Margaret Heffernan: Why it's time to forget the pecking order at work

Organizations are often run according to “the superchicken model,” where the value is placed on star employees who outperform others. And yet, this isn’t what drives the most high-achieving teams. Business leader Margaret Heffernan observes that it is social cohesion - built every coffee break, every time one team member asks another for help - that leads over time to great results. It's a radical rethink of what drives us to do our best work, and what it means to be a leader. Because as Heffernan points out: “Companies don’t have ideas. Only people do.”
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/talks/margaret_hef...
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector

[@niory]

If only more people knew how important it is what this woman is trying to explain ! life will be a better place for all of us !

[@TheAlphadog102]

sara meachel Life would be an average place. People who lack competitive drive will win over naturally more competitive people due to societal pressure. This is how the west will fall. Driven by lazy people.

[@jimdandytheboss]

sara meachel That is the worst of Utopian thinking.

[@theravenousrabbit3671]

sara meachel No, she's comparing chickens to humans. She's mistaking co-operation with "sensitivity" and "emotion", she's mistaking social bonding and learning other people's thought patterns to "empathy". She's interjecting her own subjective terms to come to the conclusion that women are more important in the work place than men, which is just misandry. There's a reason why 95% of all high achieving companies and industries are male dominated. It's because men do not care about emotion and sensitivity. If you drive a company based on empathy you'll go to the ground, if you design a system that is made to earn as much money as possible and ignore emotion, you'll have success. Why do you think so many global industries abuse humans for benefit? It's co-operation and group bonding that achieves higher production, not sensitivity nor emotion. She mentions one thing and that is trust and that is one of the things that I'd have to agree with. However being sensitive of someone's emotion isn't really cohesive to production. You're silencing one by making one censor themselves, so that someone else can speak up. Instead make the timid and shy person speak up. It's not my responsibility to give time to someone, it's their responsibility to take time. I'm not their father.

[@nachoijp]

TheAlphadog no study even remotely suggests that. On the contrary, most suggest that people become more productive and motivated when they work in functional groups than when they're forced to compete.

[@jimdandytheboss]

nachoijp Which is precisely why most scientific breakthroughs come from defense spending right? And have throughout recorded history?

[@laledavidson5248]

Love the point that helpfulness and social is more important to success than intelligence in group work, and that getting to know each other is essential to creating helpfulness. Community is so important.

[@TrustyJustin]

I've had the tremendous fortune to work with companies that have very strong social cohesion, and whenever I find myself in a super-chicken situation, I always find it amazing that people are still going with that model. Often it seems like people are so ego involved that their own role in a process is more important to them than any actual results.

[@patriciatoledo7900]

I come back to this TED Talk time and time again. It’s always inspiring and edifying.

[@tamekacooke9559]

One of my favorites...she nailed it!!

[@explorerendeavour3009]

Social cohesion also give staff a sense of belonging and safety. Great video.

[@helloitsmeagain4272]

This talk really spoke to me because when I’m put into group projects, I sigh at having to work with other people who I (I will admit it) think are not as competent in performing the task at hand as I am. Though I still try to take initiative as a “powerful leader” which just intimidates them further (I’m known as that kid who’s the smartest, best grades, etc), which decreased productivity. My thinking of them as incompetent (and trap eating them so) just embeds that idea into their own minds, and I essentially poison my group towards failure. No wonder all my group projects end up mediocre. Because I fail to value each individual’s true talents and potential. I mean, when I have to do a group presentation I have them present in front of me and I criticize them as if I’m a professional speaking coach or something. Though in reality I’m a self-absorbed kid who needs to understand the importance of social capital.

[@DzinkyDzink]

You have to understand that sometimes groups may actually fall into serious disrepair if an obvious leader with high standards is present. The bigger the group the more prevailent this becomes as people splinter in smaller sub-groups(3-5 individuals).

