Michelle: The biggest mistake you make in relationships isn't trusting the wrong person. It's trusting the right person for the wrong reasons. That 'good person' you rely on? Their goodness might be the very thing that makes them unreliable. Mark: Whoa, hold on. That sounds completely backwards. Are you telling me that my friend who volunteers at the animal shelter and helps old ladies cross the street is somehow less trustworthy? My brain is short-circuiting. Michelle: It feels wrong, doesn't it? But that's the provocative core of the book we're diving into today: The Six Signs of Predictability by Robin Dreeke and Cameron Stauth. And this isn't just some armchair philosopher's theory. Mark: Okay, who is this author that’s trying to rewire my basic understanding of human decency? Michelle: Robin Dreeke is the former head of the FBI's elite Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program. His job, for over two decades, was recruiting spies. We're talking about a world where a single misjudgment about a person's reliability doesn't just lead to an awkward conversation; it could have catastrophic national security consequences. Mark: Alright, an FBI spy-recruiter… that carries some serious weight. That’s not your typical self-help guru. But how does someone even arrive at such a radical idea, that a good person can be unreliable? Where does that kind of thinking even come from? Michelle: It comes from a place of profound crisis. For Dreeke, it was born in the smoke and chaos of the single most unpredictable day in modern American history.

Mark: You’re talking about 9/11. Michelle: Exactly. Dreeke was an FBI agent in the New York Field Office, right near the World Trade Center. He describes that morning—a perfect, clear bluebird day. Then the first plane hits. Like everyone, he assumes it's a horrible accident. But then the second plane hits, and the world shatters. Mark: I can't even imagine the scene. Michelle: He describes debris and, horrifically, people falling from the sky. In that moment of absolute chaos, he had a terrifying realization. He was surrounded by his colleagues—people he’d worked with for years, people he thought he knew—and he had absolutely no idea what they would do next. Who would freeze? Who would run? Who would be a hero? Mark: Wow. In a crisis, the social masks just evaporate. Michelle: Completely. He saw his friend, an ex-Marine explosives expert named Lenny Hatton, do something unthinkable. As thousands were fleeing out of the towers, Lenny ran in to try and establish communications. He never came out. The head of security, John O'Neill, also died commanding the evacuation from inside. These men ran toward the danger. Dreeke realized his entire framework for understanding people was useless. He couldn't have predicted that. Mark: So that experience forced him to throw out the old rulebook. Michelle: It forced him to find a new one. And this led him to the book's foundational principle, the one that feels so wrong at first: Trust is Predictability, not Morality. Mark: Okay, unpack that for me. "Trust is Predictability, not Morality." Michelle: Dreeke argues that the single most predictable thing about any human is that they will almost always act in their own perceived best interest. This isn't a bad thing; it's how we survive and achieve things. So, that "good person" friend of yours? Let's say you ask them to help you move on Saturday. But on Friday, their mom calls in a panic because her basement is flooding. Mark: Of course, they're going to go help their mom. Michelle: Exactly. And they should. They are being a good son or daughter. But they just broke their promise to you. Their action was perfectly predictable based on their priorities—family comes first—but it made them unreliable to you in that moment. You trusted their "goodness," but you failed to predict their behavior. Mark: I see the logic, but it still feels… cynical. Are we all just self-interested machines calculating our own advantage? I know some readers have found this view a bit reductive. They feel it misses the complexity of human motivation. Michelle: That’s a fair critique, and Dreeke has an answer for it. He says the key isn't to be cynical, but to practice what he calls "Stempathy." Mark: Stempathy? Is that a typo? Michelle: Not at all. It's a blend of Stoicism and Empathy. The Stoicism gives you the courage to face the hard reality of a situation—to see people's motivations and self-interest for what they are, without judgment. The Empathy allows you to understand why their priorities are what they are. You don't judge your friend for helping his mom; you understand that's his world. It’s a rational, clear-eyed kindness. Mark: Okay, Stempathy. I like that. It’s not about being cold; it’s about being clear. So if I can't rely on someone's 'goodness,' what's left? How do I actually predict what someone will do? Give me the FBI toolkit. Michelle: That’s where the six signs come in. And the first one is probably the most powerful tool for building what Dreeke calls "bulletproof alliances."

