#270 Leadership in the AI Era with Dana Maor, Senior Partner at McKinsey & Company
34:51 Share

You need to be fluent in the language of your industry and you need to know what you're doing. But even nowadays with Gen AI, right? Do you really need to be the one who's teaching your coders how to code? System can do that. You bring a very different value to the table. You are there to identify what are the needs are to serve people.

Hello everyone, this is Adele, data evangelist and educator at Datacamp. And if you're new here, Data Framed is a podcast in which we explore how individuals and organizations can succeed with data and AI. As we approach the end of the year and reflect on the seismic changes happening in the AI ecosystem, the technology space, and society at large, I think it's safe to say that being a data leader, or any leader for that matter, is not for the faint of heart.

Leaders are tasked with thinking 12, 16, 18 months ahead and making sure that their teams are fit for the future. So what makes a great leader? What are lessons we can draw upon from others to become better leaders ourselves? Enter today's guest. Dana Maor is the global co-head for the McKinsey People and Organizational Performance Practice and is a member of its Knowledge Council.

As a senior partner, she works with leaders globally to transform their organizations and themselves and serves as a co-dean of multiple McKinsey leadership programs. She's also the co-author of The Journey of Leadership, How CEOs Learn to Lead from the Inside Out.

In the episode, we spoke about what makes a great leader, the role of empathy in driving effective organizations, how leaders can balance between a human-centric approach and a results-driven culture, and a lot more. If you enjoyed this episode, make sure to rate the show, subscribe to it. It really helps us. And now, on to today's episode. Dana Maurer, it's great to have you on the show. It's terrific to be here. Thank you.

Thank you for coming. So you are a senior partner and co-head of people and organizational performance practice at McKinsey & Company, and most recently the author of The Journey to Leadership. So maybe to set the stage, what makes a great leader?

Wow. This is the whole book. We have a whole book. Maybe I share why we wrote this book, which will set the stage to what a great leader he is. I think, unfortunately or fortunately, the world is very, very complex. This is the first time that we have five generations in the workplace. Everything is changing super, super quickly. Inflation is a context that many leaders do not know.

after COVID and everything that is happening in the world, people are seeking purpose. And so it was obvious that the command and control style of leadership that might have applied years ago, that being an expert in something and leading through your knowledge is just not sufficient. And so based on everything that we have done and learned, we realized that

that actually amazing leadership starts with the individual being very conscious, being aware of the tensions that live within them and the fact that they're very unique in their position and helping others navigate through competing demands, which brings us to the first part of great leadership, which is being able to lead yourself and then you can excite and lead others.

And that requires some traits that are obvious, like being confident and resilient and versatile. But it also means being humble and empathetic. And it also means that you need to be able to make bold decisions and instill purpose in other people, invite truth speaking and power, and through that create a very different energy. So a very complex formula of what it takes to be a great leader these days.

Yeah, so we're going to unpack the ingredients in that formula. And you mentioned in the journey of leadership, you and your co-authors, what I like about, especially the early chapters, you emphasize a human-centric approach to leadership, which I think kind of what you mentioned is really contrasts to that command and control style that you mentioned. So could you explain what this means in practical terms to be a human-centric leader? Yes. And of course, when you lay the challenge to be a human-centered leader, most people say, but I am human, which is true. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

And at the same time, well, I have all those things that I need to deliver. What do you want me to do? I just need to put my head down and start working. So being a human leader means, A, listening to others, because you need to admit that you do not have all the answers. You probably have a very unique vantage point, but listen to others. It means being humble and also knowing when you are wrong and having the courage to admit that you're wrong. And it means being able to

know with a versatility when to be what. When do I speak? When do I listen? When do I follow? When do I lead? When do I push people? When do I support people? And so that mastery of that dance is really what human-centered leadership is all about. And it's anchored in, first of all, you and your ability to know yourself and understand what it means for you and what it takes for you to be professional, hard-charging, high-achieving,

human centered leader. And, you know, let's deep dive maybe into those traits that you're discussing because it is pretty complex. We live in a pretty complex economy today. The challenges organizations face and leaders face are very complex and it requires that new formula of being a leader. And I think one thing that you mentioned, which is kind of a core tenet and you echoed that in your discussion here is the need to listen and to not always need to be the best or the expert in the room.

and to rely on other experts in the room. And I think there's a misconception among leaders that they need to be the best in the team. They need to be the ones who have all the answers, but that's not necessarily the case because a good team, a high performing team is a team where everyone has a distinct advantage. So maybe walk us through why this misconception still exists today and in today's economy and how can leaders internalize the concept that they don't need to be the expert in the room always better. So yeah, I'd love some examples, references that you've had in the books as well.

