Episode 45
The Secrets of Perfect Timing: Why “What” You Do is Just as Important as “When” You Do It | Daniel H. Pink
Episode 45
Daniel H. Pink
The Secrets of Perfect Timing: Why “What” You Do is Just as Important as “When” You Do It | Daniel H. Pink
summary
Timing is everything, so it’s kind of surprising that most of us don’t give it any serious consideration. We think about what things we want to do. We think about who we want to do these things with. When we want to do something is generally our final consideration — if we consider it at all.
Take college students, for example. They must take classes in art, math, history, science, and a host of other fields. Each year, just before the semester begins, students flock to their computers and plot out the class schedules that will govern their lives for the next five months. Their top considerations are when their friends are taking classes, how they can avoid getting up early, and how they can ensure their classes are all on the same day so that they get a few extra days off.
This is a bit of a problem.
As Daniel Pink notes in his latest book When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing, there is a biological reality to our daily rhythms. This means that, at certain times, we are better at problem solving. At others, we perform better when it comes to creative endeavors. It may seem counterintuitive, but we each have a biological clock that has a material impact on our lives. Put simply, the time that we choose to do something alters our performance, influences our wellbeing, and shapes our overall experience. So if we are making decisions about when to do things on an impulse or according to whatever happens to be convenient, in many ways, we are setting ourselves up for failure.
However, there is a solution to this problem. It’s known as “chronobiology,” and it allows us to make fact-based decisions about when we should do things. By using chronobiology — by following the natural patterns found in our biology — we can help ensure that we are at our peak performance when we attempt any given task.
But how can we tell what our natural cycle is? How do we know if we are making good when-based decisions? In this episode, Demetri Kofinas speaks with Pink about the science of perfect timing and why when we do something is just as important as what we doand how well we do it.
Producer & Host: Demetri Kofinas
Editor & Engineer: Stylianos Nicolaou
Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @hiddenforcespod
bio
Daniel H. Pink is the author of six provocative books — including his newest, When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing, which has spent three months on the New York Times bestseller list. His other books include the long-running New York Times bestseller A Whole New Mind and the #1 New York Times bestsellers Drive and To Sell is Human. His books have won multiple awards and have been translated into 37 languages. He lives in Washington, DC, with his wife and their three children.
Pink was host and co-executive producer of “Crowd Control,” a television series about human behavior on the National Geographic Channel. He also appears frequently on NPR’s Hidden Brain, the PBS NewsHour, and other TV and radio networks in the US and abroad.
He has been a contributing editor at Fast Company and Wired as well as a business columnist for The Sunday Telegraph. His articles and essays have also appeared in The New York Times, Harvard Business Review, The New Republic, Slate, and other publications. In 2007, he was a Japan Society Media fellow in Tokyo, where he studied the country’s massive comic industry.
For the last six years, London-based Thinkers 50 named him, alongside Michael Porter and Clayton Christensen, as one of the top 15 business thinkers in the world.
Pink’s TED Talk on the science of motivation is one of the 10 most-watched TED Talks of all time, with more than 19 million views. His RSA Animate video about the ideas in his book, Drive, has collected more than 14 million views.
He currently serves on the advisory boards of RiseSmart, Betterment Institutional, Heleo, and Hubspot.
Before venturing out on his own 20 years ago, Dan worked in several positions in politics and government, including serving from 1995 to 1997 as chief speechwriter to Vice President Al Gore.
He received a BA from Northwestern University, where he was a Truman Scholar and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, and a JD from Yale Law School. He has also received honorary doctorates from Georgetown University, the Pratt Institute, the Ringling College of Art and Design, and Westfield State University.
Pink and his wife live in Washington, DC. They have three children — a college junior, a college freshman, and a high school freshman.
transcript
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Tum ille: Tu autem cum ipse tantum librorum habeas, quos hic tandem requiris? Idem iste, inquam, de voluptate quid sentit? Ita graviter et severe voluptatem secrevit a bono. Duo Reges: constructio interrete.
Sed quid attinet de rebus tam apertis plura requirere? Qui autem diffidet perpetuitati bonorum suorum, timeat necesse est, ne aliquando amissis illis sit miser. Nec lapathi suavitatem acupenseri Galloni Laelius anteponebat, sed suavitatem ipsam neglegebat; Ne discipulum abducam, times. Utram tandem linguam nescio? Quae cum essent dicta, discessimus.