[@maytediaz5245]

I admire your candor. Good news is that you're fully aware of the issue and now can work a plan to overcome the problem. Be thankful you're not in denial, and that makes for a great start and is the base of a great leader. Most leaders can't improve as they don't have any self-awareness and no one dares telling them. Kudos to you!

[@MarkusKnapp]

Three key principles in a team: 1. "[There are] No Stars in this Team. We need everybody. Everybody has a valid perspective." 2. "We work to one standard only: The best imaginable." 3. (The Head of was not part of the team. He listened to ensure they follow their principles.)

[@nancybroadcast]

I totally agree with her, fantastic talk, thank you Margaret Heffernan, you are awesome!

[@mngtvid]

Awesome!!! Ms Margaret.

[@Omomommm88m]

love this. In Filipino the traits that contribute to collective success could be "pakikipagkapwa" and "pakikisama."

[@soneroztaskin]

Ceviri için emeği geçenlere teşekkür ediyorum. Uygulamaya hemen çevremizden başlıyoruz

[@luciledominczak7257]

Thank you for this talk !

[@MB-Brooklyn]

Wonderful! Very hopeful.

[@NeiroAtOpelCC]

I work in IT for a company that serves a bunch of colleges and other educational institutions with IT related things. When we were formed, our boss insisted that we all share the same office space, and that every friday nobody is out of the office unless absolutely nessecary. Once a year he takes out a complete day and takes us all to some place to get a bit of discussion and stuff going - technical stuff is banned - and we're staying there all day. After dinner we can opt to go home or stay for the night (and likely get drunk). This means, that we're better at working together than the average IT department. We all know eachother rather well. In fact the next two garden parties have already been planned :)

[@Bass.Player]

Super insight, nice job Margaret!

[@tomas1944]

Wish I had found tis 8 years ago! But what a pleasure to listen to now.

[@midlifemx]

I love this!! It reminds me of something that I have often said about the nursery school game of musical chairs. Musical chairs shouldn’t be 6 scrambling for 5 chairs, it should be 6 building a new chair!

[@kd1s]

Great speech and I ordered the book. Should be an interesting read.

[@starwarsgirl18]

just brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the only way to change the world is if we start changing the way we do things and the way we think

[@khalidsafir]

Thanks, that was somehow refreshing. There is too much of a focus in industrialised cultures of competition over cooperation. But in reality, this talk was just about people being nice to each other because we know we need to cooperate and the genii might know some stuff but they dont know it all.

[@20twelvevolution]

Finally a great TED talk again

[@ackackbackack]

Helpfulness comes from people wanting to be helpful, not from getting to know people. I help people I've never met or seen every single day.

[@kdmoonchild]

Well i believe in what she says. I have worked in organizations that have failed all because of the lack of team work. I resonate with what she is saying, Its how i would want to run my organization.

[@phillipneal7425]

incredible talk, thank you!

[@Katleenfarine]

1 - high degree of social sentivity to each other (empathy) 2 - equal time to each other 3 - more women

[@paulyb6458]

2 out of 3 ain't bad....

[@ab43134]

Thank God she got 3/3 😊

[@paulyb6458]

@@ab43134 so you’re another one of those women who’d vote for a female president regardless of talent or capability or policy? Because that’s exactly what you’re saying when you agree to “more” of anything as a blanket statement without caveats. Sounds like misandry to me.

[@ab43134]

@@paulyb6458 says the person making blanket statements lol

[@paulyb6458]

@@ab43134 ok, snowflake. Triggered much? Or you another “activist” seeking validation for “feels”?

[@florenlebaron4346]

I love this.

[@mhtinla]

It is mathematically proven that, in Optimization Theory, maximizing the output of each individual components doesn't always lead to the maximization of output of the system they make up. For example, in a metropolitan area, if every driver on the freeway tries to go home as fast as possible (ignoring red lights, using shortcuts, etc.), the result is often a paralyzed freeway system; nobody gets to go home quick.

