Welcome to the Everyday PM Podcast, the podcast where we
discuss project management principles for your everyday
life. My name is Anne Campia, and I'm
the host and founder of The Everyday PM.
And I'm so excited to welcome our very special guest, Leslie
Grandy, who is here to speak about future proofing business
success with Generative AII. Love that because as everybody
knows, AI is everywhere. Everyone's trying to learn about
it, catch up on it, and Leslie is here to break it down for us
in that space. So, Leslie, for those who have
not met you yet, please take a brief moment to introduce
yourself to our audience. Sure.
Thanks for having me and I'm happy to be here.
I've had over A2 decade career in product management dating
back to early streaming media days in the early days of the
Internet. And I've LED product teams that
have included designers, program managers, product managers, and
engineers for companies like Apple, Amazon, T-Mobile, Best
Buy and Discovery. And after I retired from full
time work, I wrote a book called Creative Velocity, Propelling
Breakthrough Ideas in the age of Generative AI.
And the platform is really to help people as AI is sort of
taking on more mundane tasks to explore their creativity, to
understand what they bring to that partnership and to actually
Createspace with the thanks to AI for that kind of strategic
and creative thinking. That's incredible.
Your background is, is truly amazing.
And I'm sure from all of those companies, big and small that
you've been able to work with, you've learned a lot about how
generative AI might fit into that business model.
So I'm curious, even before I get into my first question for
you, what was that moment for you where you decided, you know
what, let me write this into something that can be useful for
others to learn from. And so, as you had mentioned,
you wrote the book. Was there something that
happened in your professional journey that you said?
I got to go down this path. I got to share my thoughts on
this topic. It's a it's a really interesting
question because the answer is a little bit of a bunch of things
as opposed to 1 real aha moment. One of them is one of the main
drivers for the topic. Before I get into sort of
writing the book and delivering the book is over the years of
coaching people as a leader of teams, I see people more than
I'd like to hold back because they don't think it's their role
to contribute a creative idea or that in their job, they're
expected to be executional. And so therefore they don't
leave space to solve problems creatively.
And it's frustrating because some of the most talented people
that I have, and when I say that in their job, they're talented,
are the least comfortable in that space of expressing
themselves creatively. And so when I would hire people,
I started to really look for signals that they might not be
that type of person, that they might actually be the type of
person that sees the world from multiple perspectives or has
great empathy to be able to adapt a new perspective.
And so those skills started to become more important in the
teams that I hired. So that's kind of the topic for
me area. And I have a lot of passion
about it because people get judged on performance as to
whether they can think big when they want to move up in their
career. But a lot of people don't feel
they have permission in their job to think big.
And so I want to help people sort of own that, take agency
over it. The second part and the second
kind of factor here is my fear that AI takes that away from
people, that they feel that AI is more creative, more capable
of generating ideas quickly, more useful in that way.
And so not just outsourcing for productivity tasks, but
outsourcing thinking. That's a real concern for me
because these people are already vulnerable to not thinking
they're creative or probably the first class of people that will
flock to AI to generate ideas for them.
And it's not that AI shouldn't do that, but you should have
agency over it. And the only way of agency is to
believe you can be creative and take that output and mold it
into something purposeful and meaningful and valuable.
So I think those are the two kind of factors in why the
topic, the book, why the book and why, how did that all
convert into a book when I, you know, when I left full time
work, I wasn't really sure what I was going to do with my time.
And my husband kept saying, oh, you should write a book and you
should write a book. And I kept thinking, I don't
need to do it for myself, but if there's value in doing it, if
the, if there's an audience for it, maybe then I will.
And part of my product training was to actually look at the
construct of writing a book. Like I was launching a product
and putting putting the sort of topics in into a book proposal
that I gave to a bunch of people who were not family, but who
would give me tough love, who would tell me, oh, this is cute.
It's a blog post, not a blog. You know, who do you think's
going to read this? Why would somebody care?