Can you walk us through that problem, Seb? Why? Because many of us grew up that way. We were experts in our field. We were the best engineer on the team and we knew how to code and then we can teach others how to code and then we could lead a whole project and design and engineer that. Or we were the best banker in the room and we really get all those intricacies of financial complexities. And it is important. You need to be fluent in the language of your industry and you need to know what you're doing. But even nowadays with Gen AI, right, do you really need to be the one who's teaching your

coders how to code, the system can do that. You bring a very different value to the table. You are there to identify what are the needs are to serve people. And so one of my favorite stories in the book is Bruno Pfister in Swiss Life. And he was the CFO of Swiss Life. He knew exactly what happens in the business. He stepped into the role of the CEO, very confident that he knows what the business requires. And then the crisis of 2008 hit.

Which meant the environment changed and the company got into a situation of crisis. And he was seeking advice from a mentor. His mentor told him, think about the legacy that you want to leave in the business. And he was thinking, what? I mean, everything is crumbling. I need to think of legacy. I need to just get things going. And that was a great example of that insight where at the beginning he tried to ignore that. But at some point he realized, actually, it's important. Let me step back.

And think about what my vision is for the business and realize that entrepreneurship and empowerment is going to make much more difference. So that was step one. It wasn't the end of his story. He then still thought that as the person, the CFO, the person that knows how to run most functions of the business, of course, you want to empower people, but I need to be in the details. And that didn't work either, because if you insist to be in the details, you're slowing down your organization rather than speeding it up. And when his management pushed back at the beginning, he didn't want to listen.

And it was another example where at some point he went into a room, had a conversation with himself and he said, well, what happens if I admit that I'm wrong?

and realized that the one thing that is probably going to happen is that his ego may be bruised. But other than that, nothing is going to happen. He came out of that conversation with self, admitted to his managers that maybe his path was not the right path. And they really changed how they're running the place. And that was the start of all of them, to your point, unleashing together to be able to recover as a business. So listening to a mentor, listening to your management team,

understanding the different vantage points are actually in some cases the key. I love that example because I think there's a lot of common behaviors that I think a lot of other leaders are probably exhibiting today. What are those common behaviors that they should avoid? I'm sure leaders are listening in and hear like, hey, I think I've had this situation at my job, right? What are those things that are key markers of leaders that maybe they should rethink their approach?

I think one is I was put in this role, so I'm expected to have the answer. I am expected to tell others what to do, not necessarily. The other one is I need to control everything. And we have a chapter in the book that speaks about controls and illusion. You think you control, but actually by controlling, you're stifling everybody's creativity.

Another one, and by the way, that's a very familiar one. Quite often when senior leaders who feel that they have to deliver are nervous about the situation, maybe have a moment where they're not sure that they understand why they're in that position. They have two tendencies. One is to go one up, which is exactly what we're saying, telling people what to do and acting as if they know. And the other one is actually to go one down and

Just trying to satisfy everyone. And these two behaviors are very, very dangerous. It's that eye-to-eye relationship where you listen and you can push and make decisions. So these are some of these behaviors that maybe leaders would recognize.

Yeah, I think definitely behavior leaders will recognize as well that is outlined in the book is imposter syndrome. I don't think that I've, I mean, I encounter imposter syndrome. Everyone I know encounters imposter syndrome. And that's often an issue that is dealt with in silence within the organization. It's like, you know, everyone has imposter syndrome, but no one talks about it. So why do you think it's such a pervasive issue, especially amongst what looks like on the outside, highly successful individuals?

