The Second Look

Kiel F. Harvey

The first take is almost never the whole truth. So I take the things we accept at face value, whether that's a workplace habit, a headline, or something I believe myself, and look at them long enough to say what actually holds. Some episodes are narrated essays from Upon Further Examination. Others are conversations that go somewhere the writing can't. kielharvey.substack.com

  1. Sep 14

    Sucking At Stuff

    Most people who want to get good at something late have already heard the argument against trying, usually in their own voice. Too old, too far behind, too much momentum in the wrong direction. The argument rarely sounds like quitting. It sounds like realism, and some days it sounds like peace. This episode gives that voice the floor first. It opens as a tribute: a deadpan day in the life of a man who has stopped trying at work and at home and treats it as an accomplishment. Then it stops, asks what exactly bothered you about him, and admits that almost none of it happened. The bit is there because the story is familiar anyway, not as behavior, but as the explanation people give themselves for why change is off the table. From there it gives a social media trend a charitable reading before showing where it goes wrong, grants the bleak premise that an unchanged life has a fixed destination, and turns on a junior high report card and a line his mother credited to Dr. Phil. It closes on a disclosure rather than a pep talk. The author is bad at too many things he wants to be good at, and he needs the argument to be true. What’s inside: a tribute to mediocrity delivered with a straight face; which parts are fiction and which are left to your imagination; a trend that recasts not thinking as a virtue, and the fair point buried inside it; why momentum is a real argument; a report card with none of the first three letters on it; what a parent’s words can do years after they seem to fail; the two things that had to be accepted before anything changed; why being bad at something is honest; starting late, in public; and what being bad at something does and does not tell you. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published September 11, 2026. Running time 9:49. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 1:02 A tribute to being incapable, and the advice not to fight it * 1:50 The flicker of ambition, and the case for letting it go quiet * 2:07 Too old, too young, too whatever * 2:21 Mid as a destination, and meaning as an opiate * 2:47 The man who grinds all night, and the medal he is owed * 3:01 A full day of committed mediocrity, hour by hour * 3:45 The cubicle check-in, and the Candy Crush game it interrupted * 3:56 A friend’s book, and the dust collecting on it * 4:08 Mid-maxxing takes more effort than it looks * 4:12 A night of candy, Mountain Dew and Call of Duty * 4:42 Good night from a man with no ambition and some heartburn * 4:54 Pause * 4:57 What bothered you about that, and how much of it was true * 5:14 A social media trend, its charitable reading, and where it goes wrong * 5:54 The story people tell themselves without being asked * 6:21 Granting the premise: an unchanged life has a fixed destination * 6:32 A report card, and a line credited to Dr. Phil * 6:52 The line itself, and why it stuck without changing anything * 7:15 The two things that had to be accepted first * 7:40 Why being bad at something is honest * 7:47 Never aspiring to it, and assuming it was not meant to be * 8:04 Sucking, renamed * 8:08 Starting late, and starting in public * 8:27 The selfish reason the argument has to be true * 8:51 Identity against location * 9:02 Outro The argument, in short The usual case against learning something late is not laziness. It is arithmetic. The years behind you have built momentum, the distance ahead looks long, and the sensible-sounding conclusion is that some things were never meant for you. The essay grants more of that case than most encouragement does. If nothing changes, it agrees, the outcome is already settled. Where it parts ways is on what being bad at something means. The mock tribute works because it treats low skill as a trait, something a person is. The second half treats it as a position, somewhere a person is. Once it is a position, it stops being a verdict and becomes information: the starting point everyone shares, including everyone who later got good. The piece is careful about two things. It does not sneer at the impulse behind the trend it criticizes; it concedes that acting without overthinking has a point before objecting to the version that turns not thinking into a virtue. And it does not pretend the author has arrived. The case is made by someone still in the middle of it, which is why the time argument cuts both ways. The years pass whether or not the effort goes in. If you take one thing: being bad at something is a report on where you are, not a ruling on who you are, and everyone who is good at something started there. Referenced in this episode * The line credited to Dr. Phil. The line his mother quoted circulates in several versions, and none traces cleanly to Phil McGraw. A close variant, “What you are to be, you are now becoming,” is often attributed online to the psychologist Carl Rogers, also without a firm source. The essay says she “attributed” it to Dr. Phil, which is the accurate way to put it. McGraw was a regular guest on The Oprah Winfrey Show from 1998, four years before his own show launched, so a late-1990s report card fits. Read the original The written version of this essay is here: Sucking at Stuff New essays every week at Upon Further Examination. Free, and it stays free. RockReader If you’re like me, you’ve been told a million times you should read your Bible. That lands about the same as “you should go to the gym.” And here’s what I’ve noticed about both. I’m far more consistent when a friend is going through it with me. That’s what I built RockReader for. You pick a reading plan, connect with a few people you trust, and journal through it together, a day at a time. It’s private by default, so nothing you write is seen unless you decide to share it. Completely free. No subscription, no in-app purchases. rockreader.com, or search RockReader in the Google Play store. Grab a friend and dig into the word together. From the Source If you’re just getting started reading the Bible, or you’ve been a Christian a long time and your Bible has gotten dustier than you’d like, I wrote a study workbook for you. From the Source teaches a four-step method for reading and studying Scripture so you can understand it for yourself, at your own pace. Available at kielharveybooks.com and on Amazon. Everything on Upon Further Examination is free and stays free. If you want to support the work, buy From the Source. What it earns pays for RockReader and for the hours these essays take. Listen and subscribe * Apple Podcasts * Spotify * YouTube * The Second Look show page About Upon Further Examination is a Substack about business, leadership, work, and life as they are actually lived, not as they are supposed to sound. Most of life runs on first impressions. This is the second look. Kiel F. Harvey writes it, reads it, and built RockReader Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    Sucking At Stuff
  2. Sep 7