And so I kept looking for that kind of negative feedback and
this kind of this kind of play into our discussion, which is
why I, I felt so important to kind of go down this journey.
I wanted somebody to tell me it was a bad idea and I wanted to
understand why it was a bad idea.
And I wanted to understand what what I missed, right.
And so looking for the negative feedback was actually the most
positive thing because everybody made it better and everybody
told me where I could strengthen it or how it can.
So six months in, I gave the proposal to someone who was an
author with Wiley, very successful author.
And I knew that person wouldn't like want me to do it embarrass
myself, but it and so he would tell me this is a bad idea.
And he said, how are you going to sell the book?
And I said, well, I I figured I'll do it the way they say on
the website. He said that'll never happen.
He said, if I like the book, I'll pitch it to my editor and
if she's interested in reading the proposal proposal, I'll
introduce you to her. And so by the time I got to that
point, the product had sort of gone through all that user
testing and all of the things that would help me see.
I, I asked professors at the University of Washington, I
asked all sorts of people to read the book to see if it had
value. And by the time I got to this
person, it was very easy for him to introduce me to his publisher
because it had already been formulated and I'd already taken
all of the risk out of it, if you will, in how it how it
showed up. And within a week, she, they
bought the book. So I realized I was never going
to do it just to self publish to fulfill some personal need or
ego need. I really wanted to actually get
it to people, to help people. And so getting the publisher
validation was that was the real final moment of saying, OK, this
is a thing. I should probably go, right?
That was brilliant and sightful. And I love the connective tissue
between what you have done professionally for over 2
decades and how you're able to apply kind of that same
framework into getting to this place with the book.
That's incredible, Leslie. I love that.
So I mean, why don't we dive into creative velocity now?
I'm obviously you've launched all kinds of projects for these
multibillion dollar companies. You've seen these be either
successes or failures. Now in your book, you argue that
one of your our biggest mistakes strategically is planning
failures and how psychologically unwilling we are as humans to
admit weakness and plan for those failure type scenarios.
Right? We always want to just say, this
is going to be successful. We hardly ever have those
conversations around what if it fails and what does that mean?
I, I don't know what that is about the human being, you know,
in our nature to do that. But typically the conversations
I've even sat in are always about this is going to be
successful. No one's in the room saying,
well, what's the, what's the flip side of that coin?
So can you share a story maybe from one of those companies?
Or it can just be kind of a, a trend or an overview of what
you've seen throughout your professional journey, where you
saw this play out and you know, where a team's inability to
imagine failure led to something that probably could have been
preventable. Yeah, there's a couple of
Nuggets in there. So the first thing I'll say is I
think there is a predisposition to avoid the negative, right.
So that's just in general and failure being negative.
So when we present an idea in a meeting to stakeholders or
executives, if we get the objection, sometimes we get
defensive. And so we don't actually get at
the root of what the objection is.
And even if the objection may be flawed, the fact that there's
someone there that could create a reason for us to fail is
something we also navigate around.
Like, oh, John is just a Megatron, and he doesn't like
anything we do that isn't his idea.
So we're just going to avoid talking to John, right?
That's a very common behavior. We kind of cut the people out
who might create the friction because we really feel the
pressure to deliver. And so within an organization,
there's a pattern that develops where we don't take the
objection as an opportunity to improve the idea or to
strengthen the idea. We don't look at the objection
as something that's meant to be supportive of the idea innately.
And so we're moving to a position where we deal with that
objection in one of three ways. Maybe we go deeper and maybe we
learn what is the source of that objection and address it either
in our delivery plan or in our feature prioritization, right?
Maybe that's one thing that we could do, but maybe there's a
cultural propensity to just avoid a conflict.
And so in a lot of consensus driven organizations, people
will navigate around the conflict.
And that's that's so that's number two, right.
You can you can see where I'm not going to be able to have a
healthy conversation with somebody about their objective.
