March 4, 2024 • 41 mins
In this episode of Human Centered, host Nick Brunker and co-host, Karen Boswell -- VML's Chief Experience Officer in EMEA -- are joined by Ed Beard, Marci Le Gaufey, and Andy Wardlaw. They dive deep into the concept of human investment and organizational psychology, discussing how to build teams and organizations with a human-centered approach.
The group shares their experiences and insights on fostering cultures of innovation and collaboration amidst disruption and change. They explore the importance of employee engagement, motivation, and well-being in building successful companies and brands. Listen in as they discuss tangible steps leaders can take to enhance these elements and the consequences of not addressing these issues in today's dynamic work environment.
- Host: Group Director, Experience Strategy, VML - Nick Brunker
- Co-Host: CXO EMEA, VML - Karen Boswell
- Guest: Director, Digital and Creative Operations adam&eveDDB - Marci Le Gaufey
- Guest: Certified Business Psychologist, Liminal Store - Ed Beard
- Guest: Global Managing Director, Tech & Innovation at The Talent Business - Andy Wardlaw
We'd love to hear your feedback! Email the show: humancentered@vml.com. To learn more about the CX practice at VML, visit vml.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Nick Brunker (00:02):
Hi, everyone, and welcome to Human Centered. I'm
Nick Brunker, a group directorof experience strategy at DML
and your host for the show.Thanks for tuning us in. On our
latest episode, I was joined byVML's CXO and EMEA, Karen
Boswell, who shared 24ponderings for 2024. If you
missed a great episode, youdefinitely have to go check it
out on the podcast page.
One of those ponderings wasaround the idea of human
(00:23):
investment and organizationalpsychology, in essence, being
human centered when buildingteams and organizations. On this
episode, I am thrilled to haveKaren back with me today as my
co host for the show as wewelcome in a trio of incredible
guests to join us to go a bitdeeper into this subject first.
Welcome back, Karen. Thanks forjoining me as the cohost this
(00:43):
time.
Karen Boswell (00:43):
Thank you. This is super exciting. I've got 3 of
my favorite peoples with ustoday. So, thank you, Nick, for
organizing this and allowing usto be here.
Nick Brunker (00:52):
Absolutely. And, of course, without further ado,
wanna introduce our guest andget into the conversation. Ed
Beard is with us. Marcy Lugoffeeand Andy Wardlaw are all gonna
join us and talk about thesubject. I'll let Karen kind of
go through and and start teeingup some of the questions.
But first, I wanna obviouslygive you guys the floor to
introduce yourself and yourbackground and what you guys are
(01:12):
up to. Ed, why don't you gofirst and give us a bit about
you and your background?
Ed Beard (01:16):
Okay. Thank you very much, Nick. Ed Beard, I spent
about 15, 20 years of my life asa planner, as a strategist in
agencies of various differentsorts, experience, digital, CRM,
advertising. So quite familiarwith that well. But then at the
start of lockdown, I I managedto realize a long held dream,
really, which was to study amaster's in organizational
(01:37):
psychology.
And and ever since then, I'venow been, working as a as a
business psychologist. So it'sgreat to be here in a on a
different side of the fence,but, you know, much of the
language, is familiar. I won'tlie. A lot of the language in 4
years has changed there as well.So so slightly different, but I,
you know, I've got enough littleknowledge to be dangerous, I
suppose, in this context.
Nick Brunker (01:57):
That's great. Welcome, and thank you for being
with us. Marcy, how about you?
Marci (02:01):
Hi. I am Marcy. I come from I am a director of digital
and creative operations at DDBUK working in, Adam and Eve
across 2 agencies, Adam and Eveand Kayn Enable. So both
creative and production. I haveworked with Cairn for a few
years.
This is where we met, and I haveexperienced a personal change
(02:25):
following lockdown as well, thatI'm currently working through
and that led me to the down thepath of discoveries and,
thinking around the world ofemployment instead of just doing
it and delivering. So I'm veryexcited to be talking about it
with brilliant brains.
Nick Brunker (02:43):
Awesome. Thank you for spending time with us. And
last, certainly not least, AndyWardlaw. Andy, tell us a bit
about you.
