Olivia: Jackson, I have a riddle for you. What do you call a company that is world-class at making a product nobody wants? Jackson: Bankrupt? Olivia: Exactly. And that's the paradox we're diving into today. The idea that being hyper-efficient, being the absolute best at your job, can actually be the fastest way to kill your company. Jackson: Okay, I'm hooked. This sounds like it turns the whole 'productivity porn' industry on its head. All those life hacks and optimization tricks might be leading us off a cliff. What's the source for this? Olivia: It's from Laura Stack's fantastic book, Doing the Right Things Right. And what's so compelling is that she's essentially updating the bible of management theory—Peter Drucker's legendary work, The Effective Executive—for the 21st century. She takes his core philosophy and makes it brutally practical for today's leaders. Jackson: Drucker is a heavy hitter. So this isn't just another list of tips for a cleaner inbox. Olivia: Not at all. This is about the fundamental architecture of success. Stack, who is known as The Productivity Pro®, boils it down to a powerful distinction that Drucker first made famous. It’s the difference between effectiveness and efficiency. Jackson: And I'm guessing they're not the same thing. Olivia: They are worlds apart. Effectiveness is doing the right things. It's about choosing the correct goals, the right direction, the right mountain to climb. Efficiency is doing things right. It's about process, speed, and using minimal resources. It's climbing that mountain as fast as possible. Jackson: Ah, so effectiveness is choosing the destination, and efficiency is how fast the car goes. There’s no point breaking the speed limit if you're driving to the wrong city. Olivia: You've nailed it. And being efficient at the wrong thing isn't just useless; it can be catastrophic. There’s no better example of this than the tragic story of Kodak.

Jackson: Oh, the ghost of corporate past. I feel like every business student has to study their downfall. But I have a feeling you're going to tell me a version of the story I haven't heard. Olivia: I think so. Because everyone knows Kodak missed the boat on digital photography. But the irony is so much deeper. In the 1970s and 80s, Kodak wasn't just a company; it was a monolith. They had 90% of the film market in the U.S. They were the definition of a cash cow, printing money with every roll of film. They were masters of chemical engineering, of manufacturing, of distribution. They were incredibly efficient. Jackson: The best in the world at what they did. Olivia: The best. And in 1975, a young engineer at Kodak named Steve Sasson walks into his boss's office with a strange contraption. It was a toaster-sized device that could capture a black-and-white image and display it on a television screen. Jackson: No way. Olivia: Yes. In 1975, Steve Sasson at Kodak invented the world's first digital camera. Jackson: Wait, they invented it?! They invented the very weapon that killed them? How is that even possible? Olivia: That's the heart of the tragedy. The executives looked at this filmless camera and they were terrified. Their entire empire was built on selling film and the chemicals to develop it. This new invention threatened to cannibalize their most profitable business. So, what did they do? They buried it. They told Sasson it was a "cute gimmick" and to not show it to anyone. Jackson: That is heartbreaking. It's like they were holding the winning lottery ticket and decided to use it as a bookmark. Olivia: A perfect analogy. And here's where the distinction between effectiveness and efficiency becomes so crucial. Instead of embracing the "right thing"—the future of photography—Kodak's leadership decided to get even better at the "wrong thing." They poured billions into making their film production even more efficient. They perfected their chemical formulas, streamlined their factories, and optimized their supply chains. They became the most efficient, most profitable, most dominant maker of a product the world was about to stop wanting. Jackson: They were the most efficient buggy-whip makers on the planet, right as the first cars were rolling off the assembly line. That's brutal. Olivia: It is. While they were perfecting their film, competitors like Sony and Canon were embracing the digital future. By the time Kodak finally tried to enter the digital market, it was too late. They were a decade behind. And in 2012, the company that invented digital photography filed for bankruptcy because of it. They were a monument to the danger of doing the wrong thing, right. Jackson: Wow. That story just re-frames the entire conversation around productivity. It's not about how many tasks you cross off your to-do list. It's about whether your to-do list is pointed at the right destination in the first place. Olivia: Precisely. And that's why Stack argues that just knowing this isn't enough. You need a system to ensure you're constantly checking your compass and not just admiring your speed. She calls it the 3T Leadership Compass.