So I'll just navigate around it. And then the third thing that we
do when we see this in this kind of organizational tendency is
that we look at the reason for failure as potentially not
worthy of our time. Like we don't dive into what
that failure case would be or what would have caused it.
And so we're more willing to look at that in retrospective in
a post mortem, right? And so we spend the time
evaluating what went wrong after it went wrong.
But we rarely do the pre mortems to think if we failed like this,
what would have happened to make us fail?
And that's a behavioral miss for most product teams, right?
We don't see it as an agile ceremony like post mortems are
and retrospectives are. We don't go in front expecting
to fail. We want to show our confidence
to our teams, to our leaders. And so we don't really spend the
time exploring the failure cases sometimes.
And this is again another risk to not doing that.
The failure case you might decide is one in a million, but
if it happens, your business shuts down, right.
So when we think about things that have happened over the last
year where certain data systems and network security systems
aren't available to regular everyday businesses, they
counted on those companies to deliver that.
What did they plan for if they didn't?
Maybe it's once in a blue moon that will happen.
But now your business isn't operating online anymore for
until they figured out what happened.
And so you are so in failure mode that you don't actually
have anything you can do to recover.
There is no backstop. So I think those are the reasons
and the trends that that that I think that describe what you see
around the, you know, the negativity in particular.
I think there's also a reticence for people in a company to
object in any way to something that may be a higher authority
has has proposed. But you're closer to the ground,
you're clearer about what could go wrong, and it's hard in a
meeting to tell Steve Jobs that's a dumb idea.
Right. I or that idea will fail for
this reason. Even if you don't say it in a
silly critical way like it's a dumb idea, you say here's
reasons I don't think that will work.
It's hard to be the one that speaks up in that meeting,
right? And so authority and, and I saw
that that happened when I was at Apple during the Steve Jobs era.
Steve wanted to launch an iPod speaker that looked like a
lunchbox cooler. It was big and looked nothing.
The only thing about it that looked Apple like was that it
was white. And there wasn't a single person
in a meeting without Steve who would say it was going to sell.
But nobody in a meeting with Steve would tell him and he
wouldn't have heard anyway. He wouldn't have listened.
So they just all shut down. And sure enough, not many people
remember that product ever released, right?
It failed. But it was, in his case,
something he could just pull out of the distribution quickly.
And it faded from memory because of the number of successes.
But nobody in the room wanted to say to that authority, this is
not a good idea. This is not going to sell.
It's going to take up shelf space because of the size.
It's going to be hard to carry because it's so cumbersome.
Like all the reasons it might not have worked because he had
more hits than misses. So people were like, maybe he
does know better. And so sometimes failure happens
because of a case where the authority of the idea and the
person that delivered it feels like it's irrefutable.
Yeah, understood. And in those situations, Leslie,
where I, I, I, there's kind of a subtle trend in what you've
discussed so far around somebody kind of losing that agency or
that permission to have a say. And when we're looking at the
failure, potential failures, obviously you called out the
human behaviors to immediately try to justify the successes.
Before you even think about that, have you, how have you
navigated that in terms of being a leader in the room, knowing,
let's say in the speaker conversation that we're talking
about this speaker that never launched this product at Apple
that it probably wasn't the best decision?
How do you, how do you provide that feedback?
I guess I'm speaking on behalf of the project managers who
probably listening to this saying I've been in the room,
I've used the data, I've tried to talk about what this looks
like from a failure standpoint, yet it didn't feel like anyone
was listening to me. Is there anything at that point
you would advise product managers, project managers in
terms of what you've seen be effective?
Yeah. So there's a, there's a, a, a
couple of different techniques, but one really simple one is to
take it out of the personal and the judgmental and to say, what
if this doesn't happen the way you imagine it would?
What could be the things that would go wrong that prevents it?
Is it customer behavior? Is it distribution problems?
