• Jeff Miller, The Influence Ecology Podcast, Transactional Competence, Transactionalism

Naively Righteous with Jeff Miller

As we teach it, the study of transactional behavior allows each of us to understand both the value and cost of our role in any transaction. For example, rigorous standards are valuable when confronting our limited resources–and at the same time–destructive when gregarious or imaginative moods are required. Too often, we get stuck when we assume our assets or contributions are always a good thing. We are often surprised when they backfire.

In 2016, Jeff Miller’s standards had him so imprisoned that the toll to his health finally stopped him in his tracks. Although the money was good, throughout most of his 25-year career, he was miserable. After studying with Influence Ecology, not only has he found peace of mind, he’s found freedom and satisfaction in a new career that takes advantage of his specialized knowledge while also enjoying a new chapter of art, music, and performance.

Below you’ll find a transcript of this podcast episode that has been edited for your reading pleasure. You’ll also see links at the bottom of this post where you can find more information on the people and ideas mentioned in the episode.

by John Patterson
Produced by: John Patterson & Tyson Crandall

“Until I could distinguish the personality types and that there was also a transactional cycle that needs to be completed for anything to be considered a successful transaction and that the personality types played different roles throughout that cycle and each is invaluable.

That’s what really disrupted and caused me to examine my, I’m going to call it my old way of being and doing and transacting.”

John Patterson: Welcome to the Influence Ecology Podcast.

Jeff Miller: Thank you John. It’s great to be here.

So my name is Jeff Miller and I currently reside in Seattle, Washington with my wife and our dog and our family of three has been up here, it’ll be three years in January.

John Patterson: Oh my gosh already three?

Jeff Miller: Yes, I know. Already three.

John Patterson: You both moved there from Los Angeles, right?

Jeff Miller: Yes, we were in Southern California for five-ish years prior.

John Patterson: All right, good. Then you moved up there for a couple of a different reasons. Do you want to say something about that?

Jeff Miller: Sure. So we relocated primarily for a tremendous opportunity that my wife had with her current employer. You know the Pacific Northwest was always someplace that we enjoyed and we had spent some time up here sailing and exploring the great outdoors but never was it on our radar that we would actually reside here.

So about three years ago Trisha was approached with an opportunity, expanded role, leadership opportunities, all of that and we were at a point in our lives, in our career, in our stopover in Southern California that we were open and ready for a change. I was very, very specifically looking for a change from not only my current employer, or what at the time was my current employer, and what is now my former industry that I had spent up until a couple of years ago, my entire career in.

John Patterson: Yeah, well I look forward to hearing about that. There’s some great stuff in your notes about what’s happened on your journey over the last … How many years since you first did the programs of Influence Ecology?

Jeff Miller: Well I’ve been on a 52 year journey thus far, John. When I first got introduced to Influence Ecology that would have been 2015, so about four years ago. I completed and I use that term loosely, the Fundamentals of Transaction, late 2015. I was screaming it at the last minute, submitting my final study paper, I think it was 11 or 12, probably 11 or 12 minutes after the official due date.

John Patterson: Oh well it’s all good. It’s all good. Well listen, I’m very happy to have you here. I love judges in so many ways and love lots of things about them. We don’t have enough opportunities to highlight some of the best things about our judges and some of the things that they go through and experience and all that. In terms of your journey, you now work for what company doing what?

Jeff Miller: I currently work for Sound Financial Group and I am by title, a financial advisor, but that doesn’t mean enough to describe our uncommon offering process. What we really do as a firm and I do as an individual contributor to that firm is to help individuals, families, small business owners, entrepreneurs, understand the world of money and we go a lot deeper than what I would categorize as your traditional financial counselors, financial planners, et cetera.

John Patterson: Yeah, I’ve known Paul for, of course, quite a while as well. So Paul and Cory, I’ve obviously known Paul for quite some time as well. But I know that what you do is very different as financial planners are concerned and in fact, really advisors. There’s a whole approach that makes you guys very different. We’ve talked about it quite a bit. There are a lot of people at Influence Ecology that find what you guys do extremely valuable and useful.

We can get into that in just a minute but I think what I want to do is to highlight a bit of your journey is you started out … So I’m going to tell you what I think you’ve gone through. So you started out in the world of finance, right? That’s where you started, finance and accounting. You were doing that in some large organizations and things like that. There were some bits about your journey where you, I love this word, you use the word naively righteous. There was a particular way that you probably approach things, ran into a brick wall, found out that didn’t work, you know, reoriented, got yourself on a new path and now life is great, right? That’s the sort version.