    When Getting Help Becomes a Full-Time Job | TSL EP # 14

    Description An institution can hold enormous expertise and still fail the person standing in front of it, and the failure will not look like incompetence. It looks like a series of appointments that each went fine. Every specialist sees the piece they were trained to see, names it correctly, and hands it back. Nobody is wrong. Nobody is lazy. And the problem nobody was assigned to hold keeps moving, unowned, while the person it belongs to carries it from office to office. This episode starts with the most expensive version of that structure the author has: six years of appointments before a daughter’s rare disease was named, and a wife whose days quietly turned into a full-time coordination job nobody hired her for. It refuses to be a story about medicine. What happens in a children’s hospital happens in a service department, a telecom, an accounting team, and any organization big enough to divide work among people who are good at different things. The diagnosis is structural, not moral, and the episode goes out of its way to say so. From there it does the harder work, which is refusing the obvious fix. The impulse to tear out the departments and put everyone in one room is real, and the episode treats it seriously enough to explain why it fails: specialization is not the disease. A closer who pitches one inning is worth what he is worth precisely because he does not do the other eight. What specialists actually generate is a second job — moving a problem between them — and that job is either assigned to somebody inside the building or it is quietly handed to whoever came in asking for help. There is no third option. The cost gets paid regardless; the only question is by whom. What’s inside: why several lifetimes of expertise can still miss one child; the difference between a doctor being wrong and no one being responsible; a Braves fan’s grudging respect for Mariano Rivera and what a one-inning specialist proves about value; seventeen years selling compactors and the engineering work he should never be allowed near; what a manager does that never shows up in a box score; twenty-five minutes and five departments at an internet provider; what the research actually found about transfers and re-explaining; a hotel clerk in Dallas who solved a problem before the caller knew he had one; T-Mobile’s Team of Experts and the numbers it moved; the fair objection that an advocate is just one more layer of bureaucracy, answered rather than dodged; and the difference between real authority and a sympathetic messenger. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published September 4, 2026. Running time 13:50. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 1:00 Six years, several lifetimes of medical knowledge, and no one holding the whole * 1:22 Why knowledge was never the missing thing * 1:38 Why this is not an accusation against anyone’s doctors * 1:59 The same shape, in any institution large enough to specialize * 2:28 The nuclear option, and the real impulse behind the joke * 2:41 First-call resolution, and what people are actually buying * 3:15 What comes out along with the structure when you strip it away * 3:38 Mariano Rivera, the 1999 World Series, and a childhood pessimism the numbers back up * 4:16 Specialization as a source of value rather than a limit on it * 4:22 Seventeen years selling compactors, and the load calculations you would not want him doing * 4:56 What it costs every time a specialist steps out of their role * 5:22 Joe Torre, and the work that never shows up in a box score * 5:47 What coordination actually looked like, measured in hours, for one family * 6:15 The second job his wife did not apply for * 6:38 Twenty-five minutes, five departments, and an internet connection that is still down * 7:18 What the research found about transfers and being asked to explain it again * 7:40 The rule the section lands on, and the only two places the bill can go * 7:51 A canceled reservation in Dallas, and a problem that was already solved * 8:32 What Carlos did that the caller never had to see * 8:46 T-Mobile’s Team of Experts, and what changed when the company took the job back * 9:23 Who the advocate actually is, and why the title matters less than the assignment * 9:49 Authority and capacity, or a sympathetic messenger * 10:01 The objection: is this just one more layer of bureaucracy? * 10:35 What the advocate does not get to do * 11:14 Why even a well-designed process runs out * 11:32 What earlier answers would, and would not, have changed * 11:55 What an advocate can do when the problem itself cannot be solved * 12:22 Outro The argument, in short The usual explanation for bad institutional service is that somebody did not care enough. This episode argues the opposite: care is abundant and mostly irrelevant, because the failure is an allocation problem. Divide complex work among specialists and you create a new task that did not exist before — carrying a problem across the boundaries between them. That task is real work, it takes time, and no organizational chart creates it on purpose. So it goes unassigned, and unassigned work does not disappear. It falls to the only person in the system who cannot delegate: the one who came in asking for help. What makes this more than a customer-service complaint is that the essay refuses the escape hatch on both sides. It will not blame the specialists, because specialization is where the value lives, and it will not romanticize flattening the structure, because tearing out departments does not conjure a coordinator, it just spreads the coordination thinner. The Rivera material earns its place here. A closer who throws one inning is not a limited pitcher; he is an expensive one. But somebody still has to decide when he takes the mound, and that somebody is not on the field. Which turns the whole question into an assignment problem with a short answer. Name a person. Give them the problem end to end rather than a segment of it, and give them two things that are easy to skip: enough authority to get answers from departments that do not report to them, and enough unclaimed time to actually follow the thing. Skip either one and you have built a sympathetic messenger — a person who will listen kindly and then hand the work back. The episode is careful that the advocate does not overrule the experts. Doctors still diagnose, engineers still calculate. The advocate owns the movement between them, and stays until it is resolved or properly escalated. The objection gets a full hearing, and it is the right objection: another role can become another stop, a place to route things so no department has to own them. The answer is a boundary rather than a defense. Routine problems that one department can close should stay with that department. Advocacy is for the problems that cross specialties, where the standard path has already failed and someone has to be responsible for what happens next. And when the same problem keeps arriving, the advocate is evidence of a process that needs fixing, not a substitute for fixing it. If you take one thing: coordination is not overhead you can decline, it is a cost that has already been incurred, and every organization is already paying it — either with an employee’s hours or with its customers’ evenings. Referenced in this episode * Matthew Dixon, Karen Freeman and Nicholas Toman, “Stop Trying to Delight Your Customers,” Harvard Business Review, July–August 2010. The study behind the disloyalty claim, and worth knowing how big it is: more than 75,000 customers surveyed over three years across phone, web, chat and email. The findings the episode leans on are the mechanical ones rather than the emotional ones — 62 percent reported having to contact the company repeatedly, 59 percent reported being transferred, 56 percent reported having to re-explain their issue, and 57 percent reported being pushed from the web to the phone. Every one of those is an assignment handed to the customer. It is also the paper that produced the Customer Effort Score, which asks a single question: how much effort did you personally have to put forth to handle your request? * “Bringing agile to customer care,” McKinsey & Company, February 2019 (Raelyn Jacobson, Sören Jautelat, Julian Raabe and Lucas Wienke). The source for T-Mobile’s Team of Experts results: first-call resolution up 14 percent, customer transfers down 70 percent, Net Promoter Score up nine points. It reports one more number the episode does not use, and it points the same direction — employee attrition fell 40 percent. Handing the coordination job to someone with the authority to do it appears to be better for the people inside the building too, not only for the people calling in. * Mariano Rivera, 1999 World Series. Rivera threw four and two-thirds scoreless innings against Atlanta across the series, allowing three hits, and was named World Series MVP. Which is the point pushed a step further than the essay takes it: the most valuable player in a championship series was a man who never pitched more than two innings at a time. * Sanfilippo syndrome (mucopolysaccharidosis type III). A rare inherited disorder in which a missing enzyme prevents the body from breaking down a complex sugar molecule, which accumulates and causes progressive neurological decline in childhood. There is no cure. The reason it takes years to find is the reason the essay is built on it: the early symptoms are all common ones — ear infections, speech delay, digestive trouble, behavior changes — and each of them has an ordinary explanation that fits inside one specialty. * Frits Wijburg and colleagues, “Mucopolysaccharidosis type III (Sanfilippo syndrome) and misdiagnosis of idiopathic developmental delay, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder or autism spectrum disorder,” Acta Paediatrica, 2013. Background reading for anyone who thinks the six years were an unlucky outcome ra