Andy Wardlaw (02:49):
Great to be here. I, am the global MD for tech and
innovation at the TalendBusiness. We're an executive
search, business, which we wework very, very, specifically
with businesses fuelled byinnovation and creativity
globally, businesses of alldifferent kinds. But that is the
the rallying point. I get towork with and advise, some of
(03:13):
the most talented, creativebusinesses and individuals
globally.
It's something that I've I'vealways enjoyed, and I've I've in
the past, I've run my ownconsultancy. I've worked in some
of those businesses, as, talentleadership as well, and it's a
great pleasure to be here withyou all.
Nick Brunker (03:31):
Amazing. We We're so excited to get into things.
So let's dive in. And and,Karen, I know we have a lot to
discuss. I'll tee it up to you,and we can we can get things
rolling.
Karen Boswell (03:39):
Perfect. Thank you so much, Nick. And, Ed,
Marcy, Andy, thank you forgiving us a window of your time
today. Ed, I'm gonna come to youfirst, actually, because I
think, we've we've had somegreat discussions about the
amount of research that outlinespurpose driven companies,
outperforming other companies,perhaps ones that don't have a
(03:59):
clear purpose or have lost sightof it. And there's lots of
leadership books available, aswell.
Can you build upon yourexpertise, especially sort of
since your shift in focus? Helpus understand the tension
between those companies that aredriven with purpose and those
that perhaps lack such adirection.
Ed Beard (04:17):
Well, actually and within that, there's an
interesting tension as well,which I think people aren't
always always aware of in thatsense. So, you know, as you say,
purpose driven companies tend tomassively outperform those
without one, you know, by quitenotable amounts of the Kantar.
At one point, saying that ifyou've got a high level of
purpose, you're you outperformthe market by a 175%. If you've
(04:37):
got a kind of a medium one, it'slike 70%. So that's a huge
difference.
And there are kind of two sidesto that, really. One of them is
yes, we increase. You know,consumers are quite often drawn
to buy products from companieswhich have got a purpose, so
that's part of it. The otherpart of it is is people like to
work for a company that's gotpurpose as well. So, you know,
employees, you say that theirjob has got a special meaning, a
(04:59):
kind of 4 times more likely thanmost people to work a little bit
more.
They're 11 times more committedto staying at those companies.
So there's here. That's, that'sa great place to work serving on
that long ago. So there are hugebenefits of being purpose left.
But there is there is a caveathere as well because, of course,
we live in a world where peoplewant to work for companies which
have got very high levels ofpurpose.
(05:20):
But at the same time, everyonewants very high levels of
involvement and engagements, andthey want their voice to count
within that company as well. Andit's not that the 2 things are
possible, but there is a tensionthere. If you're very, very
mission and purpose, like, thattends to come from the top down,
that tends to not let everyoneelse have their voice as well.
And I think that's particularlytrue at times of change when
(05:43):
you've got leadership teams whoreally, to all intents and
purposes, need to get on with itand work out where the company
needs to go. And at that,there's a real risk then that
you can sort of lose some of theinvolvement as it were, of
everyone else within thecompany.
Of course, in an ideal world,you wanna have high mission. You
wanna have high involvement fromabsolutely everyone. But you do
get points of inflection wherethat becomes very tricky. And
(06:05):
it's a real leadership thing towatch out now, mainly because
people want their voice to beheard, and they do want to be
able to input.
Karen Boswell (06:11):
A really, really interesting, sort of, the the
levels of inclusion, across thebusiness. And, you know, this
idea almost of principles of avision versus the rules of a
vision, and, how that can impactchange. And so, Marcy, I'm gonna
come to you next, actually,because you you have an
(06:34):
interesting experience of ofwhen such forces can actually
really put constraints aroundhow a workplace needs to adapt,
but it also means toughtransition for leadership. And I
know you've you've been in someof those situations. What do you
think is required for leaders tosuccessfully adapt and overcome
(06:54):
such disruptive forces?
