then they can go back to whatever the moment is. I want to feel like, I don’t know, lighter. I want to feel like they can talk to me and I can talk to them. Whatever it is, they can start envisioning that.

    John Jantsch (20:40.642)

    Right, right, right. That’s what mean. I can’t name it.

    Mm-hmm.

    Aiko (21:00.719)

    And then I might say, well, what do you feel is getting in the way of that now? Now they’re starting to diagnose what it could be. They may be like, I don’t know. Well, actually, X, Y, and Z, there was this weird moment where blah, blah, blah. And then we start seeing behaviors and moments. And what were you doing? What was happening? If you wanted to get to X, this delta of I want to feel lighter, I want to feel, what does that mean you might need to do differently?

    And sometimes it may not be in that scenario with that person. And we go all the way back and say, tell me about a relationship that you feel like you’re in flow with and in sync and you love this relationship. And we go through where the components and characteristics of it. What do you all do? What do you not do? And then we can go back to this other one as a delta and say, OK, is any of that replicated here?

    You know what, as a matter of fact, we don’t. When I see John, it’s high and by and there’s nothing else. And then we realize, wow, having that interpersonal connection is important. Or John has never told me anything that was critical of me. It’s like he always agrees. So now I realize I have to go and have a conversation and say, hey, I really want you to be able to tell me things that are difficult so I can be better. But those are ways you can diagnose it by contrast and compare.

    John Jantsch (22:17.128)

    Awesome. Well, I appreciate you taking a few moments to stop by the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast. Is there anywhere you would invite people to connect with you and find out more about your work as well as pick up a copy of Anchored, Aligned, and Accountable?

    Aiko (22:29.837)

    Yeah, there’s a few places on Instagram they can find us on at rare rare underscore coach or on LinkedIn under my name. I go with the and also our website rare coaching net.

    John Jantsch (22:43.286)

    Well, again, I appreciate you stopping by and hopefully we’ll run into you one of these days out there on the road.

    Aiko (22:48.506)

    Thank you for having me, John.

    powered by

  • Invincible Season 4: Lee Pace On What Really Motivates Thragg

    Invincible Season 4: Lee Pace On What Really Motivates Thragg

    Through its first three seasons, Prime Video super hero series Invincible put forth an imposing rogues’ gallery for title character Mark Grayson a.k.a. Invincible (Steven Yeun) to contend with. Mark’s antagonists have ranged from weak Z-listers (The Elephant, Doc Seismic), to challenging but manageable apocalyptic threats (the Thraxans, Sequids) to terrifyingly powerful supervillains (Angstrom Levy, […]

    The post Invincible Season 4: Lee Pace On What Really Motivates Thragg appeared first on Den of Geek.

    Almost by definition, superhero movies are about hope and goodness. Even when things get dark for guys like Batman or the Punisher, their respective films end on notes of redemption. The Hulk may roar and Wolverine may growl, but eventually, the real baddies are defeated and the innocents are saved.

    Not so with Clayface, the latest entry in the DCU. The first trailer for the adaptation of the classic Batman villain doesn’t reveal much about the film’s plot but it does make sure we understand the tone. Clayface will be a horror movie, complete with sharp music stings, plenty of gore, and some disturbing images of melting faces.

    Clayface stars Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen, a rising film star whose career falls apart after he experiences a horrible accident, resulting in the bandaged imagery seen in the trailer. Through scientist Dr. Caitlin Bates (Naomi Ackie), Hagen participates in an experimental procedure that transforms his body into moldable clay… at first. Where the comic book Clayface uses his new condition to commit crime, the trailer suggests that Hagen’s melting body creates a sense of visceral terror.

    The trailer’s tone shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given the pedigree of the creators. Clayface comes from co-writer Mike Flanagan, the man behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. To hear DCU co-head James Gunn tell it, Flanagan came to him with a pitch for Clayface that was so compelling, he had to put it into production. To helm the project, Gunn chose James Watkins, recently of the Speak No Evil remake.

    Moreover, the trailer seems to be bringing Clayface back to horror roots. When the character debuted in 1940’s Detective Comics #40 by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, he was Basil Karlo, a B-movie actor who lost the ability to distinguish between the real world and the movies, becoming the killer he played on screen. Another Clayface, Matt Hagen, first appeared in Detective Comics #298 (1961), courtesy of Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff. This Clayface transformed into a hulking slime beast after exposure to a strange plasm.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Clayface is hardly the only superhero character who borrows from horror fiction. Batman and villains like the Joker have clear connections to the scarier side of pulp fiction. The Hulk began as a riff on Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde, with some Frankenstein thrown in for the design. The Fantastic Four and Ant-Man stemmed from the Twilight Zone-style stories that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were telling throughout the ’50s.