    When Getting Help Becomes a Full-Time Job | TSL EP # 14
  3. Sep 2

    Buying Cocaine Undercover, Protecting Presidents, and the Cost of Duty- Marcus Johnson Interview | The Second Look Ep# 13

    Description Almost everything the country believes about the Secret Service was assembled from two sources. One is a movie. The other is a piece of footage where something went badly wrong. Neither one shows the work. Marcus Johnson did that work for fifteen years, after five and a half in the DEA, and he is the first guest to sit down on this show. He is also a friend. We stand at the back of the same church on Sunday mornings on the volunteer security team, which is the only reason a conversation like this happens at all, and it is worth saying plainly rather than pretending this was an interview with a stranger. What that friendship bought is a version of the story that does not sound like a press statement. A kid outside Annapolis raised by his mother, his grandparents, an aunt and a babysitter. A grandfather who came back from a Navy ship with wooden guns on it and went to work at the Naval Academy. An accounting job at a Fortune 500 company that he hated at twenty three. Four months at Quantico that he describes as pure hell, starting two weeks after September 11th. Undercover buys county to county in Florida, a ton of cocaine in Puerto Rico, then a pregnant wife and a decision to do something less dangerous, which turned out to mean the Secret Service. The center of it is a question he had never been asked in those words. He agreed to take a bullet for people he did not choose, including two men half the country cannot stand, and he had to decide what he actually thought about that before he ever stood in a hallway at two in the morning. His answer is not a speech. It is quieter than that, and more practical, and it turns immediately into a point about advance work: if the job is done right, the moment everyone imagines never arrives. Which is why the second half of this conversation, the part about Butler and about a fence line in West Palm Beach, is not a set of hot takes about individual agents. It is a career agent explaining what the basics are, who is supposed to enforce them, and what happens to an institution when the people who never learned them get promoted anyway. There is a good deal that is not heavy. A guy who quit the academy after two days by calmly walking his luggage back to his car. The president who would talk college football for three hours. A former president who shaved his head over something no reporter ever heard about. What all-day church as a kid prepared him to do for a living. And an ending we did not plan, where a man who spent twenty years being paid to expect the worst says what actually gives him hope, and it comes out sounding like the thing this show keeps circling back to. What’s inside: how a person actually gets hired into federal law enforcement, from the application to the polygraph to the wait; why the DEA academy is eighty percent guns and the FBI’s is eighty percent studying; the half of the Secret Service that has nothing to do with protection; what an advance is and why almost everything traces back to it; who is allowed to tell a president no, and how that decision travels; what the camera never catches about the men everybody has an opinion about; why the instincts do not retire, and what he still does walking into a store; the head shaving story; what he would tell a sixteen year old who wants that job; and the four things a kid can do right now that decide whether that career is even available to them later. Recorded August 29, 2026. Running time 2 hours, 17 minutes. About Marcus Johnson Marcus Johnson spent more than twenty years as a federal agent. He grew up outside Annapolis, Maryland, took a degree at La Salle University in Philadelphia and later a master’s at Arizona State, and worked as an accountant before he ever carried a badge. He joined the Drug Enforcement Administration in 2001, entering the academy at Quantico two weeks after September 11th, and spent five and a half years with the agency, first on a mobile enforcement team working undercover buys across Florida and then in Puerto Rico. He moved to the United States Secret Service in 2007 and served 15 years: financial crimes and protective work out of San Juan, then the Washington field office, then 6 years on the Presidential Protective Division spanning two administrations, on shift, on a cabinet detail, and in counter-surveillance. He also worked protection for foreign heads of state and dignitaries at home and abroad, and finished his career in the Phoenix field office. He is retired and lives in Arizona. He serves on the volunteer security team at the church he and Kiel attend. Upon Further Examination is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 1:32 A peninsula across from the Naval Academy, back when it was still farms * 4:15 A county that had desegregated on paper * 5:50 The father who was not there, and the grandfather who was * 6:46 A drafted sailor, a ship with fake guns, and