Jeff Miller: That is a perfect and very short, concise summary of the last, well yeah, the last 30 years of my working career.

John Patterson: Good. Well what I love about this as we teach it, and I’m saying some things that may be obvious to you, but of course people are listening that don’t know anything. So as we teach it the judge personality is personality that has high standards for lots of things. In some times their standards conflict and they’re often in positions where someone needs to be a guardian of those standards, those ideals, those metrics, those statistics. Where facts matter, evidence matters and all of that is the rule of the day. Except we find that also with all personalities there’s the asset and the liability of every one of our personalities. For you it sounds like that your ability, the natural ability, to be the guardian of standards and the keeper of evidence and all of that also proved to be perhaps detrimental to you in some ways. You kind of got caught in your own trap of it. Is that a good way to say that?

Jeff Miller: That is perfectly articulated. Being a judge and the inherent personality traits of myself and my fellow judges are both a badge of honor, if you will, as well as a cross that we bear. So yeah the same kind of things that make us valuable in a transaction, in an enterprise, on a team in an organization, are also the things that not only drive other people nuts about working with us, but drive ourselves nuts, too.

I think, if I can speak for not only myself but my fellow judges-

John Patterson: I agree.

Jeff Miller: Yeah, yeah.

John Patterson: I agree. It’s the same for every personality and I think that you have your own version of it, I have my own version of it. I’m an inventor personality so there’s the asset and liability of my own personality. The asset of my personality is I think in big frameworks, contexts, you know? Big ideas, big futures, big plans, the world and how it could unfold has a whole bunch of possibilities is quite clear to me except try to turn that noise off when you’re going to sleep. Try to get the noodling to stop. Try to get it to ever shut up and you’ll understand sort of the head of an inventor. For the head of a judge, this is where I thin it’s very useful for people. In your role with the company that you were with before all of that was a big asset. The asset that you were for critical thinking, evidence, statistics, what else?

Jeff Miller: Doing any type of analysis, deep dive into data, substantiating the “why’s” for something, whether it’s a process or a product that I was representing. Anything that required information to be gathered, collected, sorted, distilled, quantified and then explained to justify an action or whatever. I was great at all that stuff and I am great at all that stuff. There’s an “and” or a “but” there as well, which I’m sure we’ll get into here.

John Patterson: Yeah, well let’s stay on the asset side of things for just a second then we’ll go to the liability side of things. On the asset side of things when I’m leading a training and I’m having to explain to a group of people very, very quickly the judges value in a transaction I might say, “They’re the ones that say, ‘hey watch out there’s a pothole,'” you know? “Well we tried that before it didn’t work” and all of those kinds of things. As we teach it the inventor’s looking towards the future, the performer is kind of here in the moment checking on the mood, the producer is making sure that we’ve all packed our lunch and the judge wants to make sure that we don’t get lost along the way.

There’s extreme value in that and it matters that we have people that are watching out for us but when I’m brainstorming or I’m trying to invent something, when I’m trying to create something new, when we’re not in the midst of attempting to do some accurate thinking, we’re just speculating, we’re just simply speculating, then of course it’ll be a liability for some people in the transaction, right? I’m interested for you in the experience of hitting the wall for yourself. What was that about? Were you just trapped up in your own standards? Did you feel like you were kind of always caught in a double bind between, “I need to do this” and “I need to do that” and “I can’t do both”? Tell me a little bit about all that.

Jeff Miller: Sure. There were multiple factors, I think, that led up to me hitting that, well it was a figurative but also a literal wall. My standards for the entirety of my life have been so high and it’s probably not a surprise that I think most judges have some degree of perfectionism as part of their wiring. That’s really hard to break away from. I’m happy to report that something we talk about in the study is completion to a level that’s good enough or it will do and when I initially heard that distinction I was like, “Well good enough is not good enough because it has to be perfect or as darn close to perfect as we can get it. Why would we do anything if it weren’t to do something to that level and degree of being perfect?”

One of the other things, so there was that perfectionism component to my way of being and seeing the world. There was also as judges, I think, our security is one of our dominant needs, right? It’s that sense of being secure. For me, given my background and my upbringing and the ecologies that I associated with and the conversations that I was in, I never had a sense that enough was enough. I grew up and I was just in this conversation of scarcity and for me that was, the direct correlate to that, to security, was money. I’ve always been ambitious throughout my 52 year journey. You know, I think I started my first little side business in fifth or sixth grade and did a bunch of things through high school but always with the aim of earning money and saving money.

