Can you run a successful business if you aren’t good with numbers? Yes. There are a lot of entrepreneurs doing just that. But if you believe that you are good at running the business but bad at understanding its finances, think again. You’re probably better at numbers than you think you are.

That’s the message from Lynn Corazzi, fractional CFO, and “money tour guide” with 35 years’ experience in financial leadership, and Andy Weins, fourth-generation entrepreneur, veteran, and public speaker. They’re co-authors of the new book Stop Avoiding Your Numbers. The book helps entrepreneurs get over their own limiting belief that they’re not good at understanding numbers, so they can help their companies thrive and grow.

Too many entrepreneurs and solopreneurs, including me, will tell you that they’re good at what they do, but bad at analyzing the numbers from their own businesses. Weins says he can relate because he used to feel the same way about writing. “I no longer believe that narrative.”

“I struggled with English growing up,” he says. “I failed English four times in high school.” For a long time, he believed he was bad at writing, but eventually he managed to change that outlook. “I’ve written two books because I stopped telling myself I was bad at writing and reading, and I started figuring out what I could do to be successful. And I read, probably, more than 20 books a year because I no longer believe that narrative.”

In a the same way, he says, you can get beyond the idea that you’re bad with numbers. “When people start embracing their numbers, they realize there are some numbers they really like and appreciate,” he says. For example, they like getting places on time. And they like having money in their bank accounts. “Knowing how long it takes to get somewhere, or how much money you make, those are numbers,” he says. “You might not love math. But with the tools out there, there’s not a lot of math involved when it comes to understanding your numbers, especially your key performance indicators. It’s more the awareness people are lacking.”

That lack of awareness can make it hard to make financial decisions, Corazzi adds. “Every one of those, for a big company, gets subjected to a lot of analysis. What’s the upside, what’s the downside, what’s the expected return? But we often find smaller business owners are reacting to something without a whole lot of information. They start guessing, or delaying decisions.” “No one’s ever surprised when they run out of money.”

Avoiding those numbers means you might miss the chance to fix a problem before it’s too late. “No one’s ever surprised when they run out of money,” Corazzi says. “They can feel it. It happens gradually over time until one day it actually does happen.”

But if you are watching your numbers, you can see ahead of time when, for example, an upcoming payment that you owe could create a problem. That gives you the chance to take some steps. You can call your banker and ask to renegotiate the timing of that payment. You can work with your accounts receivable to try and bring in some needed cash. Or, you can ask a supplier for an extension on your terms. With that knowledge, Corazzi says, “You’re taking control of the situation.”

Both authors acknowledge that planning your company’s finances is more challenging in these days of economic uncertainty. For example, Weins owns a junk removal business. “I know what I normally spend each year on fuel,” he says. “Fuel has doubled in cost in the last six weeks, due to what’s going on in Iran. So I have two choices. I can either plan and adjust, or I can not plan at all, and hope. I’d rather plan and adjust.” Even with uncertainty, you’re better off having a plan in place, he explains, because you can measure against that plan. That will let you know when an adjustment is needed. “There’s always going to be uncertainty,” he says. You already have a system.

For some people, the thought of creating any sort of plan is daunting. So Weins recommends beginning in your comfort zone, wherever that may be. “Let’s start with something you’re comfortable with,” he says. “People have some system in place, whether they believe it or not.”

He recommends starting with common sense metrics, for example: What day of the week is busiest? If the answer is Tuesday, then how many customers come in on Tuesdays? If you don’t know, start counting the number of customers on Tuesday. “Really, it is that simple.”

Answering questions like those can help you reach your goals, he adds. If you made $80,000 last year, but you hoped to make $100,000, what can you do to increase those revenues? How have you been getting most of your business? Or, if you can never take a vacation, and you would like to take four weeks off next year, how can you get your business to earn as much in 48 weeks as it previously did in 52 weeks? These are simple, concrete types of questions. Answering them will give you the beginnings of a plan.

The numbers in your business tell a story, the authors say. Looking at those numbers will help you understand that story. It will tell you where your business has been. And it can help you create a strategy to get where you want it to go in the future.

“Easiest way to get bigger.” “Ordering pump to Asia.” “Will a penile traction device cause scar tissue?” “Is this safe?” The r/gettingbigger Reddit thread sees, on average, 30 posts a day, all inquiring and/or sharing pics of growth. Oh, and you can’t forget the cute little scoreboard: 124K Embiggened and 4.3K Elongating now.