And what advice do you offer in the book to deal with that as well? So I'd love to get your view on the imposter syndrome problem. The source of it is some of the things that we talked about. You're in a role, you think, who they nominated me to be leader of this organization because I am expected to have all the answers, but maybe I don't. And I can't show them because if I show them, so this is where the fear comes in. If I show them, then why am I in this role? And I think this is where it comes from. Some examples. So Michael Fisher was nominated CEO of Cincinnati Hospital. He's not a doctor.

He's not a doctor. And he says, how can I credibly lead a hospital and tell the best doctors around what to do? And so the first inclination is just to pretend that you know and you understand everything because your power comes from the fact that you do. And the realization that he had to go through that actually this is not my source of power. I bring other things to the equation. In fact, the fact that I'm not a doctor and I bring other perspectives on management, on development, on research, those are interesting. So that is one example.

The situation that always brings that out is when you move to a new culture.

Even worse though, I have a very dear friend who is Indian by origin, but did not grow up in India. And when she moved to India to take a senior position, everybody looked at her and expected that she understands the local culture, which she didn't. And so accepting that you actually come into a new culture and need to learn that culture and understand how to mobilize things in a different culture rather than pretend that you're it and you have the solution is another way to go about it.

What do you do? First of all, have confidence in the fact that you do deserve this role because there is a reason that you were put in that role. And secondly, if you develop other sources of strengths and contribution to the organization rather than giving all the answers, including building a board, not a professional board, but an advisory board of people that you trust that can help you learn, understand and grow and bring your strengths to the table is going to make a huge difference.

Yeah. And, you know, one thing that I've personally, maybe we can discuss whether that is a correct strategy or not, is like I harness my imposter syndrome to push me forward, for example. Right. Like, have you seen that as like a common trait that other leaders like perform, for example, or like, yeah, I'd love to see how that as a remediation strategy works in the long run. Because I still suffer from imposter syndrome, less and less so, but it has pushed me forward in certain contexts.

I'm assuming it pushes you forward because A, you have to lean into the fear and just execute, which is wonderful. I actually think that leaning into things rather than stepping away from it is a very good thing. And the second thing is because it pushes us to learn and to perform better. And I think that if there's one trait, if I had to go with one trait that I have to leave with all leaders is admitting that we're always beginners in something and we always need to learn something. And so that courage of learning that I think is what this imposter syndrome is pushing you to do.

is what it takes. And in this case of the Mazda leader that was placed in Japan, did not understand the culture, it pushed him at the beginning. He was trying to say, I know everything. But then learning the culture, learning how to operate in different ways, learning how decision is being made and playing into that role, sometimes a bit beyond what they know how to do, was a major driver to their success. So I actually think that daring to fail

And pushing yourself to learn is probably some of the ways. There's a TED talk that is called fake it till you become it as opposed to make it. I can't remember who that was, but I always like to refer to that one as well. I couldn't agree more. And then one thing that you mentioned here is like being able to admit that you are not the expert, being able to admit that you're struggling, that you're learning.

I think goes back to another quality that is really mentioned in the book that I think is great is the importance of being vulnerable. And I think this is something that many leaders today still lack and need to develop a bit more. And what's important is that it needs to be balanced with being bold and being, you know, ambitious at work and being confident. And there's kind of a tension between these two qualities, at least on the outside. So can you give an example of like how this tension plays out? And then how do you balance it well as a leader?

Yes. And by the way, a lot of the leadership is about balancing those tensions and navigating and knowing when to go left or right. And this is one of my favorite tensions, actually, the confidence and vulnerability and taking those bold decisions and being vulnerable at the same time.

I think Michael Fisher that I spoke about earlier is a good example of that as well. At one point, he was diagnosed with cancer. Being an introvert that he was, he wanted to just disappear for six months, do what he needs to do and come back. But then he realized this is wrong. This is wrong for the organization. This is wrong for me. And realized that he needs to come forward and share, particularly as he's leading a hospital. And so people would understand. The way he coped with it was not to...

make that the topic of every conversation, but he actually created a very well-structured communication strategy through which he let the stakeholders know, he let the employees know, he told them what to expect, and he even reported back over the course of his recovery process to the organization.