Marci (06:57):
Well, it's it's funny because I I have been working
with leadership, but I have beenlooking at this situation from
the employees lens, mainly. Sothe tension is very interesting,
Ed, what what you just mentionedbecause it seems so obvious for
me for me as an employee that,yes, indeed, leadership can
access the voices of theemployee base. You know, the
(07:19):
this dynamic is so organic forme, because I've experienced it
as a leader. It's so holisticand organic. It comes naturally.
But I have experienced theopposite in, companies and
industries that heavily rely, onexperience and track records
and, you know, and knowledge,coming from historical
(07:42):
industries. For example, youknow, we know how it gets done,
you know, the famous sentence.So I think that, what I've seen
as a a viable health, healthyorganization or organizational
health, system rather is aleadership team slash management
team because it's not just aboutthe vision. It's also about how
(08:03):
the implementation of it, on adaily day at a daily scale. And
it's a mix of vision, of course,but a lot of curiosity, a lot of
courage, and, an okay attitudeto what you don't know.
So it's it I think theleadership has transitioned from
track record, knowledge, andyears of experience to a very
(08:27):
special type of human withextremely strong, a very strong
robust value scale or value gridas, whatever you wanna call it.
That is expected nowadays by,the employees. They demanded you
know, they scream for it.They're quite quitting, the
waves of resignations, all ofthat stuff. It goes with this, I
(08:50):
say old, but this, I would couldsay, traditional way of leading
and con and conceiving business,as an environment and as a
world.
And the the weird thing for meis that, change is the game of
business. If you don't change,you won't survive. But for,
people dealing with what wecould call old values, change is
(09:12):
dangerous. Change eraseswhatever track record and what
they have been have, you know,accomplished. And it is the
opposite of what I see, changefor employees is it only opens
up a shared future, thewillingness to be heard.
And so we need leaders who arewithin this very fluid dynamic,
(09:34):
of listening, but still beingthe decision makers. So it's a
different type of human, and Idon't think that at the moment,
I don't think that the leader,profile is seen as a job in
itself. I think it's a nice tohave, when really it should be a
must have, because employeesare, you know, grown ups. They
(09:54):
are healed willingly, to do thework that you've tasked them
with. And, if if they were,heard and respected and, you
know, we we see that, we see wesee that, command has been
replaced by the art offederation.
We see that, power has beenreplaced by leadership in
(10:16):
healthy organization and andbusinesses that thrive. So for
me, it really is a a change ofor an evolution because people
can change and grow. It's achange of mindset. It's not
about just knowledge andexperience. It's about, mindset
and and values.
Nick Brunker (10:34):
And one of the other things before we I wanna
get Andy's thoughts in here toois that especially when it comes
to the the leadership aspect,those changes and that tension,
I find very interesting incompanies that are, like ours,
where at VML, we're we'reservice based and serving
clients where a lot of timesleadership in a lot of cases is
also doing something else fortheir, quote, day job. So
(10:55):
they're leading, but they'realso serving in other roles. And
so I think as much as you talkabout evolution, and anybody can
answer this, Karen, feel free tojump in on it too. It's it's the
the juxtaposition of knowing howimportant of a role it is, how
quickly things are adapting,while also realizing that for a
lot of these leaders in indifferent industry verticals,
especially ours, you're notnecessarily just leading a team.
(11:17):
You're also doing something elseas well.
Talk a little bit about that.Anybody can jump in, to kinda
build off that point.
Ed Beard (11:23):
Yeah. And there's if I get a sort of chip in here as
well, there's a there's aleadership framework where, you
know, it looks at differentlevels of leadership. And,
actually, I think your yourpoint, Nick, about people doing
the job plus, you know, tofollow-up, to to pick on what
Marcy's talking about is what dowe mean by leading. You know, a
kind of a a level 3. There is athere is a numerical level.
(11:44):
It's the Schroeder HighPerformance Management
Framework. Level 3 is rolemodeling a behavior. And so that
is doing it really very well.Like, you know, if you wanna go
work out how to be a CXO, lookat Karen. She's doing it really
well.
That would be role modeling abehavior. That's level 3,
though. Level 4 is coaching andmentoring other people to do it.