As women discover catching print (clocking dick size through the crotch seam), men are on Reddit putting their dicks in contraptions. Why? Well, they want bigger dicks. Duh. Think: a space for men’s sexual wellness, created by and for men. No BS claims, or you’ll get kicked out – allegedly.

The jarring part isn’t the community element. It’s the putting of dicks into contraptions and clearly lacking real safety info. Dr. Evan Goldstein, a proctologist (butt and colon doctor) and CEO of Bespoke Surgical, dives into the Reddit forum and spills all on dick gains. Are they safe? Is it a losing battle? Here’s what you need to know. Harmless curiosity or concerning?

Recently, Dr. Goldstein conducted a study with his team that found that “89% of all respondents believe society puts too much emphasis on penis size.” Yet r/gettingbigger is only… getting bigger?

“Men wanting bigger dicks is a tale as old as time,” Dr. Goldstein shared. “This is not new. At its surface, I think you could say it’s mostly harmless curiosity.”

In a recent study conducted by Dr. Goldstein and his staff, they found that most respondents felt emotional connection, chemistry, and compatibility matter more in bed than penis size. So, without sounding too cheesy, whoever said, “It’s not the size of the wave, it’s the motion of the ocean,” was right.

People may not give AF about the size, but men are still aiming to grow 1 or 2 more inches. Is it for themselves? Or for the satisfaction of being graded a C (hung) when the girls and gays are catching print?

“When you start to peel back the layers, what’s concerning is that society still associates manhood with bigness,” Dr. Goldstein continued. “And that people are willing to either inject themselves with fillers or endure stretching exercises or even undergo surgery to enhance their size.”

To give you a taste of how real this is getting, look up the frankenstender real quick. The medieval-looking gadget claims to extend penis size with metal, springs, and more. Others are using fillers, fat transfers, and other penile traction devices, aka extenders, like the frankenstender. But are these options medically realistic? Doctor’s > DIY

“Fortunately, for them, recent medical advances have made ‘penis enlargement’ a reality,” Dr. Goldstein continued. PhalloFILL, a non-invasive penile enhancement solution, uses beauty’s favorites: hyaluronic acid and filler.

Dr. Joshua Gonzalez, a professional peer of the Bespoke founder, “has been promoting PhalloFILL, which uses hyaluronic acid fillers to increase girth.” Not only does it work, but it actually has benefits, according to doctors.

The “dosage can be customized, and it’s non-invasive. While not permanent, results have been shown to last up to six years, and you can get touch-ups at any point to help extend the results” (no pun intended). “So, just like people who are unhappy with their noses or chins, or breasts, there are now medically-trusted and even FDA-approved options for those seeking penile enhancement.” More inches, more problems.

The rise of catching print while saying things like “it’s not the size… it’s the motion” sends conflicting messaging. Do we collectively care about dick size or not? Well, while that’s harder to pin down, there is one element you have to consider – if you don’t want to be an asshole. Your partner’s anatomy and pleasure.

“Some people have naturally small or tight pelvises, and when your partner is hung like a horse, this puts a lot of pressure — literally — on the receiving partner. It can be a very selfish thing. Here you are now with a bigger dick, but at what cost? You might feel more confident in the locker room, but now you’re causing all this discomfort and trauma to your partner when you have sex.” This can cause serious medical implications like tearing skin, aka anal fissures, which are extremely painful and tricky to heal.

Holemaxxxing for Dick Gains

Seriously, don’t up your dick gains without consulting your doctor and your partner. Think about it, you go out of your way to grow their girth and length, and your partner suddenly isn’t having as much fun in the bedroom. More inches come with a learning curve – literally.

Dr. Goldstein’s practice is a hub for all things anal surgery and rehab, so trust him when he says, “I’m seeing it from the other end. Especially now with the proliferation of HA injections and even fat transfer, bottoms are finding they need more training or other assistance to be able to handle tops with bigger dicks.”

Simply put, “Your [partner’s] body isn’t going to be ready for that much of a size jump.”

There are solutions, however. Common methods for stretching holes are dilator training, “anal Botox, pelvic floor therapy, or even surgery, because of anatomical limitations that limit you from being able to accommodate this new girth.” Patience is a virtue, so it might be best for your lover to start stretching those holes now, as you work on your dick gains, as “this isn’t something that will happen overnight.”