[@mhtinla]

mhtinla Having said that, the theory doesn't apply to all systems. As I watch the NBA finals, I am sure a group of average players from YMCA will have no chance of beating any team of super chicken from the competitive NBA.

[@nachoijp]

mhtinla usually small groups tend to favour competitive or exceptional individuals, in bigger systems everything is averaged out, so synchronization and synergy overcomes individual talent. With bigger and more complex systems in most areas of human life it's only natural that we start to realize what this woman said. We live with systems designed for the early XX century, when cities barely reached a few millions, now the the biggest and brightest idea of an individual can barely lighten up a town.

[@mhtinla]

nachoijp China has the largest population in the world with a value system that emphasizes collectivism over individualism... Maybe we should keep an eye on them.

[@SangoProductions213]

mhtinla Well...it's government does...I can't really speak for the people who live in little notches in the wall of a giant, overly polluted apartment building though. I, however, can very easily say that the school (when it's not promoting propaganda), is very much a "Get the highest damned grade in the class by any means necessary" rather than "Work together, and be friends" type of environment.

[@ControlsGuyMike]

unless the NBA players all killed each other....NBA players through their careers would have a track record of working as a team...i.e. Jordan, not good enough....Jordan+Pippin+Rodman+etc...beyond good...

[@Jero8198]

Goosebumps

[@blancajimenez6928]

I Love It!

[@kabita2301]

For anyone wondering, the study by the MIT is this one: Engel, D., Woolley, A. W., Jing, L. X., Chabris, C. F., & Malone, T. W. (2014). Reading the mind in the eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face. PloS one, 9(12), e115212. It took me a fair amount of time to find it, so I'm just saving others the time :) it does more or less say what she presented.

[@carlosmendes7]

It did save me a lot of time, thank you so much! I was looking at the comments just in hope someone had done me this favor hahah

[@nickjoeb]

This women gets it.

[@nickjoeb]

What do you mean?

[@nickjoeb]

lol got ya

[@keltar2007]

nickjoeb Yup. She does.

[@aaronjohnmaughan]

As a variation on the topic, I introduce ants and bees as an example to study. What they can create and achieve is astounding, and key to that success is the way in which they cooperate.

[@girishsolanki7703]

this is so true

[@LD-wf2yt]

Would "the hierarchy" be the root cause of our ongoing self-inflicted harm. Please notice the pattern: hierarchy, revolution/restaffing, bigger hierarchy, revolution/restaffing, even bigger hierarchy etc. The curse of competence has caused the West to experience "too much cynicism, too much despair, too much loneliness." Someone said: "If you want to destroy a country, poison their stories." This talk and many other talks/books/quotes give us the proof that the world is full of smart people, the past was full of smart people, too. "The superchicken model" blinds us to that basic truth. The opportunity for growth is the secret sauce that gives true meaning to our lives. IOW, social capital, social cohesion, social innovators, social entrepreneurs, collective intelligence, wisdom of crowds etc.

[@sheebaalex3185]

Wonderful

[@rozniyusof2859]

Susan Cain wrote about introverted leadership styles. Introvert leaders listen more and act more like coordinators and are more beneficial in groups whose members are more proactive.

[@jonathanbellows113]

I watch this about every month to keep on target.

[@did4h2k]

mrs. margaret heffernan, you sound like i boss i'd gladly work for... btw, left my super flock today ;)

[@joaocarreira2276]

Can't agree more with her talk. She's tottaly right. Greed, competition, individulism and everyone for themselves got us here. But how can de keep growing and evolving as a just and balanced society without these radical ideais?

[@lararawf6100]

God bless you

[@alexyoung6418]

How did the chickens understand that the experimenter wanted them to produce eggs? Chickens don't naturally have any concept of KPI and they certainly don't know how to associate the number of eggs to rewards. I'm sure there's explanation in the paper addressing the design of the experiment, but it sounds like a missing piece from this talk. A very outstanding one though, just that it got me curious for more.

[@thaizalima404]

I had the same thought, but I have to watch until the end because a company coach asked us to do so😢

[@henkvanderwath4405]

Amen!