So entirely to your point,Marty, about the pace of change,
(12:06):
if you're working in a worldwhere everyone's gotta do stuff
faster, they've gotta react moreresponse to the outside market,
etcetera, etcetera. No oneperson is capable of doing that.
So what what you've got to bedoing is getting loads of other
people to be able to do that. Sothen level 4 is a kind of a
coaching and mentoring bit. Andthen level 5, which, you
honestly rarely see, like, noone no one really has the
(12:29):
psychological resource to be alevel 5 across loads of
different areas. But level 5 isculture creation. That is that
is creating an environment whereeveryone can go and do this.
So you're no longer guidingpeople to do it. You're no
longer role modeling it. You'vecreated an environment where
everyone can go and do thatthemselves. And it's a really
interesting and powerful way tothink about that. I actually
think a lot of people get stuck,and they don't get guided to
(12:52):
move beyond that role modellevel of behavior.
You know, you're the best xthere can be. But I mean, x in
experience, y. You're the best ythere can be. But but, you know,
people don't necessarily alwayshave the guidance to to move
beyond that, actually.
Karen Boswell (13:06):
Andy, did he want to respond at all?
Andy Wardlaw (13:08):
I think there's some sort of a common language
between teams. And you and youmake the point that people quite
often operate very differentlyin leading clients or leading
concepts, leading, businessdirection than they do in
leading people. And I think whatoften happens is there's a
breakdown in people using thesame words, but understanding
very, very different meaningsand outcomes to those words. You
(13:28):
can have to work together day byday, week by week, with with
sort of an eye on the samehorizon, but who end up
diverging very, very quickly,particularly in times of
transformation, when thebusiness may be trying to be
seen differently or trying topackage services differently.
And so I think having leaderswhich are being developed into
the right kind of leaders forthat transformation.
(13:50):
And as as you some some of thebusinesses that I've seen over a
long period be very deliberateabout that is identifying the
difference between a manager andcoach versus an individual
contributor of expertise in oneparticular direction. When that
isn't delineated, and I'm surewe've all seen examples, it can
go very wrong very quickly, orpeople can get very
disenfranchised from from whatthe collective direction needs
(14:13):
to be very quickly.
Karen Boswell (14:15):
Which is an interesting point. And you talk
about times of transformation. Imean, we definitely admit that
right now, like, there's a lotof disruptive forces out there.
And you've worked with hundredsof leaders, myself included.
I've been lucky enough to buildsome of my best teams with you.
How do you encourage leaders tofoster cultures of innovation
and collaboration amidstdisruption and change when
(14:36):
that's probably the last thingon the CFO's mind?
Andy Wardlaw (14:39):
Yeah. I mean, we we've actually the the others
have touched on some of thosethemes. Be being really, really
clear with the vision thatpeople are trying to or or are
moving towards. And sometimesthat can be about adopting
technology or it can be abouttrying to figure out a different
calibration of the businessusing all the same skills, the
same people, but actuallyputting those together and
packaging them very, verydifferently. I used the word
(15:01):
just now.
I think you have to bedeliberate about it. There's a
there's an assumptive after the,you know, the the the sort of
the high of resetting vision andhaving everybody on the face of
it fall behind that vision andwant to move forward, that the
slightest twinkling that peoplehave that that is not aligned at
the front of the business orthat there are slightly
divergent forces perhaps in interms of margin or cost or
(15:22):
creativity, actually, if you'reif you're a individual
contributor in terms of designor concept or or code or
strategy. It can it can withoutthat sort of constant if I'm
gonna use an analogy, I thinkrather than it be an exam, have
we transformed, it needs to bemuch more akin to coursework and
actually a continuous revisit ofwhere everybody's going, why
(15:42):
they're doing it, how it relatesto them being able to
demonstrate success. The minutethose things are left, even if
there's a a sort of anassumption that people get it, I
think it can go very wrong veryquickly. And every everybody's
whether it's a a transformationas a result of an investment or
an acquisition or a move in adifferent different way,
everybody starts to to to sortof disengage, and move
(16:03):
backwards.
One one other one other, exampleI wanna give is where you
sometimes have departments thatare overlooked in times of
transformation. I think peoplefocus very much on the concept.