Dr. Goldstein developed a 4-piece anal dilator set with Future Method for this very reason. With four dilators, each a different size, for prep. There’s also a toy cone that’ll work on helping the skin down there stretch for a thicker girth.

“I tell people to follow my anal dilation protocol for about 6 weeks, which accounts for 2 weeks of exercises at each different size. So, while you won’t have to start from scratch, it’s likely you’ll have to dedicate about 2 weeks to the new size before you feel comfortable.”

The Bottom Line:

“Thankfully, we live in a world that has amazing resources and approaches to get you what you want,” Dr. Goldstein shared. “You want a big dick? Go get it. My goal is to not only bridge science and sex but to make sure people can seek trusted resources and experts who truly understand overall anatomy and sexual practices. It’s not a one-size-fits-all here. Pun intended.”

What can you do to make yourself happier? If you’re like most people, the idea of increasing your own happiness probably appeals to you. But here’s a second question: Do you think it’s possible? Or do you believe some people are just born with a happy outlook on life, while other, less lucky, people are not? Your answer to that last question could make a very big difference.

That’s the fascinating finding of a new study of more than 7,000 people by researchers at Seoul National University in South Korea. Researchers measured how much participants believed happiness was something you were born with on a scale of 1 to 7. Subjects at the low end of the scale believed happiness was completely changeable. Those at the high end believed it was completely innate. On average, subjects fell slightly under 3 on that scale, meaning they were slightly more likely to believe happiness levels could change.

Then the researchers tested participants’ response to changing circumstances by asking them questions about hypothetical events, as well as real events such as the pandemic. As you might expect, those who believed happiness was inborn did not expect events to change their mood very much. Those who believed happiness was changeable expected to be more affected, negatively or positively, by events. And, they found, those who believed happiness was predetermined were less happy overall. Happiness may be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

They also found that, as with many things, beliefs about happiness could turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those who believed happiness was preordained found it harder to improve their own emotional state. Those who believed that happiness was changeable were better able to change their own happiness level.

The truth is that both viewpoints are partly right. Research shows that happiness is 50 percent determined by genetics, 10 percent a result of circumstances, and 40 percent a result of what you choose to do. In other words, if you believe that happiness is entirely changeable, or entirely predetermined, you’re half right and half wrong.

But consider this: If you choose to believe your own happiness is at least partly in your control, you stand a good chance of having that belief come true. It’s another example of the difference between an internal and external locus of control. The more we believe in our power to change our own circumstances, the more likely it is we will actually be able to change them. Should you question your own beliefs?

So, let’s go back to the questions at the beginning of this column: Do you think that some people are innately happier than others? Or do you think you may be able to make yourself happier? If your answer to that second question is no, you might want to try and change that thinking.

In a piece for Psychology Today, Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Ph.D., professor emerita of psychological and brain sciences at the University of Massachusetts Amherst suggests gently questioning your own fatalistic, and self-fulfilling beliefs. Were you raised by people who took a negative view of the world? Did they discourage your attempts to take control of your own fate? Did you somehow get the idea that it would bring bad luck to try?

And, most importantly, what might happen if you start to believe that happiness might be something you can control? Or, if you just suspend your disbelief for a little while and try doing some of the things that could make you happy, and see if they work? You have nothing to lose by trying. And just maybe, some happiness to gain.

“Your brain doesn’t pay attention to boring things,” said Dr. John Medina, molecular biologist and author of Brain Rules. “If it doesn’t see a reason to pay attention, it will move on to something else. It has plenty of other stuff to do.”

I interviewed Medina for Viral Voices, an audio original on advanced digital communication skills. If you understand the neuroscience of attention — how your listeners’ brains process information — you’ll be much more persuasive in every type form of communication. Your pitch will stand a better chance of landing with your audience.

The first key takeaway: the human brain has evolved to filter information to conserve energy. “There has not been enough time for TikTok to rewire your brain,” Medina shared. “It will still react as if it were in the Pleistocene era, not the 21st century.”

So, whenever you pitch, present, or lead, listeners’ brains instantly decide whether to pay attention.

Featured Video

How Anthropic's Claude AI Became a Co-Founder

Science reveals four “signals” the brain looks for. If present, your audience tunes in. If absent, you’ve lost them.

1. Novelty

The human brains is wired to notice patterns. Predictable patterns are easy to ignore. Anything that breaks the pattern gets noticed. Steve Jobs was a pattern breaker.