a test he came two points from passing * 9:49 Blue Angels, the Naval Academy, and where the appetite came from * 12:23 His mother transfers to DEA headquarters, and then Miami Vice comes on * 15:00 Three accounting jobs and a growing certainty * 16:51 The DEA academy: four months of pure hell * 17:31 Why the DEA academy and the FBI academy are opposites * 21:09 Two weeks after 9/11, and the man who quit after two days * 24:06 The standard the special agent in charge set on day one * 24:35 Miami, and the dream he had been carrying since he was twelve * 25:34 Born again at twenty three, with one foot in each world * 27:19 What sitting through all day church actually trained him for * 28:58 The mobile enforcement team, county to county * 31:10 A ton of cocaine in Puerto Rico, and the friend who worked it * 35:11 The emptiness that arrived when nothing was missing * 37:06 What that work shows a person, and why so many agents drink * 38:48 A pregnant wife, thirty days at sea, and a decision * 40:35 Less dangerous, so you go to the Secret Service * 41:29 Turned down at twenty one: go get a skill and come back * 43:29 The half of the agency nobody pictures * 46:52 A director, a hiring freeze, and a career stuck in place * 52:28 The email that changed it, and three fitness tests at forty two * 55:06 A year on the Obama detail * 55:45 Do presidents know their agents * 59:55 The line he gave younger agents to keep the job clean * 1:00:31 Protecting the office rather than the man * 1:01:47 How do you hire for a willingness to die * 1:03:29 What made him willing * 1:04:04 If the advance is right, it never gets that far * 1:06:48 Chad, uranium, and why the small country matters * 1:07:07 The men who no longer know how to be off duty * 1:08:47 Which one was the most real * 1:11:21 The protectee he would have wanted to sit and talk with * 1:15:36 Two in the morning on the South Grounds * 1:18:03 Who gets to tell a president no * 1:20:17 Up the chain, and the email you send anyway * 1:21:16 Overseas you are a guest, and the State Department runs it * 1:23:04 The instincts do not retire * 1:27:32 What would surprise most Americans about any president * 1:29:28 The head shaving that never made the news * 1:30:37 Why the detail is less of a brotherhood than you would think * 1:32:05 Butler: the phone call, and what everybody decided too fast * 1:34:23 Perishable skills, radio rooms, and lines of sight * 1:37:22 Putting the wrong person on the post * 1:39:44 Doing more with less, and handing money back to Congress * 1:42:49 Competence is not a preference, it is the job * 1:44:05 The applicant who could not make a seven thirty interview * 1:46:32 West Palm Beach, a fence line, and the units that were not there * 1:47:29 Why he never took the supervisor job, and how he landed in Phoenix * 1:51:19 Why his faith mattered inside that job * 1:55:14 Integrity, and a standard applied unevenly * 1:56:01 Excusing the low performers is how you lose the high ones * 1:57:36 The foreign detail that looked like it came out of a movie * 1:58:57 Suits, standards, and what a president signals * 2:01:05 Doing it right when no boss is watching * 2:03:46 Advice for a kid who wants that job * 2:07:25 The four things that decide it: parents, credit, conditioning, and what you post * 2:10:39 What gives him hope * 2:11:32 Where he thinks that leaves the rest of us * 2:15:22 Thanks, and the first guest on the show * 2:16:10 Outro The conversation, in short The word that keeps coming back is not courage, and it is not patriotism. It is competence. Every strong section of this conversation turns out to be about the same thing from a different angle. Willingness is not a feeling you summon on the day, it is a decision made years earlier and then made survivable by preparation. An assassination attempt is not primarily a story about the seconds of footage everybody watched, it is a story about a walkthrough that either happened properly or did not. A promotion handed to someone who never learned to build a site is not an HR problem, it is a security problem that will surface later with the whole country watching. That is also what makes his account of the presidents worth sitting through. Every American has a complete opinion of the two most polarizing men of the last twenty years, and every bit of that opinion was assembled from footage of them performing. He stood there when nothing was recording. What he offers is not a scorecard, and he declines more than once to give one. It is smaller and more useful than that: some people are exactly what they appear to be, some have forgotten how to be anything but the role, and none of that is the point of the job anyway, because the job is to protect the office so the country stays stable no matter who is in it. His faith runs through all of it without ever becoming a segment. It shows up as the reason he did not get lost in Miami, the reason he kept doing the work correctly when

    Buying Cocaine Undercover, Protecting Presidents, and the Cost of Duty- Marcus Johnson Interview | The Second Look Ep# 13
  4. Aug 31