Mark: Bulletproof alliances. I want one of those. What's the secret? Michelle: The first sign is Vesting. It’s a simple but profound question: Does this person believe that your success is their success? Are they actively invested in your goals? Mark: So it’s about shared incentives. Michelle: Precisely. And Dreeke learned this the hard way. Early in his career, post-9/11, he was assigned a confidential informant, a Russian counterintelligence guy named Leo. Leo had a reputation for being a double agent, and he’d burned through 14 other FBI handlers. Mark: Sounds like a nightmare. Michelle: It was. Dreeke’s first meeting was a disaster. He went in with a list of questions, trying to aggressively confront Leo and figure out if he was a traitor. Leo just shut him down. The meeting was useless. Dreeke was treating it like an interrogation. Mark: So how did he turn it around? Michelle: He got some advice from a mentor who told him to stop trying to "handle" Leo and start trying to build a relationship. So, in their next meeting, Dreeke threw out his script. He looked at this paranoid, difficult man and asked a simple question: "Leo, is there anything I can do for you?" Mark: A complete 180. Michelle: A total game-changer. Leo opened up. He revealed his grandson, Viktor, was living with him and was suffering from a serious medical condition. Dreeke immediately went to work, helping Leo navigate the bureaucracy to get his grandson a visa and proper medical care. In that moment, Dreeke became vested in Leo's life. And in return, Leo became fully vested in Dreeke's success as an agent. Their goals became linked. That relationship became one of the most fruitful of Dreeke's career, all because he stopped asking "What can I get from you?" and started asking "How can I help you succeed?" Mark: That’s a powerful story. It’s not about manipulation; it’s about genuinely aligning interests. So Vesting is about creating a shared future. What's the other side of the coin? How do you assess their past? Michelle: That brings us to the second sign we’re covering today: Actions. Dreeke says it’s the most obvious and accurate sign because, for good or ill, your actions define you far more than your words or feelings. Mark: "Actions speak louder than words." It's a cliché for a reason. Michelle: But Dreeke gives it an FBI-level of precision. He tells a fantastic story about an operation to recruit a high-ranking Russian general. The plan was to use an American colonel, who was a genuine friend of the general, to make a soft approach during a trip to Las Vegas. Mark: Recruiting a Russian general in Vegas. It sounds like a movie plot. Michelle: It does! The American colonel pitches the general on attending a Thanksgiving Day parade in New York, a subtle invitation to collaborate. The general listens, and then politely declines. He says his loyalty is to Russia. On the surface, the operation was a complete failure. Mark: Right, they didn't get their spy. Michelle: But Dreeke saw it as a success. Because the general did two things. His words said he was loyal to Russia. But his action was that he never reported the recruitment attempt to his superiors. He protected his American friend. His actions revealed his true character: he was a man of deep personal loyalty, even above his professional duty. His behavior, while not what the FBI wanted, was perfectly predictable based on his core values. Mark: Ah, so even in failure, they got a perfect read on him. His actions gave them a crystal-clear picture of who he was. It’s like you said, it’s not about good or bad, it’s about predictable or unpredictable. He was predictably loyal to his friends. Michelle: Exactly. And that information is incredibly valuable. Mark: I'm starting to see how this all fits together. Vesting is about aligning future interests, and Actions are about analyzing past behavior. You're bracketing them from both sides. It’s a system, not just a gut feeling. What are some simple tells for vesting? How do you spot it in a normal workplace, not a Vegas casino? Michelle: Dreeke gives a few great ones. Do they talk in terms of "we" when discussing future projects, or "you" and "I"? Do they offer to help you even when you don't ask? Do they get genuinely excited when you succeed? These are all micro-indicators that they see your success as their own.

Michelle: So when you put it all together, the whole system is a fundamental shift in perspective. You stop being a judge of someone's character and you become an analyst of their behavior. You're no longer asking, "Is this person good or bad?" You're asking, "Given what I know about their interests from Vesting, and their past behavior from their Actions, what are they most likely to do next?" Mark: You know, what’s striking me is that this is actually a more respectful way to view people. You're not imposing your own moral code on them or getting angry when they don't live up to your expectations. You're trying to understand them on their own terms, with that "Stempathy" you mentioned. Michelle: That’s a beautiful way to put it. It’s about seeing reality clearly and kindly. Mark: It reframes the whole goal. It’s less about protecting yourself from "bad people" and more about building stronger, more effective, more predictable alliances with the right people, for the right reasons. It's proactive, not defensive. Michelle: Absolutely. It’s about designing your relationships for success, rather than just hoping they work out. Mark: So what's one thing our listeners can do this week to start practicing this? Michelle: Dreeke’s work suggests a simple but powerful experiment. The next time you're about to ask a colleague for a favor, stop. Instead, try asking them, "What's the biggest challenge on your plate right now, and is there any way I can help?" Don't ask for anything in return. Just see if you can create one small moment of vesting. It might completely change the dynamic of that relationship. Mark: I love that. It’s a small investment that could pay huge dividends. And we'd love to hear how that goes. Find us on our social media channels and tell us about your experiments in vesting. What did you discover when you stopped asking and started offering? Michelle: This is Aibrary, signing off.