For example, in the famous iPhone launch of 2007, Jobs introduced three new products: “An iPod, a phone, and an internet communication device.” He repeated the pattern three times, then broke it.

“These are not three separate devices. They’re one device. And we’re calling it, iPhone,” Jobs declared.

The audience laughed and cheered. The iPhone presentation has become one of the most iconic business presentations because it contained a novel element — a pattern followed by a surprise twist.
2. Emotion

Messages that evoke strong emotions act as a signal that the information matters. Research shows stories spark emotions because they release neurochemicals that make audiences pay attention. That’s why you’ll often hear talented communicators use stories to prove a point.

During Airbnb’s IPO roadshow, CEO Brian Chesky would start the pitch with the company’s origin: how a group of friends who couldn’t pay the rent decided to offer the use of their apartment and air mattresses to people attending a local business conference.

The story may not seem directly linked to investing, but it proved the need for the model and built trust in the team, who solved a real problem. Stories spark emotions and build trust. Tell more of them. 3. Clarity

If information is confusing or complex, the brain disengages and won’t pay attention. The fix? Make it easy.

One of the most effective tactics to keep a message simple is to stick to the rule of three. Neuroscientists say that humans are only capable of holding three or four items in short-term working memory. For communicators, that means sticking to three key messages your audience will remember after the pitch, not 23.

Highlight three features, three reasons, or three benefits. Resist adding more. Your job is not to tell the audience everything, but what they need to know. Make it easy for them to follow, remember, and decide. 4. Relevance

One of the questions the human brain is asking as it scans its environment is, “Why should I care?” Again, there’s an evolutionary reason for it. Have you heard of fight or flight? Well, that’s your brain assessing the current situation. When people listen to a pitch, they subconsciously decide whether to stay or disengage. Give them a reason to care, and they’ll pay attention.

One tactic to get your audience to care is to hit them over the head with the main message, figuratively. I watched one executive, a skilled communicator, introduce a new initiative to his team. His first slide had only one number: 28%. He explained that adopting the new system would boost revenue by 28% this year. He immediately translated those dollars into things that meant something to the people in the room: bigger bonuses, job security, and resources to hire support staff.

The audience bought in because the speaker made the information relevant. Otherwise, 28% is just a number — unless it’s directly tied to something people care about. The lesson is simple: People get bored easily. Give them a reason to listen.

Since no one ever accomplishes anything truly worthwhile on their own, every successful person I know is really good at persuading and influencing other people. (Not as an influencer, but as a formal and informal leader.)

Being persuasive means being convincing, which means sounding intelligent, since few people pay attention to people they don’t think are intelligent.

So yeah: if you want to be more persuasive, if you want to be able to influence the people around you, then you need to sound intelligent.

One easy way? Just speak a little faster.

According to a study published in Language and Speech, how people perceive your competence level increases as your speech rate increases. (As long as you don’t sound like you just slammed three Red Bulls.) Similar findings come from a study published in Journal of Nonverbal Behavior: moderately faster speech is linked to greater confidence, competence, and credibility.

Makes sense: rattling things off (think Noah Wylie in The Pitt) and you seem smart, credible, confident, and competent.

Yet speaking at a measured pace can also be a sign of confidence. (Think James Spader in, well, basically every role he’s ever played.) Rapid speech can imply certainty. But so can measured speech.

So what should you do? There’s a better approach than simply speaking quickly or slowly, since how quickly you should speak can depend on the situation you’re in.

A study published in Educational Psychology suggests:

If your audience is likely to disagree, speak a little faster.
If your audience is likely to agree, speak a little slower.

Why? When your audience is inclined to disagree with you, speaking faster gives them less time to form their own counterarguments, which gives you a better chance of persuading them.

When your audience is inclined to agree with you, speaking slowly gives them time to evaluate your arguments and factor in a few of their own thoughts. The combination of your reasoning and their initial bias means they are more likely to actually help persuade themselves.

Bottom line? If you’re preaching to the choir, speak a little slower. If you’re not, speak a little more quickly. And if your audience is neutral or apathetic, speak a little more quickly so you’ll be less likely to lose their attention.

But no matter what you do, think about your rate of speech.

Because when you need to seem more intelligent or more convincing, what you say matters, but so does how quickly, or not, you say it.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Liz Weselby, a 53-year-old communications executive based in Sydney. It has been edited for length and clarity.

At 29, I left the UK for a job at a newspaper in Thailand. Over the years, my career has led me to live in five cities around the world: London, Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Sydney.