Like what are the things? So let's think about if one of
those things doesn't go as we expect and then it's not so much
you were wrong or your predictions are as as possible,
maybe as mine are, but what happens if both of us aren't
right? Like what's that scenario right?
So it's not so much about being the right person in the room or
the critical person in the room, but asking a what if question
that takes it out of the personal and creates that sort
of what if we're all wrong about how customers are going to react
to this? What would that look like?
What could be the, what could be the trigger of that?
Have we thought about what might be something we have to plan for
since nobody's ever seen this kind of speaker before?
What might be the questions or problems right that it raises in
distribution or what might be the the shipping issues or you
know, what have we not asked about as a place where we could
be vulnerable? Even if what we're right is that
there's a need for this and we think it will fit the market
need, there are circumstances that are not always in our
control and that's the way you help breach the conversation.
The circumstances that you can't control are things like customer
behavior. You cannot just, you know, you
don't know also what could happen the day you launch in
terms of some tragic event that the whole world is focused on.
There could be some other scenario where what you planned
isn't in your control and what happens therefore isn't what you
planned. And so there's a great saying
that says by not planning to fail, you will fail, right?
Because the, the, the idea that, you know, failing to plan
creates the case for failure. And so I, I think it's the
notion that there's things that you can't control that are
beyond your know, your knowledge, especially if you're
an innovator like Steve Jobs, There are things you won't know
that people will do because they won't tell you in advance
because they've not seen that before.
And so that's the most important time to say, well, what if we
were wrong about what customers will do?
Or what if our assumptions are raw?
Which assumptions would hurt us the most if we are raw?
And by asking it that way, you're sort of putting it on the
table and letting anybody comment about it without it
being a personal thing. And you do it in the light of
fortifying the plan. Because if we think about these
things in advance, we'll have contingencies for them.
We won't be unprepared when they happen to activate the
contingency. Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Thank you for that insight, by the way.
I think it it gives us a little bit of a deeper layer insight
into how you would navigate that situation.
And now I want to take that similar scenario and pile on
there. Leslie, generative AI, right.
In terms of your insights into generative, AII know right now a
lot of organizations are looking at it from an operational
efficiency standpoint. You know, how do we draft emails
faster? How do we generate reports,
automate with automation. I know in your book, you, you
coined the, the phrase strategic imagination in terms of
repositioning, how folks are looking at generative generative
AI and the usage of that more as like a creative partner rather
than just kind of doing the thinking for us.
And in many ways. So could you walk us through
what that practice looks like in practice?
And you know, how is that differentiating from kind of at
a basic level what I've seen organizations looking at AI for
right now to do, which is like those basic automated tasks that
operational efficiency that I described?
Yeah. So the the thing that's so great
about AI is it can do pattern recognition faster than the
human brain. So if this circumstance looks
like any other circumstance in any other domain, it can use
that to fuel possible places where there are vulnerabilities
in your plan. People who have tried to do
something like this before in other fields have done have seen
this happen, right? So there's the ability to look
quickly across similar but not related domain, similar
situation. So a good example of this is I
create a disruptive check in process.
Now let me look at what happens when people try to disrupt the
check in process across all the places people check in, in
restaurants, in hotels, in airports, right?
The notion that there's a different kind of experience
every place you go that's unique to that experience might tell
you something, right? Like what are they solving for
in that unique experience? The experience is similar.
It's a check in, but there are consequences that are different,
right? And so you want that assistance
in terms of seeing what people have done where there isn't
necessarily data about what you're doing.
But the domain may be serviced by knowledge from other places.
A really great example of this is the the you're getting into
the defense segment. And one of the things that
defense has really done great is that looking at nature and
bioscience for how things actually work in nature.
So draw drone swarming is by what happens when insects swarm
to attack, right? And if you look at certain
things, you can actually see what happens and what goes wrong
when that happens. And so now you can say, all
right, I can see why it has benefit, but I also see where it
has vulnerabilities. So let me go fix that in this
sort of re evolution of nature and what I'm going to build.