Aut haec tibi, Torquate, sunt vituperanda aut patrocinium voluptatis repudiandum. Quam ob rem tandem, inquit, non satisfacit? Color egregius, integra valitudo, summa gratia, vita denique conferta voluptatum omnium varietate. Quamquam ab iis philosophiam et omnes ingenuas disciplinas habemus; Nobis aliter videtur, recte secusne, postea; Sed ego in hoc resisto; Prioris generis est docilitas, memoria; Sed haec quidem liberius ab eo dicuntur et saepius.
Itaque hic ipse iam pridem est reiectus; Claudii libidini, qui tum erat summo ne imperio, dederetur. Sed utrum hortandus es nobis, Luci, inquit, an etiam tua sponte propensus es? Etenim si delectamur, cum scribimus, quis est tam invidus, qui ab eo nos abducat? Sed ad haec, nisi molestum est, habeo quae velim.
Full Episode
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fieri, inquam, Triari, nullo pacto potest, ut non dicas, quid non probes eius, a quo dissentias. Hoc Hieronymus summum bonum esse dixit. Ita fit ut, quanta differentia est in principiis naturalibus, tanta sit in finibus bonorum malorumque dissimilitudo. Quod ea non occurrentia fingunt, vincunt Aristonem; Quis animo aequo videt eum, quem inpure ac flagitiose putet vivere? Istam voluptatem, inquit, Epicurus ignorat? Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Gerendus est mos, modo recte sentiat.
Sed quae tandem ista ratio est? Utinam quidem dicerent alium alio beatiorem! Iam ruinas videres. Non risu potius quam oratione eiciendum? Quid turpius quam sapientis vitam ex insipientium sermone pendere? Igitur neque stultorum quisquam beatus neque sapientium non beatus. Sed quid minus probandum quam esse aliquem beatum nec satis beatum? Tum mihi Piso: Quid ergo? Ut optime, secundum naturam affectum esse possit.
Estne, quaeso, inquam, sitienti in bibendo voluptas? Age, inquies, ista parva sunt. Hic ego: Pomponius quidem, inquam, noster iocari videtur, et fortasse suo iure. Quonam, inquit, modo? Negat enim summo bono afferre incrementum diem. Nondum autem explanatum satis, erat, quid maxime natura vellet. Quod si ita se habeat, non possit beatam praestare vitam sapientia. Quis Aristidem non mortuum diligit? Quae diligentissime contra Aristonem dicuntur a Chryippo.
Maximas vero virtutes iacere omnis necesse est voluptate dominante. Oratio me istius philosophi non offendit; Multoque hoc melius nos veriusque quam Stoici. Videamus animi partes, quarum est conspectus illustrior; Quantum Aristoxeni ingenium consumptum videmus in musicis? Ut optime, secundum naturam affectum esse possit.
intelligence report
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Deinde prima illa, quae in congressu solemus: Quid tu, inquit, huc? Beatus sibi videtur esse moriens. Non igitur de improbo, sed de callido improbo quaerimus, qualis Q. Videmusne ut pueri ne verberibus quidem a contemplandis rebus perquirendisque deterreantur? Nam aliquando posse recte fieri dicunt nulla expectata nec quaesita voluptate.
Nam, ut sint illa vendibiliora, haec uberiora certe sunt. Dic in quovis conventu te omnia facere, ne doleas. Mihi vero, inquit, placet agi subtilius et, ut ipse dixisti, pressius. Quos quidem tibi studiose et diligenter tractandos magnopere censeo. Cum id fugiunt, re eadem defendunt, quae Peripatetici, verba. Itaque hic ipse iam pridem est reiectus; Primum cur ista res digna odio est, nisi quod est turpis? Quae quidem sapientes sequuntur duce natura tamquam videntes;
In qua quid est boni praeter summam voluptatem, et eam sempiternam? Haec et tu ita posuisti, et verba vestra sunt. Nam et complectitur verbis, quod vult, et dicit plane, quod intellegam; Ut optime, secundum naturam affectum esse possit. In primo enim ortu inest teneritas ac mollitia quaedam, ut nec res videre optimas nec agere possint. Quicquid porro animo cernimus, id omne oritur a sensibus;
Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Nondum autem explanatum satis, erat, quid maxime natura vellet. Tum Torquatus: Prorsus, inquit, assentior; Etiam inchoatum, ut, si iuste depositum reddere in recte factis sit, in officiis ponatur depositum reddere; Quae diligentissime contra Aristonem dicuntur a Chryippo. Quae cum essent dicta, discessimus. Nosti, credo, illud: Nemo pius est, qui pietatem-; Sed quot homines, tot sententiae;
extra material
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Quod non faceret, si in voluptate summum bonum poneret. Duo enim genera quae erant, fecit tria. Illa sunt similia: hebes acies est cuipiam oculorum, corpore alius senescit; Erat enim Polemonis. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Cum id quoque, ut cupiebat, audivisset, evelli iussit eam, qua erat transfixus, hastam. Bonum valitudo: miser morbus.