[@WHEYJordan]

I agree

[@Massivecarcrash]

And then vica versa. There's been several group projects where I have had to sacrifice my efforts in order to carry some lazy bums to the finish line in order to even pass the damn thing, since after all it's a group effort, but the quality of the finished product is severly diminished because "everyone has to be involved in it". And I know the product could have been better if only the few good ones in the group where left to do it together.

[@lohphat]

Massivecarcrash Agreed. The modern notion of “everyone gets a trophy” is dragging down progress. It’s the death of expertise in the cause of “inclusion”. No. Experience and talent have value. The lowest common denominator doesn’t get to lead.

[@phylissibalile2279]

The going will always get tough, people need social support. Companies don't have ideas, people do

[@wardmailliard6989]

Brilliantly spoken

[@mikeshumaker2511]

So, does this social empathy only grow from socializing at the workplace where your actions are under the scrutiny of HR or can /should employees be encouraged to socialize outside of work. Do you have any citations for the "studies" you refer too?

[@Clickmaster5k]

Wasnt there a TED talk a few weeks ago saying how most most COEs and other super successful people are psychopaths or sociopaths? How are those people getting ahead of all these groups of people that care about each other then?

[@naidantu8653]

do you still remember the title of the talk?

[@sondashaull7158]

I saw that too. Not sure where, but you'll run across it pretty fast in talks about narcissistic traits.

[@MrPopo-bs2qs]

It goes: You The dirt The worms inside of the dirt Popo's stool Kami And Popo Any questions?

[@zanin34122]

Lord Popo which level I am Am I in Kami level?

[@stephenquinn7931]

@@zanin34122 Do you want to be slapped off the lookout?

[@captainkangaroo5518]

Oh thank god, I was hoping to see this

[@BryanHilbertTree]

Brilliant.

[@kenichishibata8717]

20% of people does 80% of work. Social work is all about distribution of knowledge of the 20% to the 80%. Superchickens are leaders of men. Which means there shouldn't be superstars but rather there should be no stars. And the superchicken makes every one better. Truth is in any given group of people there is a bell curve of competence.

[@interceptordave]

How will organisations build social connectedness when teams must be socially distant as a result of COVID-19? How can I gather my people around a coffee machine when they are all working from home?

[@jeff6413]

I like her points, but as an introvert, I find forced socialization to be terrifying.

[@Godplayzdice]

Fight your fears and your abnormal condition will go away.

[@Isabella-nn4it]

No that's social anxiety, not introversion. I am an introvert, but I like talking to people until I get exhausted. You can still achieve this, but you shouldn't attempt to overwhelm yourself either.

[@jeff6413]

@@Isabella-nn4it It's not necessarily social anxiety, it's me not wanting to be forced to do something I don't want to do. Two separate things. If I voluntarily socialize, it doesn't induce anxiety

[@nikkiatkins33]

I'm also an introvert. Here is a fun solution for you... all you have to do in social settings is get to know the person more and that's it.

[@pkvasjha]

The way you have put this point through is the way to go :) . Thanks for socialising.

[@riquelmeone]

About the women in the successful groups, I'd like to understand her statement. "The successful groups had more women in them" compared to men or compared to the non-succesful groups? She could be more precise here and make the point more interesting.

[@justgivemethetruth]

Brilliant. Now, how do you get those super-peckers at the top to give up their power ... doesn't seem like it will happen.

[@ChipSpencer123]

This is to me the way to go at work. I believe General Stanley McChrystal and Nilofer Merchant are also sharing ideas along these lines. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints works in councils to serve its members. Great stuff.

[@sirisaksirisak6981]

Leader is not good at work but great at human.

[@azucarmorena5000]

are you kidding me? come to my office and tell them to forget.

[@HigherPlanes]

azucarmorena5000 I know right. Trilfling bitches at my office would laugh at this.