Which means I am strong. I am coming back. I have a clear vision for this organization. But I am unfortunately suffering from one of the human risks that people have. And I'm going through it and I'm sharing this journey with you. And I thought that that was a beautiful example of being professional and inspiring and at the same time being just as bold in sharing something that is very personal.

Yeah, that's a beautiful story. And here we're talking about a medical case with Michael. And I think if you take a zoom out, right, like the world is today much more complex. Let's say there's a much more traumatic state in the world today, right? And I think many people within the organization are going through, you know, personal issues. We've seen wars erupt, like economic crises, etc. How do you balance that as a leader as well when there's so many personal issues that play the team or play yourself as well? So I'd love to see what should be the playbook for leaders in this kind of uncharted territory in a lot of ways.

Look, it is very difficult because, of course, you want to be there for people, but you also want to deliver. And I think that starting with one of my favorite tricks, right? You start a meeting and before you dive into the content, you say, what keeps you out of this room today? Not to now go for three hours of personal excavation of what are those things, but let's just put it on the table. And so we know, we know. And A, it helps because we all put it out there so it's not distracting me. Right.

And B, it is a great way to connect with each other. I'm struck by having spent time with a team a few weeks ago. And after having worked with them for weeks over Zoom, we were at the same dinner together. And in that evening, I learned that three of my team members actually have parents who are battling cancer. So just making that time and being together, but at the same time, taking a deep breath and saying, OK, let's go back to those things that we can control.

and focus on what it is that we can control. And of course, having the sensitivity and empathy to check in with them again with ourselves when we connect again or periodically. Yeah, we're going to talk about empathy shortly. But first, let's talk about failure, which I think is probably, you know, the scariest word leaders come to mind for them. Every leader will fail. This is something that I think in the book is outlined like failure is inevitable. What are good ways to deal with failure? What are bad ways to deal with failure? Yeah.

Bad ways to deal with failure. Deny it. Never happened. I never fail. Explain why your failure was not a failure. Oh, actually, that makes total sense because or blame others, which I hate. I hate when leaders. It was not my fault. You know, they did this. The market did that. Great ways to deal with failure is say, wow, that was an experience. What do I learn from it? What did we do well? What didn't we do well?

How can I recover from it? And one of the tips that are my favorites from Bob Keegan is when I said, try micro-experiment.

So if you know that you want to try something, start with a low risk experiment around this and then try the real deal. If that is possible, it is not always possible. It's oftentimes, you know, when it comes to failure, you know, we want to have this culture of failing forward. At one point in time, do you realize as a leader, maybe it's not working out that you're failing too much? Is there something that's failing too much in this context? And when do you put the interest of the organization first?

ahead of your learning experiences. You see the symptoms. We love to look at what we call the organizational health index, which is taking the cultural temperature of the organization. And when you see that to your point over time, performance is deteriorating, the health is not there, which typically is a predictor of performance will not improve. Stepping back and taking a real check at what are the things that are happening and how would you change it is very, very important. And

One of the ways to manage for it is to say, put some metrics for yourself and say, I am going in this direction for as long as attrition, revenues, profitability, recalls, whatever that might be. What are your red lines and what are those metrics that if you hit any of those, you want to reassess? So you set this to yourself in advance, knowing that we're living in an uncertain world rather than wait for things to come at you and at some point give it up or give in.

Yeah, I couldn't agree more. So, you know, we talked about empathy. Let's deep dive into empathy. You mentioned in the book and you mentioned it in our conversation. So for the empathy is great value for leaders. I couldn't agree more. Maybe why is empathy such an important thing?

aspect of leadership, especially today, given, you know, the complexities of the modern organization, the fact that there's five generations working in modern organizations today. And how do you develop empathy? Why is it so important? It's because we are humans. When we look at our own research and we try to understand what is the one, if I had to choose one predictor of employee satisfaction, happiness, and motivation to stay in an organization, it's typically their direct manager or leader. Yeah.