    Losing Your Way By Accident | TSL EP # 12

    Description Most people who stop living by a conviction never decide to. There is no argument, no crisis of belief, no moment where the thing gets examined and set down. You would still defend it out loud, and you would mean it. The distance between what you hold and how you actually spend a Tuesday just widens by degrees until one day it is wide enough to notice. This episode is about that distance, where it comes from, and why the obvious word for it is the wrong one. The case it reasons from is domestic rather than dramatic, and it is unflattering to the man telling it. A marriage seventeen years long, a promise made in front of people by someone who could not really afford the ring, and an honest accounting of the stretch where the promise stayed true and the behavior did not. From there the piece separates two things that look identical while you are inside them. Adapting means looking at what you believe and deciding how it applies now. Drifting means the decision never happens and the current picks instead. The difference is not effort or sincerity. It is whether anyone was steering. The answer it arrives at is smaller and more ordinary than the question seems to deserve, which is the point. Not more conviction, not better discipline, and not a resolution to try harder. Objects that keep handing a belief back to you, moments built on purpose to make you stop and hold it, and a few people who know you well enough to say when you are sliding. Along the way it takes seriously the hardest objection to the whole idea, the one that says if you cannot live your values then you never really had them, and it answers that objection rather than dodging it. What’s inside: the difference between adaptation and drift and why only one of them is a decision; what happened to a standard of beauty in a Fijian province after three years of television; why the God of the Old Testament keeps saying remember to people whose memories were fine; a semester away from Bible college and the discovery that the drift started somewhere else entirely; the fair objection that stated values you cannot live were never real; a memory trick involving a coffee table and an imaginary bomb; bread broken at a table by a man hours from dying, and what Peter needed from it; a messy garage on Saturday mornings; and a fraction of a degree that costs you the moon. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published August 28, 2026. Running time 10:17. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 0:58 Seventeen years, four states, and a ring bought with money he did not have * 1:13 The promise, and the part of it that quietly stopped happening * 1:38 Why growth and drift look identical from the inside * 2:05 The one thing that separates adapting from drifting * 2:24 Television arrives in a Fijian province * 2:53 A standard of beauty that nobody voted on * 3:19 A command God keeps repeating to people whose memories are fine * 4:10 Remembering as an action rather than a recollection * 4:21 Leaving Egypt, and the practices that kept a people distinct * 4:54 A semester off in Oregon, and where the drift actually started * 5:37 The fair objection: maybe the values were never real * 5:50 Evidence against verdict, and why aspirational values still count * 6:17 A memory trick, a coffee table, and an imaginary bomb * 7:08 A meal, a betrayal coming, and what Peter needed to remember * 7:58 Saturday mornings in a messy garage * 8:22 A fraction of a degree, and missing the moon entirely * 8:42 A gold band, an airplane seat, and everything it hands back * 9:31 Outro The argument, in short Behavior drifting away from belief is usually read as hypocrisy, and hypocrisy is the wrong diagnosis because it assumes a decision was made. Nobody decides to drift. Beliefs erode by exposure rather than by argument: what you see and do every day slowly rearranges what feels normal, and the rearranging finishes before you get around to reconsidering anything. That is why the Fijian data in this episode matters more than it first appears. No one there changed their mind about beauty. The change simply happened to them. Which leaves the harder question of what a conviction actually needs in order to keep governing a life. The answer here is not intensity. It is contact. A belief you never physically touch is a belief with nothing pushing back on the current, and the practices that keep it in reach are mundane on purpose: a ring you turn on your finger, a few minutes of quiet, a table, a standing Saturday with people who will notice. This is also, the episode argues, why so much of Israel’s religious life was built out of repetition and objects rather than instruction. The point was never information. The piece also refuses the cheap exit. It grants the strongest case against itself, that values you consistently fail to live were never really yours, and then answers it: actions are evidence, but evidence is not a verdict. Most of what a person genuinely values sits ahead of them rather than behind, which is precisely what allows a value to speak up when you have wandered a long way from it. Failing to reach something is not the same as never having aimed at it. If you take one thing: a conviction you do not deliberately return to is not being held, it is being carried by the current, and the correction is not more sincerity but a smaller and more boring thing you actually schedule. Referenced in this episode * Deuteronomy 4:9. The passage the episode builds its middle section on, quoted from the New Living Translation. It is the instruction not to let what you have seen escape your mind, and to hand it down. The episode reads the command as being about practice rather than memory. * Luke 22:19. The Last Supper, and the instruction to do this in remembrance. In the written essay this citation appears inline; in the audio it was left out of the read so the paragraph would not stall on a reference. * Anne Becker and colleagues, “Eating behaviours and attitudes following prolonged exposure to television among ethnic Fijian adolescent girls,” British Journal of Psychiatry, 2002. The Nadroga province study behind the television figures. Worth knowing what the numbers are: the measure is the EAT-26 screening questionnaire, and the share of girls scoring above the risk threshold went from 12.7 percent in 1995 to 29.2 percent in 1998. Those are screening scores indicating risk, not diagnoses, which is exactly what the episode claims for them. * Dominic O’Brien, Quantum Memory Power. The audiobook behind the keys trick. O’Brien is a multiple World Memory Championship winner, and the technique in question is a version of the standard advice to make a thing memorable by making it vivid and absurd. * 2 Samuel 11 and 12 sit under the surface here for anyone who listened to the previous episode. This one is not about David, but it is asking the same question from the opposite side: what keeps a person pointed at what they said they believed. Read the original The written version of this essay is here: Losing Your Way By Accident New essays every week at Upon Further Examination. Free, and it stays free. RockReader If you’re like me, you’ve been told a million times you should read your Bible. That lands about the same as “you should go to the gym.” And here’s what I’ve noticed about both. I’m far more consistent when a friend is going through it with me. That’s what I built RockReader for. You pick a reading plan, connect with a few people you trust, and journal through it together, a day at a time. It’s private by default, so nothing you write is seen unless you decide to share it. Completely free. No subscription, no in-app purchases. rockreader.com, or search RockReader in the Google Play store. Grab a friend and dig into the word together. From the Source If you’re just getting started reading the Bible, or you’ve been a Christian a long time and your Bible has gotten dustier than you’d like, I wrote a study workbook for you. From the Source teaches a four-step method for reading and studying Scripture so you can understand it for yourself, at your own pace. Available at kielharveybooks.com and on Amazon. Everything on Upon Further Examination is free and stays free. If you want to support the work, buy From the Source. What it earns pays for RockReader and for the hours these essays take. Listen and subscribe * Apple Podcasts * Spotify * YouTube * The Second Look show page About Upon Further Examination is a Substack about business, leadership, work, and life as they are actually lived, not as they are supposed to sound. Most of life runs on first impressions. This is the second look. Kiel F. Harvey writes it, reads it, and built RockReader. Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    Losing Your Way By Accident | TSL EP # 12
  5. Aug 24