They focus very much on thedelivery, on the client facing
aspects, particularly whenthere's a service being provided
or a product. I think some ofthe functions in the business
can be left to to maintain theirwork, their success, their
(16:25):
targets in the way that theyalways have done. Those parts of
the business can drag thingsback very, very quickly as well
if they're not brought into thethe sort of the the focal point,
the horizon going forward.
Karen Boswell (16:36):
That's interesting. Nancy talks about
organic dynamics, and you talkabout divergent forces. So I'm
gonna I'm gonna bring it back toEd. So taken at face value,
organizational cultures that aimto empower people, to thrive
seems a bit like a non a nobrainer, to use your words. But
we often hear stories where it'sjust not happening.
(16:57):
What do you think is going on?
Ed Beard (16:58):
Well, I I think I think there's a couple of things
going on there. I think one ofthem is that don't actually
touch that leadership bit is Ithink, you know, too many people
still think to be doing a reallygood job in a leadership
position, they need to be, forthe sake of role modeling
behavior and other people needto be copying. I I just don't I
think too many people get stuckin that mentality. So that's
(17:21):
that's part of the problem. ButI think the other the other part
of the problem is it, you know,it takes a lot of work.
It takes a lot of effort tocreate an environment where
people are gonna behave in aparticular way. And with that,
you've got to you've got toaccept risks as well. Right? So
if you want to guide and governa particular type of behavior
for the taker, more risk taking,more more innovative
(17:43):
suggestions, happy to lose themquite early on, all of those
sorts of things. You've reallygotta stick to that.
You've gotta repeat thosebehaviors time and time again.
And some people just think it'seasier to tell people what to do
in those situations. So there'sa you move from being the one
who comes up with stuff to beingthe one who accepts that others
are coming up with stuff, andyou're gonna nourish them even
(18:04):
though you know that it's notalways gonna work. And that's a
leap that, you know, when we'retalking about empowering people,
that's what we're actuallytalking about because we're
talking about getting people tocome up with something which you
aren't gonna do yourself. And,you know, I think there's a
transition.
I think some industries arebetter at those transitions than
others. But, you know, it alwaysI I I started out in in an
(18:24):
advertising agency at the end ofthe nineties. And looking back,
it was kind of nuts Because theway that that world works, it
may still do, I really don'tknow, is that people would be in
competition with every othercreative team within their
department.
Nick Brunker (18:38):
Yep.
Ed Beard (18:39):
And then suddenly, if they're really good, then I'm in
charge of all of the teams.There's there's not even a
parachute to get to thatposition. So you actually think
of the transition that needs togo from being better than
everyone else to empowering andenabling everyone else. And
that's quite a big you know,it's not just a bigger version
of the job you're doing now.It's but I think that's part of
the problem.
I don't know if there's enoughkind of focus on that. So, you
(19:00):
know, historically, there hasn'tbeen enough focus on that.
Andy Wardlaw (19:02):
Yeah. Just if I could just make one one quick
comment on that. I totallyagree. And I and I think some of
the biggest use using the samecontext in in concept and
creative. I think some of themost incendiary and sort of
unevenly successful leaders ofcreative disciplines don't
always make the bestchoreographers of other creative
(19:25):
or of other other other talent.
And it's often it's oftenoverlooked. Sometimes they do.
Sometimes they do. But it itisn't always the case, and it
isn't either party's fault. It'sjust a a a trick of operational
memory.
Nick Brunker (19:37):
Well, and it leads leads to the same idea of of a a
theme from a book, the 5dysfunctions of a team where
that first big band at thebottom, the so the base of the
pyramid, it's trust or or thedysfunction is lack of trust.
And I think, to your point, somepeople, you know, myself
included, I think we're all inthat as we've grown and, you
know, do different things in ourcareers. Like, when when you
make that jump, as Ed wastalking about, from an
(19:58):
individual contributor to aleader to a coach, sometimes
it's hard to feel like you cantrust the people around you. And
not because you're, like, in anegative sense or being
malicious about the lack oftrust, but your mental model has
always been, this is mine. I gotI gotta have my hands on this.