And I don't think that anybody wants to work for or with a machine. We do that. We love that. We're on a machine right now, but it's never sufficient. And you're seeing more and more people looking for a sense of purpose, sense of belonging, sense of connection. And empathy is the way to connect.

And it doesn't mean that you're now going to make decisions that are different, but it means that you're saying, I understand you. I know where you're coming from. Let's see what we can do in the context of professionalism. And that is the other tension, right? Empathy and professionalism that would help. So I think that is why it's so important. Definitely coming out of COVID, and we all hope that the world would look better. We're still struggling with hybrid work. We're still struggling with a lot of other external geopolitical expectations.

economic, all the strains that you want to think about. And when we look at burnout rates, people are tired. We're seeing burnout rates that are rising in organizations and

Empathy creates trust, creates a sense of belonging. When people are trusted and belonging, they perform much, much better. You mentioned here a sense of belonging, a sense of purpose, right, within the organization. And I couldn't agree more. You know, my hypothesis is that oftentimes people think burnout is related to work volume, but I think it's more related to purpose and this feeling that you belong within the organization. If you don't feel like your work matters,

it will feel like there's no purpose to your job. So how do you create a sense of belonging in a modern organization today, especially in a hybrid work environment? I think that's a major challenge for leaders today.

Yes, it is very difficult. I think it starts with a sense of purpose. So why are we here? What it is that we're trying to achieve? Because to your point, it is much harder to relate and connect even over Zoom if we all understand what we're doing together. And there's wonderful statements of purpose. I love Legos. I think it is developing tomorrow's builders or building tomorrow's developers, one of the two, which is, I can connect to that. I'm excited about that. I want to be a part of this organization, but also then connecting

translating that to what that means for each role and for my day-to-day life. And how does the way that we work with each other mirrors that and brings that to life? So I think that's one thing. The second thing is particularly in the hybrid world that we say is,

Pure remote is not working. But also coming to an office where I'm sitting in one office and I'm never speaking to anyone on Zoom and others do the same is also not creating that sense of connection and belonging. And so being very deliberate about what are those things that we do when we are together, creating, brainstorming, panning.

having a dinner, whatever that might be. So there's a reason to come together when we come together, which then makes us much more connected when we're remote again. It is a challenge. Organizations are still struggling with that. There's different experiments. Everybody has to come in. Everybody can be outside. Let's do something in between. We don't have an agenda. We do have an agenda. But I think that being deliberate and connecting as individuals, and if we don't have the spontaneous chitchat, we need to create those chitchat moments.

There's something that you mentioned as well as the, you know, one of the other tensions of being a leader is balancing between empathy and professionalism. It's also like balancing between empathy and performance culture, for example, like you want to be able to push the team, you want to be able to go beyond the capabilities of a team. And that can from the outset can be seen as like coming at the cost of being an empathetic leader. How do you balance between setting a performance culture and also being an empathetic leader? And is it correct to say that there's a tension there?

On the surface, there's definitely a tension because people say either you are with me, you're supporting me, you understand me and I do what I need to do or you're pushing me to perform. The reality is that a lot of people do want to perform and grow and belong to an organization that is delivering amazing results, whether it is financial results or doing something wonderful for society.

And so, and that goes back to our point on purpose. If I know why what I'm doing matters, and if it is important to me, then likely the tension is not as strong. And if we're able to support each other as people within the confines of what make an organization successful, because otherwise, why would you want to belong to it? Then it works. So I think that the initial perception is, of course, that there's a conflict. But if we tap into the sense of purpose and what it is that I as an individual want to develop, grow, and

myself, then these two come closer together. Can you give maybe examples of leaders who have kind of nailed that balance between empathy and professionalism, like setting a performance culture and how empathy can even be seen as a driver towards a performance culture? Yes. And of course, pharmaceutical companies are better at that because it is easier to see that the sense of the purpose is so that my mother, your father, and

and our friends are healthier and therefore quality matters a lot. There's no way I can allow for low quality in my manufacturing site. So these are easier. I think the harder ones are when you're driving an insurance company, like again, our story from the beginning, Bruno Fister did. And should I be empathetic to the fact that the financial world is crumbling and people are therefore very concerned for their jobs? Or can I put for performance? And I think that when he realized that his legacy and vision is about entrepreneurship and empowerment,

which in turn actually increases the job security for the people in the organization, these two came together. When it was all about, I'm going to be in the details, I'm going to tell you exactly what to do, I'm going to be able to chart the path for you,