    And yet, few movies have been willing to fully embrace the horror side of superheroes. While indies such as Spawn and Faust: Love of the Damned mix capes with creatures of the night, only the Blade franchise and The New Mutants really went into horror—and even then, they return to superheroics by story’s end.

    If this trailer is to be believed, Clayface will do something very different. It will remold the comic book superhero movie into something new, shocking, and completely unexpected.

    Clayface arrives in theaters on Oct. 23, 2026.

    The post Clayface Brings the Horror Genre to Superhero Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • 15 Movies Where the Twist Raises More Questions Than Answers

    15 Movies Where the Twist Raises More Questions Than Answers

    A great twist is supposed to change how you see everything that came before it. Some, instead of providing clarity, do the exact opposite. There are movies that reveal just enough to shift the narrative, only to leave key details unexplained or open to interpretation.

    These are the twists that spark endless debates, theories, and rewatches, due to how they refuse to answer all the questions. Whether it’s ambiguous endings, unreliable realities, or unanswered queries, these films embrace uncertainty. In many cases, that lack of resolution is exactly what makes them so memorable long after their prime.

    The post 15 Movies Where the Twist Raises More Questions Than Answers appeared first on Den of Geek.

    Almost by definition, superhero movies are about hope and goodness. Even when things get dark for guys like Batman or the Punisher, their respective films end on notes of redemption. The Hulk may roar and Wolverine may growl, but eventually, the real baddies are defeated and the innocents are saved.

    Not so with Clayface, the latest entry in the DCU. The first trailer for the adaptation of the classic Batman villain doesn’t reveal much about the film’s plot but it does make sure we understand the tone. Clayface will be a horror movie, complete with sharp music stings, plenty of gore, and some disturbing images of melting faces.

    Clayface stars Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen, a rising film star whose career falls apart after he experiences a horrible accident, resulting in the bandaged imagery seen in the trailer. Through scientist Dr. Caitlin Bates (Naomi Ackie), Hagen participates in an experimental procedure that transforms his body into moldable clay… at first. Where the comic book Clayface uses his new condition to commit crime, the trailer suggests that Hagen’s melting body creates a sense of visceral terror.

    The trailer’s tone shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given the pedigree of the creators. Clayface comes from co-writer Mike Flanagan, the man behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. To hear DCU co-head James Gunn tell it, Flanagan came to him with a pitch for Clayface that was so compelling, he had to put it into production. To helm the project, Gunn chose James Watkins, recently of the Speak No Evil remake.

    Moreover, the trailer seems to be bringing Clayface back to horror roots. When the character debuted in 1940’s Detective Comics #40 by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, he was Basil Karlo, a B-movie actor who lost the ability to distinguish between the real world and the movies, becoming the killer he played on screen. Another Clayface, Matt Hagen, first appeared in Detective Comics #298 (1961), courtesy of Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff. This Clayface transformed into a hulking slime beast after exposure to a strange plasm.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Clayface is hardly the only superhero character who borrows from horror fiction. Batman and villains like the Joker have clear connections to the scarier side of pulp fiction. The Hulk began as a riff on Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde, with some Frankenstein thrown in for the design. The Fantastic Four and Ant-Man stemmed from the Twilight Zone-style stories that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were telling throughout the ’50s.

    And yet, few movies have been willing to fully embrace the horror side of superheroes. While indies such as Spawn and Faust: Love of the Damned mix capes with creatures of the night, only the Blade franchise and The New Mutants really went into horror—and even then, they return to superheroics by story’s end.

    If this trailer is to be believed, Clayface will do something very different. It will remold the comic book superhero movie into something new, shocking, and completely unexpected.

    Clayface arrives in theaters on Oct. 23, 2026.

    The post Clayface Brings the Horror Genre to Superhero Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • 20 Interesting Movie Facts That Are More ‘Unsettling’ Than ‘Fun’

    20 Interesting Movie Facts That Are More ‘Unsettling’ Than ‘Fun’

    Sadly, not every behind-the-scenes story is a fun bit of trivia. Some reveal just how far productions have gone in the name of realism, ambition, or simply getting the shot. Over the years, certain movies have become tied to stories of unsafe conditions, real injuries, or decisions that feel quite questionable.

    These aren’t the kind of facts that make a film more enjoyable. If anything, they can make certain scenes harder to watch once you know what actually happened. From risky stunts to troubling production choices, these are the movie facts that stick with you for reasons that are anything but entertaining.