Yet another distinction that we’re taught in Influence Ecology and through the Fundamentals of Transaction and through all the work is the importance of thinking accurately. Thinking accurately allows us to be grounded in anything and everything that we do. John, I had zero accurate thinking about my security. What I mean by that is we’ll just use money because for me, money was security. I knew that I needed a lot of that but I didn’t know what “a lot” meant and I never took the time even to step back and either do that thinking on my own or request help of others, talk to somebody, talk to an expert resource.

Oh, just for example the folks as Sound Financial because there’s another layer to all of this and that is I didn’t trust people with highly consequential transactions as they related to me and my family. I didn’t want to pay for them because I thought I could figure it out on my own and as a judge, I don’t know if all judges are like this but I suspect we’re similarly wired, I’m willing to go very deep and learn about something new. Whether or not that information will really serve me ongoing-ly or if that’s more of an event type of a exercise. All those things were not working. They were working in some ways, I had plenty of measures of success-

John Patterson: You just didn’t know whether or not they would satisfy your ultimate aims for money.

Jeff Miller: Or the other aims in life that are equally important as just that money component, right? I focused, I put a lot of my time and energy and worry and stress around that one condition of life that we call money.

John Patterson: Without that accurate thinking around money and since you’re bringing that one up as an example of one thing that gives you security. That accurate thinking, you were just going, going, going and you assumed that you needed a whole lot more than you probably had or how did it show up in the day to day? Were you just going, going, going, running, running, running?

Jeff Miller: Yes. On that hamster wheel just going, going, going. Stuck in also a lot of comparison traps.

John Patterson: That is such a thing for judges. We can come back to it but my gosh, that’s a thing. Comparison traps for judges are just deadly. I don’t know if you know that or not but they’re just, out of all the personalities, they just get really stuck with those.

Jeff Miller: I guess I only know how the comparison trap did a number on me and I’m sure there’s some universality, if that’s even a word, to that experience. I felt like I was not only constantly under a microscope or the microscope, but I was putting everybody else that I interacted with into my little judge machine, you know? Crank the handle out and see what my assessment is whether or not that assessment served me. Most of the times it didn’t other than it may have served to motivate me to be productive in the type of work that I was doing.

John Patterson: Is that what you point to about being naively righteous? Were you just sort of spouting out your judgements about things as if they were contributions to others or yourself and you found out they weren’t? What’d you find out?

Jeff Miller: Well I was so unaware when a lot of this was going on. It wasn’t until I started studying with Influence Ecology and being able to distinguish and even understand and recognize what might be going on there and once I was able to take a step back, step outside of myself and look at myself and how I was transacting even though I wasn’t even aware that I was transacting all the time. Right when we first learn in Fundamentals of Transaction like day one, right, statement one is “You are always transacting.” That took a little while to even wrap my head around that one.

John Patterson: Did you start to wake up to the dead bodies you left in your wake?

Jeff Miller: There were a few, yeah. There were some dead bodies that I had long since forgotten about and then also as judges we have a group of people that we’re really, really close with that know us like nobody else does and love us for the judges and the people that we are. There was a lot of unintended wake, I think, that I left behind in relationships that I wasn’t even aware of.

John Patterson: You started to see that impact and did you start to see that there were other ways to transact? How did that start to alter?

Jeff Miller: It did. I started to see that Jeff’s way wasn’t the only way and wasn’t necessarily the right way, either.

John Patterson: What?

Jeff Miller: Yeah. Go figure, right?

John Patterson: What?

Jeff Miller: Surprise, surprise. It’s a wonder I got this far.

John Patterson: Well you’re describing beautifully, by the way, what it’s like for a judge but you’re also describing what it’s like for all of us. We all have a similar kind of thing. You suddenly find out that your way is not the right way and certainly for anybody on a journey for developing their transactional competence they come to find out that their way is not the only way, their way is not the right way. In fact, there may be somebody better for the job and somebody that you’ve completely dismissed your whole life because they didn’t see life the way you did, you know? From a judges point of view with the standards and the evidence required considering the things that a performer might say, you know, which are rather just narrative and all good moods and that. That might have been tough for you I would imagine.

Jeff Miller: Until I could distinguish the personality types and that there is also a transactional cycle that needs to be completed for anything to be considered a successful transaction and that the personality types play different roles throughout that cycle and each is invaluable. That’s what really disrupted and caused me to examine my, I’m going to call it my old way of being and doing and transacting, which was on my own completely because I’m probably the best person to do everything, John, because I’ve got these high standards and I’m a perfectionist so probably best if, yeah, if I just carry the ball down the field the entire way by myself.