Do you understand that I'm actually very worried about my ability to put food on my table? Yeah, it's a great example. And you mentioned something here about being in the weeds. Like there's often a discourse today, especially in the tech industry around the merits of micromanagement. Oftentimes you have people that are pro micromanagement, people that are against micromanagement. You know, there's this famous essay by Paul Graham on founder mode that you need to be in the weeds all the time.

Maybe walk us through what that looks like from at least an empirical perspective, because you see founders who can give their own anecdotal evidence to it. But there's also analysis that has been done and research that has been done. So yeah, what are the merits of founder mode? First and foremost, this is probably the most passionate individual that exists when it comes to that organization, a founder, which is I think the magic that we should all tap into. And that is...

at the heart of everything that we do. There's a lot of passion, a lot of energy, a lot of innovation and creativity that comes with it. So all that is wonderful. When hopefully the company is doing extremely well and is growing, some of those things that you could have done in a very familial manner of family,

are no longer possible. And this is where recognizing what is your personal contribution to the organization versus what are those things? And this goes back to, I don't have to have all the answers. I need to listen to others. I need to build a group that actually complements my skills and capabilities with others.

This is when you need to be able to let go of that illusion of control, partner with others, understand what it is that you bring to the organization versus others. And that is very, very difficult to let go of. Yeah, I can imagine. I think that debate will still be raging on, especially, you know, amongst the VC CEO class. But maybe going back to the concept of empathy, what's related to empathy as well in the book, this concept of authenticity. Yeah.

Also, there's a tension between being a professional and being authentic work. So how can leaders also be true to themselves while meeting the demands of their roles? When is being too authentic, for example, versus pushing for a performance culture on the team? Yes, but by being authentic, if I go back to purpose, it means I cannot try to inspire you in what I think is driving you if it's not what's driving me.

you will know immediately that I'm making something up so that you're engaged. And so we always talk about the five sources of meaning as a way to understand how people think, society, company being part of the best, most successful company, customers, I want to pharmaceutical, I want to do the best for people out there. Team, I want to belong to a team that is doing something phenomenal that otherwise I wouldn't be able to do. And self, I want to put food on my table, but I also want to grow and learn.

And I think that if I know what drives me, I can be authentic. If I know what drives others, we can think about what is that story that engages more of us truly in this conversation. And with that, this is authenticity that brings the passion and energy in the service of performance of the organization. We always say that people don't listen to your words. They look at your actions.

They look at your feet, where you're going and what you're doing. To me, this is being authentic, behaving in a way that is truly mirroring what you hope to achieve and do with an organization. Related as well to the authenticity aspect and maybe empathy in general is empathy to the self when it comes for leaders. I think leaders are oftentimes...

especially middle managers, I would say. There's pressures on all sides for middle managers and it's really hard and it's pretty lonely to be a leader. And that can lead to burnout, that can lead to leaders also needing to take care of themselves. So maybe walk us through the pressures leaders face oftentimes within a modern organization and how

How do you increase your longevity as a leader? Wow. I think to me, the biggest pressure is time.

Time is precious. We know that. You get to a point in leadership where you understand that if you're going to do everything that all your stakeholders, as you were saying, below, above and at home. To the sides. Yeah. Everyone wants something from you. Everyone wants something from you, which is it means that you play an important role in their lives, which is wonderful. But it also means that there is no way on earth that you're going to be able to satisfy everyone's demands. Accepting that.