So that ability to look in places you're not uniquely
familiar with, you don't know yourself, that's a really great
way to sort of offset some potential risk.
The other great way that AI works is that it can quickly
look at second and third level consequences of a miss.
What if this assumption is wrong?
What are the ripple effects of that assumption being wrong in
places I might not look right? I might be focused more on
operational, but there could be brand ramifications for this
miss and I might focus only on the operational ones.
And so the idea that it can look at the second and third level
consequences quickly to help make sure that sometimes the
first one isn't the biggest hit. It's what happens when the
second and third get activated, right?
And then in totality, it's, it's a crash, right?
It's a problem. And so you want to have that
ability to get to that level of thinking quickly as well.
And I think that's a really useful way that generative AI
can bring you back the kinds of questions.
Well, have you thought about this or what about this or where
are the other areas? Lastly, I think it's hard, it's
hard to know what the opposite of an assumption could create.
We assume people will do this. We assume the market will be
like that. We assume the tolerance for
prices in this range. And we make a lot of assumptions
in especially in innovation without a lot of data.
And even when we have data, data isn't always predictive of what
happens in a new environment. And so being able to provide a
list of assumptions and look at the opposite of those
assumptions being true and what they do to the plan.
Here's my plan. Here are the assumptions
underlying that plan. Now, what if any of these
assumptions was wrong? What would be the consequence of
that on my plan, right? And so now you're able to sort
of take all that insight quickly, right?
And establish where you, with the agency that you have, want
to focus, go deeper, understand how to build a contingency plan.
So it's going to come back with all this perspective, but the
human has to sort of put value on what's the most important
thing to focus on, what's the one to explore and what risk you
want to tolerate. Yeah, I'm smiling because all
these, you know, little light bulbs are going off in my head
as you're speaking Because, you know, we just talked about a few
minutes earlier how just the human nature, the human behavior
around being not in the position to want to discuss failure.
And then now you've laid out kind of the layer of this is
what you would do situationally if you were in the room.
And then now we've added in the layer of how do you then make
generative AI your, your creative partner in this
journey? And then now I'm thinking, I
wonder if Leslie, you would imagine a space or maybe you've
already seen it where folks are in a room using the data from
the prompts that they've they've fed into the generative AI tool
and are now leveraging that kind of to placate the adverse nature
that humans have to talk about the negative.
Have you seen anyone surface Gen.
AI as if they were another stakeholder in the room and
saying they are the ones talking about failure?
No, it's really a great question.
I haven't seen it, but what I have talked to several product
managers about is using that as a talking points, talking points
sort of memo for the conversation.
So I hear your objection and I've explored it with AI and
here's some thoughts that I have now in thinking about that
objection. So it does two things.
One is it gives the person I've been seen and heard, which from
a stakeholder perspective or leader perspective is valuable,
right? To do it shows you took them
seriously. It also shows that you did it
dispassionately and not just defensively, because the
psychological distance that generated AI brings is really
helpful in that conversation, right?
It's not saying bad idea. It's saying here's some flaws,
here's some risk, here's some assumptions that aren't strong,
right? And so it takes that human
dialogue from I think this is not the way to go to let's
explore the reasons this could go wrong and see how realistic
we think they are together. And by the way, I have
contingency plans for three out of the five of them.
And now you're now as a product person, you're, you're again,
you're showing a, a level of insight that isn't just your
personal knowledge because maybe you're a more junior employer,
you don't have the years of experience of the person who's
provided the objection. Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Gosh, Leslie, I'm going to try to prevent myself from rabbit
holing down this this trend, but I'm absolutely enjoying this
conversation. But to kind of put the bow on
this conversation around your book Creative Velocity, as well
as, you know, the insights that you bring within the context of
that. Let's talk a little bit about
big picture. So building that organizational
resilience, making sure that it's not just IT, for example,
individual project managers who are usually the audience of the
everyday PM, but you know, product managers, whomever that
it goes from individual to organizational practice.