John Patterson: All right so then at some point you said that you hit the wall and you’ve now left, it sounds like you know, you’ve left the job, you’ve kind of turned a big corner. You’re in a new position, you understand how to relate to personalities different than your own. It sounds like somewhere in the accurate thinking that you guys did with Influence Ecology and with Sound Financial Group you come to the realization that you guys are pretty good financially. Things are good. Is that right? Am I correct?

Jeff Miller: Yes. If I can tell a little bit of the story as it relates to that, the lack of expert help, the DIY mentality that I had and I still have in certain things but boy, I am so much more open to contracting for the right type of help at the right time and all of that. Yeah, turn back the clock a couple years ago my wife and I were introduced to Paul, the founder and CEO of Sound Financial Group. We went through the same type of process that we continue to take clients through to this day but again, as clients. It’s a 12 month initial engagement. The roll up the sleeves education and learning component of that process takes a couple months. The biggest thing that came out of that, John, was full transparency around our financial situation because we finally had this aggregate look at everything that we had had and squirreled away and hid under mattress cushions and buried in the ice next to the dead seals, you know and all that, and the nuts that we had storied in the rainy day fund and got all that together and went through, again, a process. A very grounded set of exercises that enabled us to look completely accurate at what was going on with our situation.

It became clear to me after I was given permission not only by my wife but by our financial advisor who said, “You have accumulated enough on your balance sheet that you don’t have to work for money anymore unless you choose to” and as a judge, we’re negatively oriented, right? We doubt before we accept. No means maybe and all those kind of things. It took me a while to even believe that but once I was in conversation with our advisor with my wife and we were all starting from the same place, my God, that just opened up so much for me in terms of my ability to really put my time and effort and energy into those things that were serving my aims and aims that I have with Tricia as a couple and just allow me to behave differently. I think the first phase of that was getting out of my own way and not feeling like I had to do something because of the income opportunity that it provided because during that first 25 years of my, what I’ll call career 1.0, I was well regarded. I had very good career identity, I certainly wasn’t the best transactionalist.

Yeah, I had the ability and the inclination to run through brick walls until I achieved whatever result I was looking to achieve but man, I was miserable. I really hated what I was doing and it wasn’t until I stepped away from that that it really became clear how wrong of a fit what I had been doing was for me and for my personality type. Now when you’re also told that your money measure or what you’ve managed to save and accumulate and invest had reached enough to take the pressure off, well it did exactly that.

John Patterson: Great.

Jeff Miller: Had I not going through that exercise that got me to this, again, what we call accurate thinking stage I might be still on that hamster wheel running through that brick wall bloodying my brow every day.

A huge shift that occurred for me, John, once I really had a good, grounded, accurate sense that my future security was taken care of it’s like the floodgates opened for me as it relates to art and music and creativity. I have, I think I might now be an inventor just because of the amount of things that come to me that I think about that I design or create or can build or come up with. I feel almost like it’s a free flow of creativity happening. Not 24/7 but throughout any given week I have these periods where I’m in that zone and it’s a zone of creativity that resonates with me so much that I ignored for several decades of my life. I either ignored it or maybe I didn’t even consciously ignore it, it was maybe just pushed down. I had so much other noise going on in my brain and with what I was doing that I don’t think I had that freedom to create.

How I spend some of my time in any given week, I buy art, I refurbish art pieces, I never touch the original artwork but I’ll redo frames or I’ll frame unframed art. I do some of my own artwork.

John Patterson: And music. You play instruments? You sing? Tell me about music.

Jeff Miller: I play guitar pretty well. I sing very poorly and I don’t practice. I have zero practice and habit around singing. Although I do, one of the things I took up this year as part of our ambitious aim work was making a commitment to perform at an open mic at least once a week for the entire year. Now prior to 2019 I had only performed music in front of people exactly three times in my life. One was at my wedding but it was a huge, huge thing for me to undertake. I’ve done it just about weekly. I’m in arrears, I’ve got about five or six makeups that I need to account for before the end of the year but as long as I’ve been in town every Wednesday night I hit the open mic at one of the local venues here.

John Patterson: That’s great. Were you in the past, because it’s often that a judge will acquiesce leadership. They certainly can give advice, opinions, evidence, judgements and all this stuff but they’ll sometimes acquiesce leadership to other people and prefer to take up their role of simply telling the leader how poorly they’re doing. Did you find yourself stepping into leadership roles or stepping into the drivers seat in some ways and if so can you tell us about that?