    Shiny, Heroic, Leader? | TSL EP# 11

    Description Nearly everything written about leadership converges on the same list. Character, competence, charisma, communication, care, integrity. This episode does not argue that any of those are unimportant. It argues that the list does not do the job it is being asked to do, because every item on it is something worth wanting from everyone in the building, not just the person at the top. The test case is personal, and it is a disappointment rather than a scandal. A college student training for ministry attached himself to a well-known leadership author he had never met, read everything the man wrote, and took the framework seriously at an age when he had never led anything of consequence. Years later that author fell. The moral failure was devastating on its own terms and is treated that way here. But it left a narrower question behind, and the narrower question is what the episode is actually about: if character is the baseline you expect from every colleague, what is the thing that only a leader does? Working toward an answer takes the piece through the gap between Mel Gibson’s William Wallace and the man who actually lost at Falkirk, through a respectful disagreement with one of the most widely read writers in the field, and through a king of Israel who at the decisive moment did not supply his own integrity and had to borrow it from someone standing next to him. The conclusion is not that leaders do not matter. It is that we have made them far too big, and that the real work of the role is smaller, heavier, and considerably less flattering than the heroic version. What’s inside: the author whose fall changed what one reader wanted in a leader; Braveheart against the historical record; why six admirable virtues fail as a definition; a disagreement with John Maxwell that is not a criticism of the man; Zig Ziglar on wandering generalities; David, Bathsheba, and Nathan; what a room of newly promoted supervisors was told about blame; and a definition of leadership narrow enough to be useful. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published August 21, 2026. Running time 14:11. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 0:58 The leadership author a college student attached himself to * 1:28 A fall in 2018, and what it changed about what he wanted in a leader * 2:16 Braveheart, and the kind of leader we all say we want to follow * 2:48 The real William Wallace, Stirling Bridge, and Falkirk * 3:52 Training programs that promise to make you the Braveheart of the office * 4:33 John Maxwell, leadership as influence, and a philosophical difference * 5:29 Integrity, communication, care: things worth wanting from everyone * 5:59 Zig Ziglar on wandering generalities and meaningful specifics * 6:20 Leadership happens in a messy environment, not a vacuum * 7:09 King David, Bathsheba, and where the integrity actually came from * 8:04 Leaders as part of an ecosystem rather than self-contained causes * 8:30 Going hard in the paint against the heroic leader * 8:49 The definition, narrower and heavier than a list of virtues * 9:03 What a room of newly promoted supervisors was told * 9:53 Where the compounding failure actually was * 10:58 Twenty years later, and the role model that was needed * 11:32 Outro The argument, in short Character is a prerequisite for leadership, not a description of it. Every virtue the standard list names is something worth demanding of everyone in an organization, which means none of them can be what separates a leader from anyone else. A definition that applies equally to the whole company is not a definition. It is a distinction without a difference, and it leaves people who are handed authority with an aspiration instead of a job. The distinguishing act is narrower. A leader takes responsibility for directing people toward a shared outcome, and the responsibility does not get shared out even though the outcome always is. That is why the newly promoted supervisor in this episode is told he has forfeited the right to blame anyone. It is not a motivational line. It is a description of what he just accepted. The second half of the argument cuts against the same heroic picture from the other direction. Leaders are not self-contained causes of anything. They sit inside an ecosystem of people who correct, support, challenge and enable them, and the reason David survived his worst moment is that one of those people was willing to walk into the room and say so. Making everyone a leader flatters the org chart and quietly devalues the very people a leader cannot function without. If you take one thing: owning the outcome is the job, including the outcome that hurts. A leader who will not face what happened has failed at the one thing the role actually required, however impressive the rest of the resume looks. Referenced in this episode * Bill Hybels and the 2018 Willow Creek investigation. The leadership author at the center of the opening. An independent investigation later found the allegations against him credible, and church leaders reported that he did not take part in their reconciliation efforts. The episode treats his writing on character, competence and chemistry as work that genuinely formed people, and treats him as a man who fell rather than as a cautionary prop. * John Maxwell, “leadership is influence.” One of the most widely read writers in the field, and among the first this episode’s author ever read. What follows is a philosophical difference about whether influence is specific enough to define a distinct role. It is not a criticism of the man or of his life’s work. * Zig Ziglar. The line about refusing to be a wandering generality, used here against the vocabulary of leadership training rather than against any individual. * Braveheart (1995), and the historical William Wallace. The film gives us a singular strategic genius. The record gives us a man who was one part of a rebellion already underway, who won at Stirling Bridge and was crushed at Falkirk less than a year later against superior numbers and complicated politics. * 2 Samuel 11 and 12. David, Bathsheba, Uriah, and the prophet Nathan, who is the supporting character this episode is most interested in. Read the original The written version of this essay is here: Shiny, Heroic, Leader? New essays every week at Upon Further Examination. Free, and it stays free. RockReader If you’re like me, you’ve been told a million times you should read your Bible. That lands about the same as “you should go to the gym.” And here’s what I’ve noticed about both. I’m far more consistent when a friend is going through it with me. That’s what I built RockReader for. You pick a reading plan, connect with a few people you trust, and journal through it together, a day at a time. It’s private by default, so nothing you write is seen unless you decide to share it. Completely free. No subscription, no in-app purchases. rockreader.com, or search RockReader in the Google Play store. Grab a friend and dig into the word together. From the Source If you’re just getting started reading the Bible, or you’ve been a Christian a long time and your Bible has gotten dustier than you’d like, I wrote a study workbook for you. From the Source teaches a four-step method for reading and studying Scripture so you can understand it for yourself, at your own pace. Available at kielharveybooks.com and on Amazon. Everything on Upon Further Examination is free and stays free. If you want to support the work, buy From the Source. What it earns pays for RockReader and for the hours these essays take. Listen and subscribe * Apple Podcasts * Spotify * YouTube * The Second Look show page About Upon Further Examination is a Substack about business, leadership, work, and life as they are actually lived, not as they are supposed to sound. Most of life runs on first impressions. This is the second look. Kiel F. Harvey writes it, reads it, and built RockReader. Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    Shiny, Heroic, Leader? | TSL EP# 11
  6. Aug 17