    The post 20 Interesting Movie Facts That Are More ‘Unsettling’ Than ‘Fun’ appeared first on Den of Geek.

    Almost by definition, superhero movies are about hope and goodness. Even when things get dark for guys like Batman or the Punisher, their respective films end on notes of redemption. The Hulk may roar and Wolverine may growl, but eventually, the real baddies are defeated and the innocents are saved.

    Not so with Clayface, the latest entry in the DCU. The first trailer for the adaptation of the classic Batman villain doesn’t reveal much about the film’s plot but it does make sure we understand the tone. Clayface will be a horror movie, complete with sharp music stings, plenty of gore, and some disturbing images of melting faces.

    Clayface stars Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen, a rising film star whose career falls apart after he experiences a horrible accident, resulting in the bandaged imagery seen in the trailer. Through scientist Dr. Caitlin Bates (Naomi Ackie), Hagen participates in an experimental procedure that transforms his body into moldable clay… at first. Where the comic book Clayface uses his new condition to commit crime, the trailer suggests that Hagen’s melting body creates a sense of visceral terror.

    The trailer’s tone shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given the pedigree of the creators. Clayface comes from co-writer Mike Flanagan, the man behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. To hear DCU co-head James Gunn tell it, Flanagan came to him with a pitch for Clayface that was so compelling, he had to put it into production. To helm the project, Gunn chose James Watkins, recently of the Speak No Evil remake.

    Moreover, the trailer seems to be bringing Clayface back to horror roots. When the character debuted in 1940’s Detective Comics #40 by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, he was Basil Karlo, a B-movie actor who lost the ability to distinguish between the real world and the movies, becoming the killer he played on screen. Another Clayface, Matt Hagen, first appeared in Detective Comics #298 (1961), courtesy of Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff. This Clayface transformed into a hulking slime beast after exposure to a strange plasm.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Clayface is hardly the only superhero character who borrows from horror fiction. Batman and villains like the Joker have clear connections to the scarier side of pulp fiction. The Hulk began as a riff on Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde, with some Frankenstein thrown in for the design. The Fantastic Four and Ant-Man stemmed from the Twilight Zone-style stories that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were telling throughout the ’50s.

    And yet, few movies have been willing to fully embrace the horror side of superheroes. While indies such as Spawn and Faust: Love of the Damned mix capes with creatures of the night, only the Blade franchise and The New Mutants really went into horror—and even then, they return to superheroics by story’s end.

    If this trailer is to be believed, Clayface will do something very different. It will remold the comic book superhero movie into something new, shocking, and completely unexpected.

    Clayface arrives in theaters on Oct. 23, 2026.

    The post Clayface Brings the Horror Genre to Superhero Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • Over Your Dead Body: Jorma Taccone Wants a Remake “With Teeth”

    Over Your Dead Body: Jorma Taccone Wants a Remake “With Teeth”

    As one-third of the legendary comedy trio The Lonely Island, Jorma Taccone is best known for his originality. Alongside childhood friends and collaborators Andy Samberg (star of Brooklyn Nine-Nine) and Akiva Schaffer (director of The Naked Gun), Taccone has helped introduce the world to novel concepts like SNL Digital Shorts, Grammy-winning comedy rap, and the […]

    The post Over Your Dead Body: Jorma Taccone Wants a Remake “With Teeth” appeared first on Den of Geek.

    Almost by definition, superhero movies are about hope and goodness. Even when things get dark for guys like Batman or the Punisher, their respective films end on notes of redemption. The Hulk may roar and Wolverine may growl, but eventually, the real baddies are defeated and the innocents are saved.

    Not so with Clayface, the latest entry in the DCU. The first trailer for the adaptation of the classic Batman villain doesn’t reveal much about the film’s plot but it does make sure we understand the tone. Clayface will be a horror movie, complete with sharp music stings, plenty of gore, and some disturbing images of melting faces.

    Clayface stars Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen, a rising film star whose career falls apart after he experiences a horrible accident, resulting in the bandaged imagery seen in the trailer. Through scientist Dr. Caitlin Bates (Naomi Ackie), Hagen participates in an experimental procedure that transforms his body into moldable clay… at first. Where the comic book Clayface uses his new condition to commit crime, the trailer suggests that Hagen’s melting body creates a sense of visceral terror.

    The trailer’s tone shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given the pedigree of the creators. Clayface comes from co-writer Mike Flanagan, the man behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. To hear DCU co-head James Gunn tell it, Flanagan came to him with a pitch for Clayface that was so compelling, he had to put it into production. To helm the project, Gunn chose James Watkins, recently of the Speak No Evil remake.