[@azucarmorena5000]

HigherPlanes for real!!! LOL

[@HigherPlanes]

***** Dentist office- ground zero for trifling personality type

[@pseudonym4893]

What does this mean for people with social deficits, like those on the autism spectrum, or those with high social anxiety or schizoid personality disorder? If every workplace becomes a social workplace, will there be room for such people in the future? Will accommodations be made for them? Or will they be left out in the cold?

[@Elochai1847]

Pseudo Nym Think of it this way. They will have more opportunities to overcome these challenges. Their coworkers in turn will be presented with more opportunities to better understand their challenges. This would help to alleviate their problems because there would be more people who understand them and talk to them in a manner that is more respectable to their situation. In the end they will move closer to moving passed those troubles they have, and those around them will be able to better deal with them. If it is so bad that they just can't handle social interaction, they more than likely wouldn't be there in the first place.

[@pseudonym4893]

Elochai1847 I'm not optimistic to be honest. More and more employers are looking for candidates with strong (not just adequate) social skills even for positions which don't require them. I think for the most part it will be a good thing (for the reasons stated in this video, among others) but certain populations will become further and further marginalized.

[@this_username_is_taken7004]

I say that some of those type of people will still be able to work in these places, but they'll struggle more. As for those that can't fit into those type of uber-socialised workplaces, we could very well see a rise in these people seeking self-employment and starting up their own practice considering that very few (if any) wish to hire them. And ironically, this could result in more socially-deficient people getting hired should these self-employed people hire more employees, because these employers may be more partial than a neurotypical employer towards neurodivergent people.

[@tranwc]

❤️👍🏽

[@dannymc1905]

Watch at 1.5X speed lol way better

[@codyt.346]

'Tell me more about the chickens!' Referencing "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"

[@danc1476]

as a recovering super chicken I'd like to admit this lady is my hero

[@claubertosousa749]

Lindo vídeo! Com excessão do exemplo dos CFC's! Que já sabemos ser uma grande enganação! Os CFC's não destrói a camada de ozônio! O seu substituto garantiu a empresa somente no Brasil um aumento nós ganhos de 2 Bilhões para 31 bilhões! Mas, o contexto da apresentação foi interessante e concordo com a mesma!

[@yuriygraf9516]

супер!

[@sharonkelly5534]

Time to forget the pecking order in life!

[@4141ca]

Awesome :)

[@adambeller]

It seems like the vast majority of people no longer understand the distinction between competition and violence. Competition is not the enemy of production, it's the driver behind it. Both the average chickens and the aggressive chickens were competing for grain. It's just that the aggressive chickens resorted to violence. Violence causes destruction, which is the opposite of production. Those on the economic left, such as socialists, often use examples like this to vilify the competitive nature of capitalism, but it is not a fair analogy. You see, violence is not an accepted part of capitalistic competition. Only governments are socially "allowed" to use violence and as in all cases the destructive force of government violence impedes natural production. A truly free market would maximize production without the use of violence.

[@astrozombie5357]

What is her degree?

[@leightonjulye]

Beyond Measure: The Big Impact of Small Changes (TED Books) Hardcover - May 5, 20 by Margaret Heffernan

[@OnlyKnowsGod]

despite being british. i think she needs to plead to the uk companys as ut seems there not listening. ive worked here for 20 years and every company and every job its all run on a heirarchey even the goverment and the educational structures down to the individyal regions are run on this pecking order. good luck changing her own country..

[@vaibhavgupta20]

I thought ted didn't sell products?

[@hallyemontgomery967]

The US government needs to watch this video

[@HussainFahmy]

Social Wealth

[@theravenousrabbit3671]

Comparing chickens to humans is a VERY bad argument.

[@xpubi1122]

She is using it as an illustration, along with the many other illustrations and examples that are applicable in real work places. Her argument is pretty good.