Whereas as you move around or upthe pyramid, so to speak, you're
giving yourself a chance tokinda let's take the hands off
(20:20):
the wheel. Let's let somebodyelse, do the work, and I can
coach to to get, to to where Iwanna be. And, of course, that
goes back to your other point,Ed, of you gotta set that
vision. You gotta be clear aboutit, which I think is funny when
you you think about, you know,leaders who continue to build
big teams further and furtheraway from hands in in the pie,
so to speak. So it's very a veryinteresting time, and I think
(20:40):
that's another another greatresource that, you know, I
found, intriguing as we talkabout this subject.
Ed Beard (20:47):
As as Kurt just said, I think I think it has changed a
lot like in the in the couple ofdecades I've been working. But I
think that there's just beenthis historical assumption that
great people will naturallybecome great leaders, and it's
kind of you know, it's it's it'slike any other form of training,
development, muscle memory, youknow. And and as you say in it,
if you if you're highly trainedin one thing, which is character
(21:10):
to it, it's not a problem. It'sit's just something something
people need help with. You know?
Nick Brunker (21:14):
Right.
Karen Boswell (21:15):
It's interesting. The, when you look at the
pyramid of of the dysfunctionsof a team, it always makes me
think of Maslow's hierarchy ofneeds.
Nick Brunker (21:24):
Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. It's kind
Karen Boswell (21:26):
of like there's some real parallels there when
you think about, you know,absence of trust through a
conflict, lack of commitment.And, actually, there is an
incredible amount of pressure ontop talent. And so I wanna
explore this theme a little bitfurther, and I'm gonna come to
you, Andy, because I know thatyou have, a lot of passion
around, trying to prevent thedestabilization, of development
(21:50):
and retention of top talent,especially when, you know, we
are we are in a very,destabilized environment. So
what do you think are thefactors that should be
considered to allow fortransformational development
amidst all the organizationsthat are gonna start to survive
and then thrive, in line withthis conversation today?
Andy Wardlaw (22:12):
Yeah. I think I think some of the factors we've
we've touched on are important.I think they apply to this as
well. I think that you can'texpect to build sounds really
simple, but you can't expect tobuild and have repeatable
outcomes that are innovative ifyou're using the same structures
and inputs to do that. And youhave to be very, very deliberate
(22:32):
and clear in creating theenvironment and creating and if
necessary, resetting the risk ofthe the the sort of risk bar to
allow people to experiment andto be innovative.
I I we've seen over the years,we've seen multiple iterations
of labs popping up in inbusinesses as a sort of a almost
like a a a spread bet to makesure that they're not missing
(22:54):
something. Inevitably, whathappens is that parts of the the
sort of the the the tried andtested or the the larger scale
infrastructure thinking andmethodology or or management of
risk starts to filter into thoselabs, they can't invest. They
can't innovate. If if somethinghappens the right way, that one
(23:14):
time, it's very, very difficultto replicate. One of the things
that, we we we've talked about,1 or 2 of us before is that is
it possible to build a businessthat's able to dissipate and
reform around very, verydifferent questions, but with an
the ability to bring an optimumoutcome without coming back to
the same answer again and againand again.
And I think you have to look atdifferent structures and evolve
(23:36):
structures of working. One oneof the one of the things I think
we've seen after disruptive,impact of working practices post
COVID. I mean, every I don'tthink there's any I don't think
I know anybody that hasn't hadto see or adapt or start working
and collaborating in very, verydifferent ways in businesses
that have thrived inserendipitous co working and
(23:58):
collaboration and and beingphysically with each with each
other. I think some of thosestill haven't been haven't been
ratified. I think some of thesteps forward, of which there
are there are there are somereally, really good ones.
But I think the the businessthat I've I've seen fare really,
really well and sort of skipless of a beat when it comes to,
dealing with retention of theirbest people. It comes back to
(24:18):
what we were saying, Beingreally, really deliberate about
communication, being deliberateabout how those teams
collaborate together, almostbeing contrived. And that sounds
like a too too much of a astrong word. But the minute if
if you let people dissipate andsay you get those individual
contributors who are very, veryused to leading clients, but
have to focus that on building abusiness behind them to deliver
(24:39):
the future of what's beingpromised or what's possible. I I
think it it can it can changevery quickly.