Jackson: Okay, a compass sounds useful, especially if you're about to drive off a cliff like Kodak. What are the 3Ts? Olivia: It's a beautifully simple framework for how leaders should spend their time. The three 'T's are: Strategic Thinking, Team Focus, and Tactical Work. Jackson: Let me guess. Strategic Thinking is the big-picture stuff? Olivia: Exactly. That's the 'Think' part. It’s about goals, innovation, and market analysis. It's asking, "Are we climbing the right mountain?" This is pure effectiveness. Jackson: Okay, what about Team Focus? Olivia: That's the 'Team' part. It's all about your people. Fostering a great culture, communication, motivation, mentoring. It's about making sure you have the right people on the bus, and that they're all excited for the journey. Jackson: And Tactical Work must be the day-to-day grind. Olivia: That's it. The 'Tactics'. This is the hands-on execution, the workflow, the project management, the personal productivity. This is the efficiency part—doing things right. Jackson: Okay, that makes sense, but how does this actually work in practice? I mean, everyone has to do all three, right? A CEO can't just sit in a room and 'strategize' all day without dealing with people or tasks. Olivia: Right, but the balance is what matters. And this is where Stack's insight is so powerful for anyone who wants to advance in their career. She shows how the ideal allocation of your time across these 3Ts should dramatically shift as you move up the leadership ladder. Jackson: How so? Olivia: Think about it. For an individual contributor—a programmer or a designer—their time is maybe 80% Tactical, 15% Team, and 5% Think. They are there to execute. But when that person gets promoted to Manager, the ratio needs to flip. Suddenly, their job should be mostly 'Team'—managing and enabling others—and more 'Think' than before. Jackson: Oh, I know that feeling. The classic 'promoted to manager but still trying to do everyone's job' trap. You keep your old tactical focus because it's comfortable, and you end up becoming a massive bottleneck. Olivia: You've just described the biggest pitfall in leadership development! And it gets even more extreme. For a C-suite executive, their time should be almost entirely 'Think' and 'Team'. Their job is to set the direction and empower the leaders below them. If a CEO is spending half their day on tactical work, something is deeply wrong with the organization. They're steering the ship by personally scrubbing the decks. Jackson: That's a fantastic way to visualize it. The 3T model isn't just a list of duties; it's a diagnostic tool. You can look at your calendar and ask, "Am I spending my time like a manager, or am I still acting like an individual contributor?" Olivia: That's the whole point. It forces you to be honest about whether you're doing the job you have, or the job you used to have. It's the practical application of the Kodak lesson: you have to consciously shift your focus to the 'right things' for your role, or you'll efficiently lead yourself and your team to a dead end.

Olivia: And that's the book's core genius. It connects that big, philosophical idea—effectiveness over efficiency—to the daily, practical reality of how we spend our time. The Kodak story is the 'why' you must change, and the 3T model is the 'how' you actually do it. Jackson: It's a powerful call to action. It’s a call to stop obsessing over clearing our inbox and start asking if the emails in our inbox even matter. It’s about the quality of our focus, not just the quantity of our tasks. It's less about 'getting more done' and more about 'getting the right things done.' Olivia: Absolutely. And while Stack includes a full self-assessment in the book, there's a simple action our listeners can take right away. Just track your time for one day. Be ruthless. Categorize every hour into 'Think,' 'Team,' or 'Tactics.' The results might shock you. Jackson: That's a great, tangible step. I think a powerful reflective question to leave everyone with, inspired by this, is: 'What am I being incredibly efficient at that I should probably stop doing altogether?' Olivia: A powerful question indeed. It might be the most important one you ask yourself all year. Jackson: This is Aibrary, signing off.