Iam doloris medicamenta illa Epicurea tamquam de narthecio proment: Si gravis, brevis; Collige omnia, quae soletis: Praesidium amicorum. Qui autem esse poteris, nisi te amor ipse ceperit? Iam in altera philosophiae parte. Multa sunt dicta ab antiquis de contemnendis ac despiciendis rebus humanis;
Miserum hominem! Si dolor summum malum est, dici aliter non potest. Cum autem in quo sapienter dicimus, id a primo rectissime dicitur. Hoc loco discipulos quaerere videtur, ut, qui asoti esse velint, philosophi ante fiant. Teneo, inquit, finem illi videri nihil dolere. Levatio igitur vitiorum magna fit in iis, qui habent ad virtutem progressionis aliquantum. Si stante, hoc natura videlicet vult, salvam esse se, quod concedimus;
Perge porro; Quae duo sunt, unum facit. Hic, qui utrumque probat, ambobus debuit uti, sicut facit re, neque tamen dividit verbis. Cum id quoque, ut cupiebat, audivisset, evelli iussit eam, qua erat transfixus, hastam.
related episodes
Video
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. In his igitur partibus duabus nihil erat, quod Zeno commutare gestiret. Me igitur ipsum ames oportet, non mea, si veri amici futuri sumus. Nihilne te delectat umquam -video, quicum loquar-, te igitur, Torquate, ipsum per se nihil delectat? Sequitur disserendi ratio cognitioque naturae; Quid igitur, inquit, eos responsuros putas? Duo Reges: constructio interrete.
Primum divisit ineleganter; Quod non faceret, si in voluptate summum bonum poneret. Aufert enim sensus actionemque tollit omnem. Eam tum adesse, cum dolor omnis absit; Non enim, si omnia non sequebatur, idcirco non erat ortus illinc. Sed quod proximum fuit non vidit. Si stante, hoc natura videlicet vult, salvam esse se, quod concedimus; Sextilio Rufo, cum is rem ad amicos ita deferret, se esse heredem Q.
Quo plebiscito decreta a senatu est consuli quaestio Cn. Diodorus, eius auditor, adiungit ad honestatem vacuitatem doloris. Quid dubitas igitur mutare principia naturae? Quod quidem iam fit etiam in Academia. Verum hoc idem saepe faciamus. Hoc etsi multimodis reprehendi potest, tamen accipio, quod dant. Quod mihi quidem visus est, cum sciret, velle tamen confitentem audire Torquatum. Ad corpus diceres pertinere-, sed ea, quae dixi, ad corpusne refers?
Quae cum essent dicta, finem fecimus et ambulandi et disputandi. Mihi quidem Homerus huius modi quiddam vidisse videatur in iis, quae de Sirenum cantibus finxerit. Quam nemo umquam voluptatem appellavit, appellat; Universa enim illorum ratione cum tota vestra confligendum puto. Quid, si etiam iucunda memoria est praeteritorum malorum? Sed haec omittamus; Cur igitur, cum de re conveniat, non malumus usitate loqui? Sed emolumenta communia esse dicuntur, recte autem facta et peccata non habentur communia. Huic mori optimum esse propter desperationem sapientiae, illi propter spem vivere. Istic sum, inquit. Quid ei reliquisti, nisi te, quoquo modo loqueretur, intellegere, quid diceret? An est aliquid per se ipsum flagitiosum, etiamsi nulla comitetur infamia?