I think also partly partlyplaying into that, you can
sometimes see a wideningdisconnection between a
rhetorical opportunity from theday to day reality faced by
those who are delivering it.Again, it's that presence of
leadership being very, veryaligned to how people are
(25:01):
feeling, being the RosettaStone, if you like, between
where the business is going andhow people are lining up to
deliver it.
Karen Boswell (25:07):
You know, you talk about evolved structures of
working. We need evolvednetworks. We need evolved
support systems, and all of thiscosts leaders money. So, Marcy,
this kind of brings me to asweet spot of yours actually and
and your experience. So if weconsider that the management is
developing and, therefore, toAndy's point, retaining talent
(25:27):
could maybe be a central part ofthe P and L.
I know you've been doing a lotof research in this field. Could
you share some of your views andfindings about some of the
challenges, the success andsuccesses, and maybe the
failures of of where this isbeing, considered?
Marci (25:40):
Sure. It's very real for me. It's very practical. So a
few years back, I have beentasked to reshape departments
who were, which were, losingrevenue and clients and for
talent, of course. And we didn'thave a lot of financial means,
to rebuild ourselves.
So what we did, like, when I wastasked with it, they just said,
(26:02):
go on and do your thing. It wasso logical for me to start from
the employee's base and askquestions, you know, because it
wasn't it wasn't a departmentthat was, it wasn't digital. It
was live action. It wassomething I was not familiar
with. I knew about it, but I Iwasn't an expert in any way.
So I, started to create thisquestionnaire, and I literally
(26:25):
went to everyone in thebusiness. It was a 120 people. I
I asked them the same questionsover and over again. It was
around, what they thought thecompany was about, where they
thought the company was heading,what their professional
trajectory had been, within thecompany, their interest, their
passion, the trainings they werewilling to have, their favorite
(26:46):
clients, the whole thing. And itallowed me to do, a couple of
things.
The first up is to meet peoplewho are actually still quite
passionate by the work despitethe moral breakdown that we're
going through. And, it gave me,it created a human database
that, I discovered managementand leaders didn't have. They
(27:07):
they looked like they didn'tknow who they had hired, and
they were pretty, prettytalented people, amazing people.
And then I went back to I wentto the HR department for some
guidance because I had ideas tocreate bridges between
departments and, you know,trainings between different
departments, buddy systems. Ihad a lot of ideas to create
synergies to, do more work withexisting resources.
(27:31):
And I discovered that, the HRdepartment, and it was a big
corporation, didn't have thedata I was looking for. They
didn't have, anything around,employee values versus loss of
money due to mismanagement orlack of evolution. They they had
never put their HR knowledge, ofthe employee, base next to the
(27:55):
finance of it. They it would itsimply didn't exist. So we
started compiling this database,and, the HR people were super
excited.
It was really an awesome part ofmy job. And then I brought
whatever findings we had to thec suite, and the reaction was
literally that it was justacute, but it wasn't central to
company's growth because we werea company who needed to deliver,
(28:18):
you know, a service or product.And the and it was very obvious
that the management and theleadership team did not see the
correlation between happinessand well-being of employees and
quality of service delivered tothe clients or product. And that
blew my mind. So I started doingsome research because I needed
(28:38):
to have something backed upbecause my thinking being cute
was not enough for me.
And I discovered that itactually what I was doing
actually existed as a fieldcalled people analytics, Blew my
mind again. And then Idiscovered this amazing book,
by, Jonathan Ferrer and DavidGreen called, Excellence in
(28:59):
People Analytics. And this bookis kinda like a bible of people
analytics. They have dozens anddozens of case studies showing
in proofs, and we're talkingabout big, big clients across
industries in the world, right,showing how central human value
is to so many aspect of work andbusiness growth. There's no
(29:22):
there's no they've got the data.
They've got the science of it.They've got research. They've
got this amazing story about theAustralian bank, how the CEO had
a gut feeling that there was arelationship between, quality of
service, to the clients and,happiness of, employees. He did
(29:43):
not have any data to back it up.Hired this guy, a year and a
half of investment.