    Moreover, the trailer seems to be bringing Clayface back to horror roots. When the character debuted in 1940’s Detective Comics #40 by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, he was Basil Karlo, a B-movie actor who lost the ability to distinguish between the real world and the movies, becoming the killer he played on screen. Another Clayface, Matt Hagen, first appeared in Detective Comics #298 (1961), courtesy of Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff. This Clayface transformed into a hulking slime beast after exposure to a strange plasm.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Clayface is hardly the only superhero character who borrows from horror fiction. Batman and villains like the Joker have clear connections to the scarier side of pulp fiction. The Hulk began as a riff on Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde, with some Frankenstein thrown in for the design. The Fantastic Four and Ant-Man stemmed from the Twilight Zone-style stories that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were telling throughout the ’50s.

    And yet, few movies have been willing to fully embrace the horror side of superheroes. While indies such as Spawn and Faust: Love of the Damned mix capes with creatures of the night, only the Blade franchise and The New Mutants really went into horror—and even then, they return to superheroics by story’s end.

    If this trailer is to be believed, Clayface will do something very different. It will remold the comic book superhero movie into something new, shocking, and completely unexpected.

    Clayface arrives in theaters on Oct. 23, 2026.

    The post Clayface Brings the Horror Genre to Superhero Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • The Top 10 Movies and Shows Streaming Right Now, How Many Do You Know?

    The Top 10 Movies and Shows Streaming Right Now, How Many Do You Know?

    Streaming platforms continue to rotate fresh hits into the spotlight, with both returning favorites and newer releases pulling strong viewership over the past month. From reality TV and crime docuseries to anime adaptations and major film releases, the current lineup reflects a wide range of audience tastes.

    There are certainly some old timers in here, but quite a few entries here are from new and fresh IPs. Based on recent viewing figures, these are the movies and shows audiences have been watching the most right now. Here’s a look at the top performers and what’s driving their popularity across streaming platforms.

    The post The Top 10 Movies and Shows Streaming Right Now, How Many Do You Know? appeared first on Den of Geek.

    Almost by definition, superhero movies are about hope and goodness. Even when things get dark for guys like Batman or the Punisher, their respective films end on notes of redemption. The Hulk may roar and Wolverine may growl, but eventually, the real baddies are defeated and the innocents are saved.

    Not so with Clayface, the latest entry in the DCU. The first trailer for the adaptation of the classic Batman villain doesn’t reveal much about the film’s plot but it does make sure we understand the tone. Clayface will be a horror movie, complete with sharp music stings, plenty of gore, and some disturbing images of melting faces.

    Clayface stars Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen, a rising film star whose career falls apart after he experiences a horrible accident, resulting in the bandaged imagery seen in the trailer. Through scientist Dr. Caitlin Bates (Naomi Ackie), Hagen participates in an experimental procedure that transforms his body into moldable clay… at first. Where the comic book Clayface uses his new condition to commit crime, the trailer suggests that Hagen’s melting body creates a sense of visceral terror.

    The trailer’s tone shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given the pedigree of the creators. Clayface comes from co-writer Mike Flanagan, the man behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. To hear DCU co-head James Gunn tell it, Flanagan came to him with a pitch for Clayface that was so compelling, he had to put it into production. To helm the project, Gunn chose James Watkins, recently of the Speak No Evil remake.

    Moreover, the trailer seems to be bringing Clayface back to horror roots. When the character debuted in 1940’s Detective Comics #40 by Bill Finger and Bob Kane, he was Basil Karlo, a B-movie actor who lost the ability to distinguish between the real world and the movies, becoming the killer he played on screen. Another Clayface, Matt Hagen, first appeared in Detective Comics #298 (1961), courtesy of Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff. This Clayface transformed into a hulking slime beast after exposure to a strange plasm.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Clayface is hardly the only superhero character who borrows from horror fiction. Batman and villains like the Joker have clear connections to the scarier side of pulp fiction. The Hulk began as a riff on Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde, with some Frankenstein thrown in for the design. The Fantastic Four and Ant-Man stemmed from the Twilight Zone-style stories that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were telling throughout the ’50s.

    And yet, few movies have been willing to fully embrace the horror side of superheroes. While indies such as Spawn and Faust: Love of the Damned mix capes with creatures of the night, only the Blade franchise and The New Mutants really went into horror—and even then, they return to superheroics by story’s end.

    If this trailer is to be believed, Clayface will do something very different. It will remold the comic book superhero movie into something new, shocking, and completely unexpected.

    Clayface arrives in theaters on Oct. 23, 2026.

    The post Clayface Brings the Horror Genre to Superhero Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.