I've had to adapt my work wardrobe multiple times. Each place brought unique challenges and cultural nuances, and I've had some awkward encounters to show for them.

One thing I've learnt is that the color of my clothes matters more than I'd ever thought it would. Colors reflect cultural nuances

I enjoyed living in Bangkok and stuck around for 7 years. During that time, I learned that the color of clothes matters greatly to the Thai people.

In 2010, Bangkok was in crisis, and there was a series of huge demonstrations across the city. Supporters of the ousted prime minister wore red shirts.

I remember going to meet a client and accidentally wearing a red top, and they commented on it even though I'm not Thai. I found out later that one of the client's properties had been burned down by the red-shirt protesters.

I learned about what other colors could offend the people I was working with, and in the end, one of my favorite things about Thai culture was that each day of the week has a different color.

On Mondays, many people wore yellow because it was the Late King's birthday, and yellow is associated with royalty.

On Tuesdays, people wore pink in honor of the late Queen Mother.

Black was generally frowned upon at the time because it was associated with death and bad luck. I'd moved from London, where I wore black four out of five days a week, and suddenly, it couldn't be my dress code anymore.

I didn't think to research cultural norms around fashion before moving to Thailand — and I should have. These days, though, there is tons of information online, from practical guides to millions of Reddit threads you can scroll through.

So do your research before building a work wardrobe for a new country. It's important to be aware of the country's cultural etiquette. Liz Weselby's photo. Weselby said wearing the right colors helps build rapport with clients. Liz Weselby The right colors build rapport with clients

Another thing I like doing is researching the color of the brands I'm pitching to.

I worked on a pitch for a company in Hong Kong where the branding was all bright pink, so I wore a bright pink jumper. I've done it for another client who had purple branding, and I wore a mauve top.

It helps to mirror a client. It's a hack to find a rapport with them. If you're too mismatched, it's harder to establish that connection.

This goes beyond colors — sometimes your entire outfit has to change depending on the client.

For example, most of my tech clients in Australia dress pretty casually, so I know I can wear jeans and a jacket. But when I'm meeting with people in the fashion industry or at luxury hotels, they tend to dress much more formally, so I'll make sure I do too, usually wearing a trouser suit or a more formal dress.

So again, research is the key. You need to understand their business — but also who they are: their background, their age, and the environment the meeting will take place in.

Is it a coffee shop or a corporate office? Is it an event? And, if so, what kind of event?

Once you know that, you can show up in a way that feels appropriate.

You want to be happier. You want to feel more fulfilled. You want to live longer, healthier lives.

Hold that thought.

Lewis Terman, a Stanford University psychologist, was a pioneer in I.Q. testing. His revisions of the Stanford-Binet test helped it become a widespread tool for measuring general intelligence.

In 1921 he identified 1,500 children who had scored 135 or higher on the test and began one of the longest longitudinal studies ever conducted. (The New York Times calls Terman and his study of “Termites,” as the kids called themselves, the “grandfather of all lifespan research.”)

Terman’s study was guaranteed to outlive him, but that was the point: analyzing large groups of people over many decades allows researchers to uncover connections between cause and effect that short-term studies naturally miss. (It’s really hard to know if what you did in your 20s actually made you happy in your 40s and 70s unless the researchers catch you at all three stages of your life.)

Who tended to live the longest, most fulfilling lives?

People who actively pursued, and were highly engaged, in pursuing their goals. In fact, many of those who worked the hardest turned out to live the longest.

Even if they didn’t actually accomplish their goals. According to The Longevity Project, achieving lifelong dreams doesn’t matter. According to the authors, pursuing your dreams is what counts:

We did not find that precisely living out your dreams matters much for your health. It was not the happiest or the most relaxed older participants who lived the longest. It was those who were most engaged in pursuing their goals.

Those who were the most successful were the ones least likely to die at any given age. In fact, those men who were carefree, undependable, and unambitious in childhood and very unsuccessful in their careers had a whopping increase in their mortality risk.

Of course “success” means (and absolutely should mean) different things to different people.

That’s why determining what success means to you, and then actively working to achieve your definition of success, is the key. Living a laid-back, care-free, stress-free life may sound great… but, as the study shows, “happy-go-lucky” people tend not to thrive.

Persistent, conscientious, goal-oriented people thrive — again, even if they don’t always achieve their goals.