    You Are Not a Factory | TSL EP# 10

    Description A career spent in and around factories leaves you with real convictions about measurement. Efficiency works. It has made products cheaper, cut waste, raised quality, and lifted productivity, and the Toyota Production System is one of the genuine achievements of industrial engineering. This episode does not argue with any of that. It argues about the border. There is a point where the logic of the plant stops applying to the person, and the difficulty is that nothing announces when you have crossed it. The test case here is personal. A doctor’s warning at thirty-one, eighteen months of logging every calorie, a hundred pounds gone, and then a decision to stop that turned out to matter more than any of the tracking did. That round of tracking succeeded because it had a defined end. Most of the measuring people take up on themselves never gets one. From there the piece widens out to vacations, a marriage between two people who plan very differently, and the parts of being human that produce nothing measurable and are worth the most anyway. The conclusion is not that measurement is bad. It is that measurement is a tool with a job, and a tool with no job left will go find one. What’s inside: a stranger on a plane and what wanting to diagnose him revealed; the case for efficiency, made by someone who believes it; a doctor who did not sugarcoat it; eighteen months in a food logging app and the day it ended; Hawaii, spreadsheets, and the value of an unplanned afternoon; and the one question worth asking before you start measuring anything about yourself. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published August 14, 2026. Running time 11:43. In this episode * 0:00 Billboard and intro * 1:24 A stranger on a plane doing nothing, and why it was impossible to leave alone * 2:16 The machinery we have built for optimizing ourselves, down to scoring our sleep * 3:04 Taiichi Ohno, the Toyota Production System, and the case for efficiency * 3:50 Thirty-one years old, exhausted, and sitting in a doctor’s office * 4:16 A diagnosis delivered without sugarcoating * 5:27 Eighteen months of logging everything, and the decision to stop * 6:30 Two kinds of vacation planner, who reliably marry each other * 6:48 Hawaii, spreadsheets, and what planning is actually for * 7:51 The parts of being human that refuse to produce a number * 9:06 Why a sleep score never tells you that you are finished * 9:25 Where to leave margin, and a concession to the man on the plane * 10:08 Outro The argument, in short Tracking is a tool, and tools are built for jobs. The eighteen months of food logging described in this episode worked because the job was obvious and finite: understand what was actually being eaten, retrain the habits underneath it, and get the numbers back into range. Once that was done there was nothing left for the tool to do, and the durable result was not the weight. It was a changed relationship with food that held up after the measuring stopped. Most self-optimization never gets defined that way. It starts without a finish line, so it cannot succeed, only continue. And it tends to spread into places where measurement was never going to help: friendship, thinking, rest, marriage, an afternoon with nothing scheduled in it. If you take one thing: before you start measuring something about yourself, decide what the end looks like. If you cannot describe the end, you are not optimizing. You are keeping score. Referenced in this episode * Taiichi Ohno and the Toyota Production System. Ohno was the engineer most responsible for turning TPS into the template that modern manufacturing still works from. The episode treats his work as sound and well earned, and takes issue only with where people carry it. * MyFitnessPal. The food logging app behind the eighteen months described here, and the one that got closed on purpose at the end of them. Read the original The written version of this essay is here: You Are Not a Factory. New essays every week at Upon Further Examination. Free, and it stays free. RockReader If you’re like me, you’ve been told a million times you should read your Bible. That lands about the same as “you should go to the gym.” And here’s what I’ve noticed about both. I’m far more consistent when a friend is going through it with me. That’s what I built RockReader for. You pick a reading plan, connect with a few people you trust, and journal through it together, a day at a time. It’s private by default, so nothing you write is seen unless you decide to share it. Completely free. No subscription, no in-app purchases. rockreader.com, or search RockReader in the Google Play store. Grab a friend and dig into the word together. From the Source If you’re just getting started reading the Bible, or you’ve been a Christian a long time and your Bible has gotten dustier than you’d like, I wrote a study workbook for you. From the Source teaches a four-step method for reading and studying Scripture so you can understand it for yourself, at your own pace. Available at kielharveybooks.com and on Amazon. Everything on Upon Further Examination is free and stays free. If you want to support the work, buy From the Source. What it earns pays for RockReader and for the hours these essays take. Listen and subscribe * Apple Podcasts * Spotify * YouTube * The Second Look show page About Upon Further Examination is a Substack about business, leadership, work, and life as they are actually lived, not as they are supposed to sound. Most of life runs on first impressions. This is the second look. Kiel F. Harvey writes it, reads it, and built RockReader. Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    You Are Not a Factory | TSL EP# 10
  7. Aug 10