Yeah. So you talk about I think the
term is premeditation of evils with Gen.
AI, which you know, can can help in terms of organizational
cultural change and that sort of thing.
So can you elaborate more on what you mean by that?
And then as well as you know, what do you think it's going to
take to build that type of resilience at scale?
So the premeditation of evils is a Stoic philosophy.
And one of the reasons that Stoicism factors in here, and I
talk about this in the book as well, is because the Stoics are
really about emotional regulation, right?
And not having the highs and lows that come from, you know,
failures and wins, right? And, and taking them all in
stride and then being able to process them all with
equanimity. And in an organization that
accepts failure, that equanimity is part of how they do it,
right? People don't get punished for it
and any more than they get rewarded only when they
celebrate. And I was talking to an
executive yesterday who was telling me that in his all hands
meetings, he starts with all the failures and what we've learned
from them. So that people doesn't.
It's not that he's celebrating failure, it's that he's
acknowledging it as a part of the journey.
And so that acceptance of the learning from it comes from
being regulated and how you react to it.
So that's part of why the Stoics are really good for this advice,
right? Because we all fear failure as a
performance judgement and we all feel feel fear failure as a
final statement as opposed to a learning journey.
So that's, that's, that's one element of it.
The premeditation of evils is also based on the Stoic belief
that things that you don't think about or don't plan for hit you
harder if you not so much expect the worst, worried just to
worry. But if you imagine these things
could happen, you build more robust and resilient plans
because you expect the things that are out of your control
could go wrong. And so you think about the ideas
in advance of what it would take if they did.
And so there's kind of three components to this in the book
that that I used to sort of bring it to life.
The 1st is paradoxical thinking. What if one of your assumptions
is true, but the opposite is also true?
Both things can be true creates a different dynamic than if only
yours is true, right, right. There's a tension in both things
being true, which isn't bad. Always look at Bombas's
profitable and you know, charitable, right?
Those typically don't exist. So it's not bad.
But if you understand what it creates when both of those
exist, the the assumption that you have and the it's opposite
can coexist. You're a little more prepared
for what that dynamic will be when you enter the market or you
execute the plan, right? Because then it doesn't torpedo
you that someone said, well, see, the opposite is true.
Yeah, but I'm true, too. And in that scenario, this is
how we have to navigate that tension, right?
So it's a proactive thought about that.
The second one is opposite thinking, and I love to recall
the Seinfeld episode with George Costanza where he spent the
whole day doing the opposite of every single thing he thought
about. Doing I take all and any
Seinfeld references? Thank you, Leslie.
Because that episode was so fantastic, and when they
interviewed the actor who played them, Jason Alexander said that
people have walked up to him on the street telling them that
they took that advice and it worked out for the better.
And the whole concept of this is imagining every assumption is
wrong. That everything that you assume
to be true isn't in in in the plan isn't what's going to be
true. And by taking the opposite of
your assumptions, not that yours is true, but only the opposite
is true. Now you recognize how weak, how
it weakens the plan. Can the plan go forward if one
of these assumptions isn't true? Which assumption not being true
will hurt the plan the most, right?
And so by looking at the opposite of your assumptions,
you're looking at the ways that things along the way could
decrement your success. Maybe it'll be successful, but
maybe not as successful, or maybe it can't be successful if
this assumption is wrong. And so you kind of rank your
assumptions and you see the risk in your assumptions more clearly
that way. And then the last version of
this is called inversion thinking.
And this is where you actually imagine the worst thing that
could happen is the opposite of what you want to happen.
And I'll tell a personal story on this.
My first career was in the film industry.
I was a film major at Northwestern and I grew up in
Philadelphia and I wanted to move to LA right away after
college and start working in the film industry.