Of course, other things matter as well. Other research shows good relationships make you happier and healthier: Terman’s study shows kids who have greater willpower and perseverance tend to be more successful as adults, regardless of relative I.Q.

It’s not easy to change the quality of your relationships overnight, though. Nor is it easy to develop greater willpower and determination (although there are certainly ways you can increase your ability to resist temptation, stay focused and determined, and remain resolute in pursuit of your goals.)

But what you can do, starting today, is actively work toward achieving one of your goals. (A great double-dip goal would be to try to improve the quality of your relationships.)

Working toward a goal will make you happier. Working hard to achieve a goal will help you live longer. Actively pursuing a goal, even if you never quite achieve it, will make your life more fulfilling, both now and when you eventually look back on a life well-lived.

Because there’s only one longitudinal study of happiness that truly matters: yours.

When I was in law school, people used to say: “If you don’t know who the class jerk is, it’s you.”

Actually, they didn’t say “jerk,” but you get the point. And it rang true.

It also gave me a quiet goal for the rest of my time there: Figure out who the class jerk is — or take a good long look in the mirror.

Now science has an update that makes the whole idea a little more serious: Difficult people in your life might actually make you age faster.

Featured Video

How Canva Became the Power Player in the AI Design Wars ‘Hasslers’

That’s the conclusion of a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Researchers examined the impact of what they called “hasslers” — people in someone’s social circle who regularly cause problems or make life more difficult.

The study used data from more than 2,300 adults in Indiana, combining detailed surveys about participants’ social networks with saliva samples that allowed researchers to measure biological aging through DNA markers.

The result: Each additional “hassler” in a person’s life was associated with a roughly 1.5 percent faster pace of biological aging.

“Those less-positive relationships may function as chronic stressors, so having those people around you actually makes your life really challenging,” said Byungkyu Lee, an assistant professor of sociology at New York University and lead author of the study.

The researchers also estimated that each additional hassler corresponded to being roughly nine months older biologically than someone of the same chronological age.

Put simply, the wrong people can wear you down. ‘Chronic stress’

The study also found that difficult relationships correlate with a wide range of other health issues. Participants who reported more hasslers tended to have worse mental health, higher levels of anxiety and depression, poorer self-rated health, and higher body mass indexes.

Researchers think the mechanism is fairly straightforward: chronic stress.

Repeated interpersonal tension can keep the body’s stress systems activated, increasing hormones such as cortisol and triggering inflammation. Over time, that kind of physiological strain can affect the biological processes associated with aging.

One interesting twist in the study involves who the “hasslers” are most likely to be.

Friends, it turns out, were relatively unlikely to fall into that category. Only a small percentage of friendships were described as regularly stressful.
Family members were far more likely to be identified as hasslers — especially parents and children. Coworkers and roommates also appeared frequently on the list.

The explanation is intuitive. Relationships based on obligation or shared space are harder to escape or redefine. You can slowly drift away from a difficult friend. It is much harder to create distance from someone you work with, live with, or share a family with.

(Can I point out that law school classmates — especially since first year law students often take all their classes with the same people — fit this almost perfectly?) Looking in the mirror, again …

The researchers were careful about how far to take their findings. The study identifies an association between hasslers and faster biological aging, but it does not prove direct cause and effect. Other factors could contribute to the pattern.

Still, the research highlights something worth thinking about: chronic stress from difficult interactions has real consequences.

So one obvious takeaway is to think carefully about the people who occupy the center of your life — the people who get your time, attention, and emotional energy.

But there’s a second takeaway that might be just as important.

It’s easy to read about “hasslers” and immediately picture someone else: the impossible coworker, the exhausting relative, the friend who always brings drama.

The harder question is whether we ever play that role ourselves. Choose carefully

Most people probably have moments when they are the one creating the strain, escalating conflicts, or leaving other people feeling drained after an interaction.

Which makes the goal pretty simple.

Choose your relationships carefully. Protect your time and energy. Invest in the people who make life calmer, steadier, and better.

And try not to become the kind of person who speeds up someone else’s biological clock.

So here’s to science, and living longer, and being careful about who we allow to get close to us and take up our time.

And also, here’s to being able — even all these years later — to remember pretty quickly who the class jerk was — and knowing it wasn’t me.

It started with two incidents on the same day. In a fairly empty train carriage, a stranger in her 70s approached me: “Do you mind if I sit here? Or did you want to be alone with your thoughts?” I weighed it up for a split second, conscious that I was, in effect, agreeing to a conversation: “No, of course I don’t mind. Sit down.”