    The Truth Cynicism Leaves Out | TSL EP # 9

    Description My grandfather had every right to be a cynic. At 13 he hitchhiked from Kansas City to Oregon to escape the chaos at home, sheltering in a barn through a Nebraska blizzard on the way. Navy at 17, a steel mill after the war, 65 years of marriage. A good life built from hard beginnings, and I never heard him complain. I started life on third base, and I’m the one who struggles with cynicism. This essay is about what cynicism actually does. It is a master diagnostician. It names what is wrong, and it is usually right, in part. Then it stops. Cynicism perfectly diagnosed my problems, fixated my worldview on them, and gave me absolutely nowhere to go with them. I learned that during the hardest years of my life, while my youngest daughter Raelin was living with a terminal illness. Cynicism kept being right, and being right never once helped me carry it. What it did do was leave me unavailable to my wife, my kids, and Raelin at the moments they needed me most. What did help was gratitude, and I don’t mean the happiness-tool version. If cynicism is not just a mindset but a way of living that does nothing to improve your situation, then gratitude is not just a way of thinking but a way we choose to live. It won’t change the truth, but it will help you see other truths, other objectively good things, that make reality bearable and, in moments, beautiful. What’s inside: why cynics are usually right, in part; the difference between problem spotting and problem solving; what cynicism cost me during my daughter’s illness; my grandfather’s answer to the key to happiness; and Philippians 4:8-9, written by a man well acquainted with impossible situations. Written and read by Kiel F. Harvey. Originally published August 7, 2026. Running time 12:13. In this episode * 1:04 My grandfather, Marvin * 2:51 Cynics are usually right, in part * 4:13 When cynicism would have been my end * 6:49 An alternative * 8:53 What can you gain? * 10:42 Outro Lines from the episode Cynicism reverses that decision. It prowls through the brokenness in our lives, stacking reason upon reason that action is futile, until it persuades us to surrender the tools still in our hands. Turns out there is a big difference between problem spotting and problem solving. Cynicism perfectly diagnosed my problems, fixated my worldview on them, and gave me absolutely nowhere to go with them. If cynicism is not just a mindset but a way of living that does nothing to improve your situation, then gratitude is not just a way of thinking but a way we choose to live, and it colors every choice we make. Be happy with what you have and don’t want what other people have. Cynicism can tell you truths, but it does nothing to help you bear them. Gratitude won’t change the truth, but it will help you see other truths, other objectively good things, that make reality bearable and, in moments, beautiful. The question, if you only take one thing: cynicism is usually right about what’s wrong, and that was never the problem. If you examine your own life right now, what is cynicism costing you? And where could you replace it with gratitude? Referenced in this episode * Philippians 4:8-9, New Living Translation. Paul, writing to the church in Philippi as they endured suffering, from a man well acquainted with hardship himself. * Sanfilippo syndrome (MPS III), the rare genetic condition Raelin lived with. Families walking this road and the research working toward treatments: Cure Sanfilippo Foundation. Read the original The written version of this essay is here: The Truth Cynicism Leaves Out. New essays every week at Upon Further Examination. Free, and it stays free. RockReader If you’re like me, you’ve been told a million times you should read your Bible. That lands about the same as “you should go to the gym.” And here’s what I’ve noticed about both. I’m far more consistent when a friend is going through it with me. That’s what I built RockReader for. You pick a reading plan, connect with a few people you trust, and journal through it together, a day at a time. It’s private by default, so nothing you write is seen unless you decide to share it. Completely free. No subscription, no in-app purchases. rockreader.com, or search RockReader in the Google Play store. Grab a friend and dig into the word together. From the Source If you’re just getting started reading the Bible, or you’ve been a Christian a long time and your Bible has gotten dustier than you’d like, I wrote a study workbook for you. From the Source teaches a four-step method for reading and studying Scripture so you can understand it for yourself, at your own pace. Available at kielharveybooks.com and on Amazon. Everything on Upon Further Examination is free and stays free. If you want to support the work, buy From the Source. What it earns pays for RockReader and for the hours these essays take. Listen and subscribe * Apple Podcasts * Spotify * YouTube * The Second Look show page About Upon Further Examination is a Substack about business, leadership, work, and life as they are actually lived, not as they are supposed to sound. Most of life runs on first impressions. This is the second look. Kiel F. Harvey writes it, reads it, and built RockReader. Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    The Truth Cynicism Leaves Out | TSL EP # 9
  8. Aug 4

    2009: The Last Time I Got a Job From an Application | TSL EP # 8

    Episode title: 2009: The Last Time I Got a Job From An Application- A Narrated Article In 2009, I filled out an application for a seasonal job at Costco. It was the last job I ever got from an application. Seventeen years and five companies later, every door I have walked through came from a person, not a form. This episode is about what happened after that. Years later, I was the hiring manager. I posted a service technician role, had 320 applications in two hours, and another five hundred that a filter threw out before I ever saw them. I opened the rejected folder out of curiosity. In it were people I wanted to interview, and one of the people I hired out of that pile eventually succeeded me as general manager. A resume can only tell you what somebody has already done. A person is the only thing left in the process that can look at somebody and see what they could do. IN THIS EPISODE ● Why a viral job posting asking for ten years of experience with a seventeen-month-old tool is funnier, and darker, than it looks ● The research finding that dropping degree requirements changed fewer than one in seven hundred hires, and what that says about who is actually reading ● A Costco membership counter, a business card, and two weeks of voicemails ● 320 applications in two hours, five hundred more auto-filtered, and what was actually in the rejected pile ● Why the person allowed to see the applicant is almost never the person allowed to change the filter ● Why “build your network” does not describe what happens to most people who catch a break ● What a hiring manager can do about it on a Tuesday afternoon QUOTES ● “Call me sometime is not an offer. It is how a person politely ends a conversation.” ● “What that man saw, standing at a cash register, was somebody who would crawl over broken glass to take care of his family. There is no field for that on an application.” ● “The filter read what those people had already done, and it had no way at all to see what they could do.” ● “Momentum is not a reason, but it is an explanation.” LINKS * Read the essay * New essays every Friday, free to subscribe * From the Source, my Bible study workbook, plus the free printable companion workbook * RockReader, the Bible journaling app I built, free * Spotify * YouTube REFERENCED IN THIS EPISODE ● Applications per posting rising from an average of 115 in 2022 to 244 (Greenhouse) ● Roughly half of employers automatically screening out resumes with a six-month employment gap (Harvard Business School, “Hidden Workers”) ● Public degree-requirement removals changing fewer than 1 in 700 hires Get full access to Upon Further Examination at kielharvey.substack.com/subscribe

    2009: The Last Time I Got a Job From an Application | TSL EP # 8

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
6 Ratings

About

The first take is almost never the whole truth. So I take the things we accept at face value, whether that's a workplace habit, a headline, or something I believe myself, and look at them long enough to say what actually holds. Some episodes are narrated essays from Upon Further Examination. Others are conversations that go somewhere the writing can't. kielharvey.substack.com