And knowing that in that moment, taking time for yourself to remember who you are, to grow, to learn, to meditate, whatever that might be, is the only way that you're going to be able to continue to perform at the level that you're going to be proud of. And it's counterintuitive because I'm telling you to take time off so

so that you can be properly on. But I do think that that is one of the secrets to longevity as a leader. It's pretty interesting, like what time off from work can do to sustain the energy. That's something I've experienced as well. And when you look at today, you know, leaders, especially in this transitionary period and within the technology space that we live in, you know, generative AI is being introduced into the economy. There's, you know, these paradigm shifts,

This also creates tons of pressure to deliver ROI on these types of initiatives really quickly. But there's also more and more so within the organization that will be performed by digital technologies and tools such as generative AI. So looking forward, how do you see AI changing the role of leaders? How do you see the role of leaders evolving in an economy, in an organization where a lot of tasks can be potentially be performed by generative AI?

I know that many are still struggling. At a personal level, by the way, we've done research and we saw that at a personal level, 91% of employees self-declared to be using already Gen AI individually. And the remainder, 9%, I would say 80% of them are saying we're going to play with it. So it is happening. There's no question. Organization, on the other hand, are lagging. So the same people say only 13% of organizations have probably deployed it properly. It doesn't mean that it's not coming. I think it will come. And when I say Gen AI, I think of...

technology at large. It started with AI, now it's Gen AI. I'm sure there'll be something new before we know it. All this is to say, I think it's a real thing and it actually brings a lot of efficiencies and excitement on our organization. Also, there's risk associated with that.

But if anybody is afraid that Gen AI will replace them, I say there are some things that it will replace. I do not need a person to teach me a skill that I can learn from a software or a tool, how to program something, a new language, play music even. But when it comes to awareness of the context, being able to understand what is happening around me, ask the right questions, not only questions.

discern the answer and bring that together into an answer that makes sense and most importantly bring a heart

to everything that we're doing, not only the brain. I actually think that those leadership traits are going to be amplified and a leader will need to learn more and more how to bring that to the table rather than knowledge and experience. It goes back to the beginning of our conversation. The leader of today is no longer expected to anchor, I think, anchor in being the best expert on something, and particularly with Gen AI and AI,

Quite likely that there's a machine somewhere that brings more expertise in that space. It is all those other traits that are going to matter more.

Yeah. And maybe, you know, as we close out our conversation, you know, you mentioned here the need for a human centric leader approach. And that's the main skills that will define the leaders of the 21st century. Do you find that the case for expert leadership or kind of functional expertise within leaders will go down over time and that will become less and less of a skill demanded from leaders today?

I'm not seeing that yet, and maybe it is because those technologies are not yet prevalent as much as they could be. But also because I think that, again, if we think of judgment, asking the right questions, knowing where to push, recognizing in people who work with me who's better suited for one thing or the next, these are still things that are done by humans.

And so I think that if we, again, focus on what are those human aspects that are brought to the expert role, those would probably still matter. And at the end of the day, it's humans who develop technology and technology that serves humans. And so I think that the expertise is still very much required and there's no substitute to that.

Okay, wonderful. And as we, Dana, as we close our conversation, for those who want to aspire to reach the highest levels of leadership, what are key pieces of advice that you would give them to progress in their career? I would say first and foremost, pause to reflect. I know it sounds obvious, but at the same time, most of us do not take that time to pause.

The second thing is find your own advisory board. And again, it's not the board of director of a company. It's your own. It could be a family member, people at work, mentors, whoever that might be that see you, you trust, they hear you, they give you advice. I think to hold the mirror for you, that is very, very important. I would say always learn.

Keeping that beginner's mindset is super important, but also stretching our minds in different ways. Music languages, Singularity University, yoga, whatever that might be. Just learn anything that keeps you fresh. I think that these are the most important things. And also...

listening to the rest of the organization. To me, these are the four things or five maybe I rattled out that I try to take with me. Okay, that is awesome. Dana, thank you so much for coming on DataFrame. Any final call to action before we wrap up today's episode? Anchoring in the human is super, super important. And to me, that is why a book about human-centered leadership was so important. And I'm hoping that if more and more of our leaders would be anchored in humanity and their human traits,

We will not only have more impact, but probably better world. Could I agree more? I think this is a great place to end today's episode. Dana Morris, thank you so much for coming on DataFriend. Thank you.