She turned out to be an agreeable, kind woman who had had a difficult day. I didn’t have to say much: “I’m sorry to hear that.” “That’s tough for you.” She occasionally asked me questions about myself, which I dodged politely. I could tell she was only asking so the conversation would not be so one-sided. Some moments are for listening, not sharing. I sensed, without needing to know explicitly, that she was probably returning to an empty house and wanted to process the day out loud. I didn’t feel uncomfortable, as I knew I could duck out at any moment by saying I needed to get back to my phone messages. But instead we talked – or, rather, I listened – for most of the 50-minute journey. I registered that it was an unusual occurrence, this connection, but thought little more of it. A small part of me was glad this kind of thing still happens.

That evening, I ate at a restaurant with my family. As the waitress brought the bill, we chatted and I learned that she was from Seoul. She was shy and softly spoken. We talked gently about Korean food and what she missed about home. Once again, I thought little of this exchange.

As we walked home, my 15-year-old son asked: “Is it OK to talk to people in that way?” “What way?” He was asking about the boundaries when it comes to talking to someone about their home country.

This was a very good question. How do you know, generally, what the terms are of a conversation with a stranger? I realised that there is a sort of unwritten code you learn as you get older, which enables you to assess whether a conversation is a good idea or not. I thought about the woman who had approached me earlier. How did she know it was OK to talk to me? In the end, I replied to my son: “You don’t always know if it’s OK. Sometimes you have to take the risk and find out.”

Then it struck me. A lot of people have given up taking a chance on other people: that they might want to listen, that they might want to talk. But they have also given up taking a chance on themselves: that they might be able to navigate a conversation with someone new, cope with knockbacks and steer a path through any misunderstandings.

The disappearance of these kinds of interactions from day-to-day life – in pubs, restaurants, shops, queues, on public transport – is striking. I have been talking to people tangentially about this for the past 10 years, ever since I started researching my book, How to Own the Room, which came out in 2018 and went on to become a podcast. This project was supposed to be about public speaking and confidence. But I realised from people’s reactions to the topic – especially younger people – that their deepest anxiety lies elsewhere, in something much more banal and inexpressible. Forget “public speaking”. What a lot of people don’t like at all any more is “speaking to anyone in public”.

Many reasons are cited: state-of-the-art don’t-talk-to-me headphones, mobile phones and social media generally, the rise of working from home, the introduction of touchscreens in takeaway restaurants so you barely interact with a human, the death of third spaces, the pandemic. In the end, the biggest excuse becomes “social norm reinforcement”. This is the idea that if no one talks to you, you don’t talk to anyone either. A casual conversation in a waiting room where no one else is having a casual conversation suddenly sounds not very casual at all.

On an individual level, some people perfectly understandably cite neurodivergence, introversion, inability to tolerate eye contact or an intense loathing for small talk (especially about the weather) as reasons to avoid these conversations. It’s certainly true that this time six years ago – at the height of lockdown – it would have been rude and unsafe to start a chat, let alone sit next to someone on a train. But now? It can feel as if everyone is still adhering to the 2-metre rule, employing “the tech shield” or even “phantom phone use” (pretending that you need to be on your phone when you don’t).

This goes deeper than adolescent angst or personal preference. And possibly deeper than our overreliance on phones. We are losing a basic human skill. The ability to speak to others and understand them is being compromised. People sitting at a train station, most staring at their phone or talking on it, a couple reading the paper

Dr Jared Cooney Horvath, a teacher turned cognitive neuroscientist who focuses on speech, has warned that gen Z is the first generation in history to underperform the previous generation on cognitive measures. And Dr Rangan Chatterjee, a bestselling author and father of two teenagers, said in an interview this month: “I think we’re raising a generation of children who have low self-worth, who don’t know how to conduct conversations.”

It’s not only affecting young people. The psychologist Esther Perel calls it a “global relational recession”. She writes: “The point is not depth. The point is practice, the gentle strengthening of our social muscles.” On her YouTube channel she recently introduced the topic of Talking to Strangers in 2026.

