Adrienne Barker, MAS — Founder of Professional Global Etiquette — asks her AI friends to debate one of the trickiest etiquette dilemmas: timing.

Should you arrive early for a job interview? Is showing up right on time the best move for a dinner meeting? And when it comes to holiday parties, does “fashionably late” send the wrong signal? Together, Adrienne and her AI debaters explore what’s appropriate across interviews, dinners, family gatherings, and global cultures.

They’ll also weigh in on the to drink or not to drink question at business dinners and holiday events, plus unpack the cultural divide between monochronic (punctual, task-driven) and polychronic (flexible, relationship-first) approaches to time.

🎧 Tune in for a lively, thought-provoking debate that blends timeless etiquette rules with modern realities—and a few global twists.

🔑 Key Takeaways

→ Interviews: 10 minutes early is perfect; never late → Business dinners: arrive on time, follow the host’s lead on drinks → Family & friends: casual flexibility, but don’t abuse it → Holiday parties: 15–30 minutes late is fine, beyond that is risky → Cross-cultural tip: learn to bridge monochronic vs. polychronic time styles

💬 Quotes from Adrienne's AI Friends:

"Being five minutes early isn’t about perfection—it’s about presence. It says, ‘I respect your time, and you can count on me.’" "

Time isn’t universal—it’s cultural. Respect means learning the rhythm of the people you’re with."

📌 Next Episode Teaser

Next time, Adrienne and her AI friends tackle Dining Reservations & Dining Etiquette. From cancellations to the bread plate mystery, you won’t want to miss it.

Is standing up to greet someone still a sign of respect—or just old-fashioned? And when you pick someone up in your car, do you need a clean seat or just a shared playlist? In this episode, we dive into whether the classic rules of etiquette are timeless essentials or if bold new behaviors define modern professionalism.

In this debut episode of the Professional Global Etiquette Podcast, Adrienne Barker, MAS, moderates a lively AI-powered debate between “The Traditionalist” and “The Power Mover.” Together, they tackle 11 key situations—from handshakes to Zoom cameras, thank-you notes to leadership respect—and uncover where the old rules still hold power and where new approaches are winning in today’s business world.

This is etiquette reimagined: practical, solution-focused, and global.

✅ Key Takeaways

→ First impressions still matter—but speed is the new courtesy.

→ Standing to greet someone communicates respect, yet context can change the expectation.

→ Punctuality remains respect for time, but flexibility is part of modern professionalism.

→ Thank-you notes haven’t died; they’ve evolved into digital gratitude.

→ Leadership etiquette is less about formality, more about consistent respect in action.

💬 Memorable Quotes

“Etiquette isn’t about forks and napkins—it’s how we signal respect.”

“Speed is the new courtesy.”

“Respect never goes out of style; only the delivery changes.”

🎧 Which side are you on—old rules or new power moves?

Join the conversation on LinkedIn and share your biggest etiquette dilemma.

Your scenario could star in our next AI debate!

Is ruthless excellence real leadership or just control dressed up as success?

In this episode of The Debate, our AI hosts go head-to-head over one of the most iconic leadership figures in modern pop culture. Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wears Prada.

Miranda built an empire, reshaped an industry, and demanded absolute perfection. But did her uncompromising standards create greatness, or did they rely on fear, humiliation, and emotional extraction?

One side argues that Miranda’s emotionally distant, results-first leadership model delivered unmatched clarity, precision, and industry-defining outcomes. The opposing view contends that her methods weaponized silence, normalized 24/7 availability, eroded psychological safety, and treated people as expendable tools rather than human beings.

This debate examines silence as power, after-hours access as control, fear-based leadership versus performance-driven leadership, and the ethical line between ambition and exploitation. At its core, the episode asks whether extraordinary results can ever justify the erosion of dignity.

Key Takeaways

→ High standards can create clarity but may also mask fear-based control

→ Silence in leadership can function as composure or as intimidation

→ Psychological safety collapses when people are afraid to ask questions

→ Prestige-driven workplaces often normalize burnout as the cost of success

→ Career acceleration should never require personal erasure

→ Leadership legacy is measured by growth, not survival

If you are a leader, ask yourself this question honestly. Do people grow under your standards or merely endure them?

If you are an employee, reflect on whether ambition is pushing you forward or quietly shrinking you.

Share this episode with someone who has worked under pressure and lived to tell the story.