[@jimzheng4912]

louie wallenberg I think you're conflating the explanatory power of metaphors and analogies to the "actual" scientific literature. Explaining things in terms of cute and adorable chickens is more vivid than using simply humans, it's also more funny. The things she's talking about have been discussed at length by people like Daniel Goleman (I recommend _Social Intelligence_ and _Emotional Intelligence_)

[@theravenousrabbit3671]

***** No... But doing a study on chickens... DOES NOT FUCKING TRANSLATE OVER TO FUCKING HUMAN BEINGS. If it was chimpanzees then she'd have more of an argument but chickens are on a completely different branch of evolution.

[@jimzheng4912]

louie wallenberg I see your concern. Chickens aren't as related to humans as, say, apes. However, they *ARE* related, and hence correlations can be made, however statistical in nature. But, again, I think we're missing the point by *WHY* she used the chicken example: It was used to explain an idea in the most appealing and memorable way possible. She could of used studies on apes or directly with humans, but it's not memorable to the degree to which chickens can entice our imaginations

[@theravenousrabbit3671]

Jim Zheng She didn't mention any other study. She simply drew a parallel that doesn't exist. It's a completely pointless argument. "Well humans and fish are related, therefore...!" - Humans and chickens are so far separated on the evolutionary tree that drawing parallels are simply just silly.

[@lem00na]

from chicken to humans - how this relates for example to Roman empire which was probably most efficient and successful human organization in the whole human history?

[@pariray__and__pihuray8612]

Viel how is these

[@mazengsa]

@TED, she said, Arab, not Arub! Don't be ignorant..

[@MrWebster]

Dunno. It seems to be more fun to work at companies with social capital. But that in no way ensures success. One of thee most successful high tech companies has been Intel. But they have a very brutal internal evaluation system that literally pits workers against each other as they rate and rank people. Money not important? Ask any executive who has bonuses with the wazoo if money is not important.

[@WyldOrbit]

Are they gonna ban her from ted talks as well for speaking against the oligarchy?

[@daviddettrick3127]

In the English speaking world our key societal role models are USA -obsessed with the individual rights prevailing over societies, and the U.K. -trapped within a inter generational cultural of hierarchy and elites based on privilege. It's gonna be tough to turn those two societies around.

[@Ross-2077]

What I really want to know and unfortunately the speaker supplied no answers. Why did the chicken cross the road?

[@Godplayzdice]

Because there was a road. No road, no crossing.

[@abouttime837]

I thought it was bad when she said "occasionally women" in 3:06 but then I realised how much men are chozen over women in America for being the 'best' or 'brightest' and how she might be saying that "occasionally" women are chosen not because they're worse but because of bias. idk tho

[@Loathomar]

Amer Turkistani That would depend on how you define 'best' or 'brightest'. In America's education system, women are clearly the 'best' or 'brightest'. Higher GPA, lower drop out rate, higher college rates and so on. But you look at CEO's and it's almost all men, but are these men chosen over women cause they are men or are the chosen from the group that has shown they are willing to do what it takes, which in American corporations does mean working very long hard hours. I don't mean working a hard 40 to 45 hours a week. It is more like 60 or 70 hours per week, the male to female ratio of jobs like this is 5 to 1, which is much closer to the ratio of executive officer level employees. Ei, it is not the America is choosing men over women, but that system and working required to be chosen as "the 'best' or 'brightest'" is not something many women want. There is no sexist organization telling professional women they can't work 60 or 70 hours per week on a salary job, but women are choosing not to do so. Though there is a driving factor that men get from money and power women don't get. Being a rich and powerful man makes you extremely attractive to women but a rich and powerful woman does not makes you attractive to men.

[@20twelvevolution]

Amer Turkistani She was pointing out the sexism that still exists, especially in corporations where men tend to be the one's with the leadership and higher paying positions.

[@TheAlphadog102]

***** Men in higher paying jobs and higher up the corporate ladder does not equal sexism. It's sexist to even suggest that. Like these men didn't work hard to get whee they are, just they have a penis therefore promotion.