Jeff Miller: I was in several leadership roles prior to studying with Influence Ecology and in hindsight while I’m sure I was a great guy, you know, delivered on everything and more that the companies that I worked for wanted me to deliver on, I’m not sure that I was a great leader. I think I was probably pretty poor at it because I was just so narrowly focused, again, and unaware of different transactional personalities and even just different personalities. I’m not naturally a gregarious people person but I really love people if that makes sense?

John Patterson: Yeah, it does. Well I was going to ask you about that because I wanted to know a little bit, if you would, tell us what you love about advising people about their finances and their financial freedom.

Jeff Miller: For me, security was the biggest thing for me, right? My primary mission is to ensure my security and I love with my current offer that I’m doing work that I’ve been doing all of my life and I’ve had conversations with Paul and Cory and when we were initially talking about how we might work together and what type of help I could provide their organization and how everything would work I said, “Well guys, I don’t have the 20+ years of experience that each of you do.” Then as we’re talking through it, it was like, “Oh, I actually have more. I have been embodying a lot of the habits and practices that we teach our clients about my entire life but here’s the thing, because I wasn’t accurately thinking along the way like, some of my behaviors and habits and practices were so rigid that it pushed me down and it limited my ability to enjoy and experience and live life on an every day like, live life in the moment.

Jeff Miller: For me it was because it was never enough I was just always worried about getting more, getting more, let me make sure that, again, my comfort and security is protected. I want to help people do the same thing that I went through to think accurately about their situation and what it’s going to take for them to reach their own specific and individual aims and goals around their conditions of life and how they want life to look so that we can together think accurately and then they can be freed up to enjoy and experience life. I’m now doing something that’s so meaningful to me that I know I’m expert in between myself and the other resources that we have within our organization. When I meet with clients I know that I am delivering benefit to them, providing some type of value in every interaction that we have and I never got that sense of satisfaction in my career 1.0.

John Patterson: Well welcome to life 2.0.

Jeff Miller: Yes. It’s very good to be here.

John Patterson: Jeff Miller, thank you so much for being a guest on the Influence Ecology Podcast.

Jeff Miller: John, thank you so much for inviting me. It has been a pleasure.

In today’s talk we’ll listen in on a webinar where co-founder Kirkland Tibbels and I discuss the condition of life, career and how our identity is not what we say it is but it’s what other people say it is. Here’s the talk.

John Patterson: While the topic of tonight is being well known we’re going to focus on career because one of the ways that you might think about career, especially if you’re new to Influence Ecology is just simply think identity. We might use those two words interchangeably. Work is the doing of your life, money is simply the financial re-numeration for the work or your identity and your identity is simply said the, I think this is a real good way to say it, your identity is not what you say it is, you know? A lot of us are at work and making sure that other people know the identity that we want them to think. “I want you to think this,” “I want you to think that,” “I want you to relate to my product, my goods, my services, my person in a particular way.”

We’d like for you to consider the possibility that identity is not what you say it is but rather your identity is what other people say it is. It’s what other people claim about you, say about you, the way that you’ve built not only what you’re known for … Tiger Woods is known for hitting golf balls. Known for hitting golf balls, but he began to be known for some other things after the scandal of 2009. He was paid for endorsements because he was known for something. He was known for lots of things and at that time he was known for integrity and mastery and discipline and the kind of accomplishment that was uncommon and many people wanted to cuddle up to that identity. They wanted to nuzzle up against that identity because that’s a great identity to be related to.

Then he may not have, and I certainly am not in the head of Tiger Woods and I can’t say but he may not have been thinking about the impact to his identity when he took the actions outside of his work. I mean, the scandal didn’t have anything to do with hitting golf balls.

Kirkland Tibbels: Well yeah and it all counts in Influence Ecology from the very first program we teach. We begin this mantra that you’re always transacting. That you’re always, your identity is always in play, your character is always in play in the ecologies or the marketplace or the industry or the companies or the organizations, the charities, your congregations. There is something at play and we invite people simply to take a look at what that narrative might be. We’ve seen it. I have transactions in the entertainment industry and I got off the phone last week with a friend of mine who called me in a panic to see if there was something that I knew to do to help stem the negativity that was coming to this individual as a result of a post on Facebook.