I had no friends, no relatives, no connections, no idea how to
do it. And my parents, who were the
educated professionals, told me it was a dumb idea and that I
would fail. They were 100% sure they didn't
support this idea. And when I left, they're like,
good luck, right? Like we're not helping you
because we think this is a bad idea.
You made this choice. Go go live with it.
The entire time I was in Lai thought they can't be right.
I can't let them be right because if they're right, then
everything I want is wrong. And I can't believe that.
So what is it going to take for me not to fail?
How do I look at their scenario and what would prove them right?
Well, I couldn't pay my rent would prove them right.
I couldn't afford my car because LA is a car city.
You have to have a car, right? I couldn't sustain long enough
to build a career economically, not that I couldn't find a job
in the film industry. And if I reset that failure
state at that abstract level, which is maybe it takes a year
or two to get into the film industry and I just, I have to
buy my time and make smart choices along the way, then they
won't be right because I'll have survived long enough to do that.
And that actually was the biggest motivation.
And within three years, I became a member of the Directors Guild
of America. I ended up working with James
Cameron and Brian De Palma. And I literally had no prior
connections. I was not an Apple baby.
I didn't know anyone. But I navigated my way there
with a different point of view because I didn't set out
thinking that was the job I had to have.
I just thought I needed money. And in LA, if you work on a, you
know, as a cater waiter or a nanny, you're probably working
for people in the industry, right?
Right. And so putting myself out there
to get jobs, even if they weren't the job helped me make
my network. And then in building my network,
I was able then right to navigate to an entry level job
where someone knew me and trusted my basic intelligence
and skills to give me that entry level production assistant job.
And then once I got that door open, it was up to me to keep
working. But I started to appreciate that
the effort to get in there was all mine, not to get the final
job right, but to put myself in a position to get hired.
And so that failure was the biggest motivation to not
failing. And my parents just couldn't
believe it, Like they wouldn't believe that I actually had
success. And when when they asked, I
said, it's because I just didn't want you to be right.
I just didn't want it. And so I thought of every
possible way that you could be right.
And I did the opposite of that. I thought about what it would be
that I would have to do so that that wouldn't happen.
And so my plan was super strong and super resilient and, and in
retrospect, probably the only plan that would have worked.
Yeah, absolutely. I, Leslie, that story alone has
been incredibly inspiring and has been transformative just for
me. So if I'm being selfish amongst
my audience, I've enjoyed this conversation thoroughly because
now you have me thinking about things in a very different
framework and light. And that's what I wanted for,
for us to get together and have this conversation for and to
share that with our audience. So Leslie, thank you so much for
this. Honestly, it's been incredibly
insightful, thoughtful. I've learned a lot.
Again, like I said, I honestly think when we're done with our
conversation today, I'm going to go about my day, George Costanza
style and try to flip everything on his head today too, because I
think that would just be incredibly fun to see how that
would turn out for me. So absolutely.
Well, look, that will do it for our conversation today.
Leslie, thank you so much for giving of your time and your
expertise and just sharing some of the stories around generative
AI and as well as the book, which I encourage everybody to
pick up. So, Leslie, if folks want to
continue the conversation with you, where can they find you
online? Well, I have a website,
lesliegrandy.com and also a sub stack.
So either of those places work and everybody's on LinkedIn, but
everybody has different opinions about being on LinkedIn.
So I Ioffer the other two first. I am going to take up the offer
of the sub stack. I didn't realize that, so I will
be doing that as well as soon as we're done today.
So again, thank you for joining me.
I look forward to hopefully future conversations with you.
This has been so much fun and for our listeners who are maybe
listening in for the first time, let us know what you thought
about this conversation. Let us know if there's any other
topics you want us to cover on the everyday PM.
You can also subscribe to the podcast on any of your
podcasting platforms as well as drop a comment and let us know
what you thought about our conversation today.
So that will do it for the everyday PM myself for Leslie.
Thank you so much for joining us, everybody.
And until next time, take care.