One somewhat paradoxical signal is that imposter syndrome signals growth.

It’s not exclusive to juniors. Even longtime leaders show this. Second-guess themselves and feel like fakes.

Without a clear mental model of how a system works and what to ask, AI tools become more obstacle than help.

It’s like trying to have a conversation when you’re not sure what language the other person speaks.

At the start of “Roxanne”, Sting accidentally sat on a piano creating an odd chord followed by laughter. Instead of removing it The Police kept it in the final recording. It became one of those perfect imperfect moments.

Embracing the flaws is the best way to hide the flaws. Because then the flaws become the signature. - Venus Theory

This reminds me of my first Fallout 4 playthrough. I tried to make my character equally good at everything. Just like when I became an engineering manager and saw that skill matrix spider web. I automatically assumed I needed to max out every area.

But here’s the thing: being average at everything isn’t as valuable as being exceptional at specific things. Some of our “flaws” are just areas we’ve chosen not to prioritize. And that’s okay.

Like that piano chord in Roxanne sometimes our mistakes and imperfections become our signature. Our strength isn’t in being flawless. It’s in owning the mistakes and the imperfections.

At Spotify I worked a bit on the Alexa speakers and had meetings with Amazon. This is where I first learned about the “silent meetings” structure that Amazon had. They usually began with someone having written a document on the topic, different viewpoints, and a possible way forward. The first 10-15 minutes of the meeting went into reading this document. And once everyone was literally on the same page, the meetings started. The discussions were engaging, and everyone was focusing on solving the same problems.

There are key parallels between Amazon’s silent meetings and the flipped classroom model: both rely on everyone starting with the same information before discussion begins. When done right teachers become coaches guiding students through shared material rather than lecturers delivering new content.

When I’ve experienced a working flipped classroom, it has been all about the “silent reading” part. The students all started from the same baseline when it came to the information. They worked together in small groups summarizing it, then shared with a bigger group about what they learned.

This is often when I’ve seen the flipped classroom break. Instead of having the same baseline, each group has had a different set of topics and areas they should summarize and teach to the rest of the group. Effectively they’ve switched from an experienced teacher to an amateur teacher, and they’ve only learned the topics they themselves have discussed. The method works best when it builds on shared understanding rather than dividing the learning experience.

Sometimes I get the question about build vs buy. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a developer by heart and I’d always pick build.

But as a manager or leader I most often pick buy.

The equation rarely adds up when you build something that’s not part of your core business. Unless your core business is faced with a tight budget.

And by equation I mean time. Hours spent building, making it better, bug-fixing, upgrading, new feature, planning, sorting, prioritizing it, knowledge sharing.

Think of customer feedback as two distinct signals. One is complaint-driven insights about why people leave. The other is a silent signal that explains why people stay and remain loyal.

When looking at complaints and help requests you’ll only capture the minority of vocal customers. But your satisfied users might have the key insights to what makes your product worthwhile. Your loyal users often value something completely different from what complaining customers expect.

Value alignment over problem resolution.

You might have a bug in the product but you might also have the wrong customer.

With consensus everyone must say yes. With consent no one says no.

I remember when we introduced this at Spotify. Leadership felt it took way too long to make decisions - almost like paralysis by analysis. But once understood it was a fairly simple shift to get teams moving faster.

There are very few decisions we can’t reverse if they fail. Consent helps us move quickly toward either failure or success. Continuing to analyze and second guess rarely moves us forward.

One challenge with consent is that someone needs to make a stand. If discussions are endless then it might not be consent that’s lacking. It might be that no one cares strongly enough to put a stake in the ground. Or worse it might be a sign that no one feels psychologically safe to make a mistake.

One pattern I see is that we approach all AI with a similar mindset, an industrial mindset that focuses on production metrics and output targets. While AI excels at production, Generative AI’s real value might lie in distillation and discovery.

Think of it as a lens for spotting connections and extracting insights rather than a factory churning out content.

Earlier AI focused on clear tasks (recognize this, predict that, sort these) and it was easy to measure if the results were better.

But generative AI opens new possibilities for exploration and creativity. Yet we measure it with industrial era metrics and we see it in all benchmarks that the Generative AI companies share when they release a new model.

The power isn’t in producing more, but in helping us see different angles and uncover unexpected patterns. Quality over quantity. Insight over output.

The question shifts from ‘How can we create more?’ to ‘How can we discover better?’"

I’m fascinated by us “lazy creatives.” We dive so deep into planning that we never actually create. We research endlessly. Buy the perfect tools. Watch countless tutorials.

Right now I’m guilty of this with music. I’m setting up the perfect Ableton Live set. Buying gear. Watching performance videos. Even coding custom tools to make it “better.”

Have I made any actual music yet? Nope.

Bad art teaches you more than perfect planning ever will.

Here’s the truth though: Bad art teaches you more than perfect planning ever will.

Maybe instead of trying to get everything right we should just create something terrible on purpose. Make that awful track. Write that horrible story. Take those bad photos.

Because really. What’s braver? Having the perfect plan or actually making something?

Ever notice how some of your best ideas or solutions come while explaining something out loud? Just rambling out loud until something clicks? Rubber-ducking your way forward.

Most people stick to either talking or writing when processing thoughts. But you might get better results in combining the spontaneity in verbal processing and the structure of written words

Start talking. Let yourself ramble on a topic without filters. Just let the ideas tumble out.

Then bring it to AI. It captures your ramblings and reflects them back in text form. No judgment. No interruptions.

Now read the response. This is where scattered thoughts begin to make sense. Reading slows your brain down. Helps you spot patterns in your own ramblings.

It’s like having two thinking modes: creative outpour and thoughtful reflection. Your brain needs both to turn raw thoughts into clear ideas.