You know, unfortunately it’s too late. The damage has been done and a studio executive is very upset and there is a good chance that this individual is going to lose a mid-six figure contract as a result. In the moment of that biological reaction to responding to someone on a Facebook page that produces a particular kind of identity that others with whom we engage on a regular basis may no longer want to associate. It matters is what we’re saying here. There is some attention that needs to be paid to this domain, this area, this condition of life called career and you cannot avoid, if you’re up to producing any kind of satisfactory gain in any area of your life you will not be able to avoid this condition. It is an inescapable condition of life. You will be confronted by the identity you produce. We at Influence Ecology say you ought to pay attention to it and remember that your identity is what others say it is.

That is what it is in terms of a transactional approach.

John Patterson: I’m imagining the person who might be on and says to themselves, “Well wait a second, Kirkland. There’s my private life and my professional life. I have the right to do whatever I’d like in my personal life. That’s my private business.” What would you say to that?

Kirkland Tibbels: Well I would say, “Good luck in this digital age.” I do know people that successfully compartmentalize their activities and my hats off to them. It’s a tremendous amount of work. It’s a form of work that we talk about called labor. There’s a tremendous amount of maintenance and activity and energy that goes into that but at the end of the day there is a concern or a condition that we invite you to consider and that is this thing called career. In this digital, dynamic, fast paced world in which we attempt to engage it’s costly not to pay attention. Every transaction is costly. Every transaction has a cost associated with it. It also has a value associated with it and if you’re not paying attention, it may simply be because your naïve. You just may not understand the condition of life career as it ought to be understood transactionally. Maybe it’s that you are simply immune to the judgements of others until it becomes so costly that it gets your attention which is what’s happening all over, especially in the discourse of business in the entertainment industry.

For a while over the last few years I’ve been keeping a tally of my, people that I know directly, acquaintances and close friends who, as a result of their social media conduct, have lost money of one kind or another. Not just in direct contracts where that has happened but in other ways unexpected. There is a condition of life called career to pay attention to. Now while you can have impact and you absolutely can make certain in very specific, powerful moves to engage the marketplace there is also an aspect that is out of your control and it’s important to recognize where those things are. Some companies, some people, the people that you saw are just the current smattering of folks who are public doesn’t include five other people that have hit in the last 60 days that have been in the news and continue to make news in terms of producing an identity and how that identity, you could say their career, translates into the satisfaction of other conditions of life.

John Patterson: Career is simply the condition of your identity of help or value in specific ecologies. Again, the condition of your identity. The state of your identity. The condition of your identity of help or value, you’re known for something. Well, there’s the help or value or the harm or cost. Pick one. The identity of help or value or the identity of harm or cost you are to specific ecologies. There is the condition of your identity in your work environment, in your congregation. There’s the condition of your identity in your neighborhood. There’s the condition of your identity in your family. There’s the condition of your identity in the industry in which you’re a part. There is a condition of your identity of help or value in specific ecologies.

My special thanks to our guest, Jeff Miller. In our show notes you’ll find links to connect with him and all the links to websites, books or downloads mentioned in this podcast.

The Influence Ecology Podcast is produced by Influence Ecology, LLC in Ventura, California. This episode was recorded November 20th, 2019 and was produced by Tyson Crandall and John Patterson. You can find a transcript for this and other episodes at InfluenceEcology.com. This episode is made possible through the assistance of the Influence Ecology faculty, staff, mentors, and students around the world. Co-founder Kirkland Tibbels and our colleagues comprise an international collective of professionals who are active in the development of the philosophy of Transactionalism and the discipline of Transactional Competence™. Kirkland is considered a leading philosopher and authority in the field and he has authored more than 500 papers on the subject, study, and discipline.

This episode includes contributions by Karal Gregory. The podcast theme is by Chris Standring and titled “Fast Train to Everywhere.” You can subscribe to the Influence Ecology Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts. You can also find us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn or via email at podcast@influenceecology.com.

If you haven’t yet offered a rating or review, I ask that you take a moment to go to iTunes or your podcast app and let us know what you think. This helps us more than you know.

Influence Ecology is the leading business education specializing in Transactional Competence, having published and contributed to the only comprehensive text on the subject, Transactionalism: An Historical and Interpretive Study by Trevor J. Phillips. Co-Founder Kirkland Tibbels has authored more than 500 papers on the subject, study, and discipline of transactional competence and is a sought-after lecturer at universities, major corporations, and civic organizations around the world. 

Influence Ecology’s curriculum includes conferences, webinars, online tools, podcasts, and mentorship utilized by men and women in over seventy countries around the world. Our membership includes an international assembly of accomplished professionals, faculty, and peers from a variety of countries, industries, and cultures.