[@Loathomar]

TheAlphadog Mostly men get the job because men are work what are some times call the "extreme jobs" where 60 hours is the standard. Of these jobs there is a 5 to 1 male to female ratio and people working like this is not generally restricted. They are salary jobs, so overtime is not in the equation. I have never work someplace where women who are salary are told not to long hard hours for no direct extra pay. The idea of a boss telling anyone to work less hours for free is generally unheard of no matter the gender.

[@abouttime837]

***** ya that's what i meant by my realization. they don't get selected not because theyre not good but because of sexist bias. my wording must've been all over the place from all the comments thinking im saying something else

[@mutambajane5298]

Thanks dear mumy ibeg you help me to see asponsor for helping me my journey I see it is too long

[@SangoProductions213]

After 10 videos in a row (only counting those that featured women), that featured nothing but feminists, I just stopped watching any female videos from this channel, because they obviously didn't respect any women, who weren't professional victims, enough to give them the spotlight - painting women as only petty beings who choose not to better themselves for the sake of being able to make money spreading hate. I come in expecting the worst...and it's actually reasonable. In fact, she's not actually pushing a feminist agenda at all, and the only pro-female thing she said was "women performed better in this test" (plus, a bit of "why females performed better" but she then states it's not proven), but that's backed up by evidence as an actual facts (if we are to assume the study she quoted, but we were not given, is correct). [Well, she did mention "occasionally" women getting chosen. But she didn't go so far as to say "they are being oppressed because I am lazy." And it is true that it is occasional for anyone to get chosen for promotions. So, I see this as an improvement over the last female videos I watched on this channel.]

[@johnappleseed6210]

ALRIGHT MAGGOTS LISTEN UP! Popo's about to teach you the pecking order!

[@DeezNutz-xi3vh]

John Appleseed it goes you

[@sanstheskeleton8104]

the worms inside the dirt

[@sanstheskeleton8104]

Kami

[@shadowmencer]

Ms Heffernan, to you I say: [Citation Needed]. You give an anecdotal story at the start, but then don't back up your claims with any evidence. Please back up your theory.

[@Lawofimprobability]

A common phenomenon with TED talks. I consider it edutainment with poor quality control. This video is more of a thought-provoking lecture, not a coherent argument. I think it inspires the right questions (does stack ranking inhibit the network effects of specialized knowledge?) but doesn't provide more than individual cases.

[@adrjaco]

I hate group work. There is ALWAYS slackers and sosiopaths.

[@lexiek6580]

This talk really went Hufflepuff>Gryffindor

[@Renji9031]

OK, but she forgot the most important reason why the pecking order no longer works. Kami is inside Piccolo and God is now Dende.

[@TheAnnoyingGunner]

What the heck, is there any reason why only women sit in the audience?

[@TheAnnoyingGunner]

I apprehended it, though it wasn't stated in the description. It is a shame. Such a fine talk wasted to one-sided commentatorship. At least it ended up here, for everyone to see.

[@paulswain5199]

Idealistic but I wouldn’t say this is practical advice. There was nothing in this we can actually take away and implement.

[@Paulthepsych]

Explains why our current politicians are so incompetent as they compete not collaborate.

[@Zornroeschen90]

121 super chicken watching this, pecking the dislike button

[@HorseMuse]

Zornroeschen90 🐔🐔🐔🐔baaabaaabak! You nailed it! Who are these nay sayers! I also trip on the count of thumbs up to watched by count...really, you watch this and can't give a thumbs up?? Who are these tumbless minds? This was a brilliant talk!

[@bsngrarts]

​@@HorseMuse qaa!5

[@proweiqi]

Something odd about this. It's just not... Convincing.

[@jimdandytheboss]

Holy cherry picking Batman.

[@binhvu3444]

There are men at 13:54 for those who think this talk is only to praise women and feminism and also spent their whole life to be teachers' and bosses' pet rather than make friends and collaborate with colleagues

[@bravobear1844]

Is this a 16:00 minute video just saying to work together?😂

[@astrozombie5357]

Hahahahha