Something that used to come naturally is now a subject of longing and fascination, as if it were a rare anthropological phenomenon. Videos are springing up on social media, cataloguing encounters with the unknown “other”: earnest, well-meaning, wholesome videos, under the categories “social anxiety”, “extrovert” and “talking to strangers”. Many have the unstated theme of “out and about in the big city”. Some are personal experiments, often extremely ill-advised ones. Can you challenge yourself to tell a joke to an entire train carriage? What happens if you go up to an older woman and tell her she looks beautiful? The (usually young) person doing the filming is often trying to improve themself in some way or attempting to “be braver” or “less socially anxious”. The camera acts as their accountability partner. The people they’re talking to are relegated to the role of “task to be ticked off the list”. Either that or there’s a push towards a Hallmark card effect: “Look, other people are not as horrible as you thought.” (Cue swell of trending motivational audio.)

The trouble with these social media experiments, of course, is that they are performative and individualistic. There’s an element of commodification: the encounter must be ripe for digital packaging. Often it’s not clear if the filming is consensual. The connections are one-way and border on the exploitative or manipulative. They are designed for individual personal growth or free, self-directed therapy (“this made me more confident”) and for clicks and voyeurism (“check out this person’s reaction”). The effect is to make “talking to absolutely anyone” seem even more alienating, fake and narcissistic. This has spawned a secondary genre of parody videos such as the comedian Al Nash’s “A cup of tea with a stranger – an amazing conversation!” In this clip, an irritating interviewer passes tea to a stranger on a park bench under the guise of “helping you with your loneliness”, only for the encounter to turn awkward when the stranger accidentally drops the cup and smashes it. Two 1950s men in shirts, ties, jackets and knitted vests chat by the garden wall

It’s only natural to fear rejection, humiliation, giving offence or overstepping a boundary when we initiate a conversation – or even when we respond to someone else’s attempt. But according to a study by the University of Virginia (Talking with strangers is surprisingly informative), we overstate these fears in our minds: “People tend to underestimate how much they’ll enjoy the conversation, feel connected to their conversation partner and be liked by their conversation partner.”

The key is to lower the stakes. Make it less of a big deal. Don’t focus on what could go wrong. Also, don’t focus on how amazing this could be. You are just saying, “It’s cold today, isn’t it?” You are not asking someone to join you on a quest for world peace. Similarly, if an approach is made towards you and you don’t want to respond, just be confident and clear either with your gestures (look down, don’t make eye contact) or with speech: “I can’t talk right now.”

In her work on kindness, the University of Sussex psychologist Gillian Sandstrom calls these conversational gambits “small, humanising acts”. It’s important to emphasise the “small” aspect. Sometimes I think people are overwhelmed by the “bigness” in their mind of the fear of interaction, and how disproportionate that seems next to the “smallness” of the pathetic reality. Don’t read too much into passing moments. Trust yourself to read social cues and work out how you stand in relation to them. Know yourself and your own personality. Not everyone wants to talk and not everyone wants to be talked to. And that’s OK. It can depend on the day and on your mood. Give yourself get-out-of-jail-free cards in these conversations. If someone doesn’t respond, assume they didn’t hear you or they’re having a bad day. If someone talks to you and you feel uncomfortable or you’re having a bad day, it is not your job to be kind or nice. If their attempt was well meant, they’ll get over it. We don’t need to avoid each other. But we also don’t have to be on niceness autopilot all the time.

In any case, our worst fears about these interactions are rarely realised. Last year, the team of Stanford psychologist Prof Jamil Zaki, the author of Hope for Cynics: The Surprising Science of Human Goodness, put up posters around campus with messages about approachability and warmth. They found that what students most needed was permission – the reminder to “take a chance”. They concluded: “Too often, we’re sure that conversation and connection will exhaust us, or that we can’t count on others.” In our minds, we paint people (and ourselves) as profoundly disappointing. They – and we – are rarely that bad. And even if they are, it will make a good story to tell later to the people who are not strangers to you. People queue up in a supermarket car park, standing well apart from each other

Is it going to change your life if you talk to someone in a shop about the prospect of rain? Probably not. But in light of the current state of the world, even the slightest possibility of brightening someone’s day is valuable. It’s certainly worth the punt. Perhaps the way they respond matters less than the fact that you retained your humanity enough to try something, to risk, to connect.

Small talk may not profoundly alter your life. But its absence will profoundly alter human life as we know it. We live in a world of intense and often unnecessary division. Small talk is a tiny, free and very possibly priceless reminder of our shared humanity. If we intentionally give up talking to strangers, if we purposely decide to give in to the phone shield, the consequences will be horrible. Arguably, we are already on the verge of doing this. Let’s back up and start a conversation before it’s too late.