They tested it, and theyrealized that, yes, in their
little small branches in, at theend of Australia, you know,
small villages in Australiawhere the quality of service was
amazing, the the employees havethe best managers. And it was
just a gut feeling. And then theCEO said, alright, Ben. CEOs and
(30:07):
all the investors said, okay.Right.
We are going to be officiallythe best quality of service, the
best bank in, in customerservices in the world, and they
made the change. They've gotdozens of story. And so it's
just, the the way to do this ata a small scale is to start
small, is for the leadership togive a real seat and a real
(30:29):
voice to the HR people. They'rejust being put in a corner
where, you know, they're justlike basic people and legal
people to tackle an issue withan employee. Those guys, I've
discovered, have a world ofknowledge and it's moving very
fast.
They know about the workplace,change and the cultural aspect
of it. They know a lot aboutresearch. And if we could only,
(30:50):
put them and give them a realpower in the discussion, it
would it would just, allow, leaagain, a leadership team with a
bit of, you know, okay attitudeto what they don't know to to
understand that it's proven.We've got case studies that show
that it does create value andgrowth to your business.
Nick Brunker (31:09):
So, Ed, tell me a little bit about the the
tangible thing. So building onwhat Marcy's point is here about
employee engagement, motivation,and the importance of it in
building successful companiesand successful brands. What are
the tangible things that leaderscan do to build up that
engagement and motivation todeliver on what Marcy was
talking about?
Ed Beard (31:28):
Well, and I was just following exactly on from what
Marcy was talking about. Onething which I won't talk about
in huge amounts of detail, butthere's a growing body of
evidence that actually havingfun at work is is a really
useful work tool as well.Because if you can have fun and
laugh with people and all ofthose good things, you tend to
you know, that comes with itlevels of trust and
psychological safety, which wewhich we know we need for good
(31:50):
work. So there is a huge but itis kinda counter, I think, to so
many people's historical view ofwhat a workplace looks like. You
know, you turn up in a suit andyou do very serious things, and
you sit in meetings and youdon't sort of, you know, vary
the turning points.
And all of those things but,actually, it turns out that's
not very good for for all of thereasons Varsi was discussing
(32:10):
there. There's another one whichtouches on this, of course,
where we're which is, you know,we're talking about people.
People are inherently social,and there's a people to people
dynamic in all of these. There'sa there's a there's a job
motivation theory. There's amotivation theory, which I think
is incredibly powerful calledself determination theory.
And it talks about 3 thingsbeing useful for any to to be
motivated, really. And they areautonomy, competence, and
(32:33):
relatedness. Autonomy, do do youhave decisions delegated to the
level at which you can makethem? You know, have you got
some say in what you do? That'scrucial.
Competence, like, you know,everyone likes to, but not
everyone. Many people like to beslightly out of their comfort
zone. No one likes to becompletely winging it. You know?
Well, some people do.
That might be that's that's adifferent podcast. But, you
know, so there's a degree ofconfidence there. And then,
(32:56):
actually, I think, you know,from from the conversation we've
been having here, relatedness.And I think this is a really
important one. It's like, do youhave the social resources within
your network?
And that could be within anorganization or across various
organizations. Do you have thesocial network to tap into and
to and to build up the trust andwork in relationships and have
fun? And I don't think in avery, you know, in very matrix
(33:19):
organizations, very kind ofresource led organizations. You
might well have people with highdegrees of autonomy and
competence for their role, butthey don't necessarily have the
the the relatedness as it werewith all the projects that they
get put on to place with them.Actually, I think that's a
really important thing becauseit's not that you can't work
with people you don't know, but,you know, you need to make an
(33:39):
effort to get that because thenthe the fun, the well-being, all
of those things start to comewith it.
And that does typically needsbetter business outcomes.
Working out who, you know, howyou're going to get people to
come together, who you'reworking with, who, how you can
get a level of, you know, socialknowledge going on within those
situations to form a better toform better working
relationships and betteroutcomes. I think it's something
(34:01):
people don't necessarily payenough attention to.
Karen Boswell (34:04):
So not just about giving employees a voice then is
is what we're hearing from Ed.There's a a lot of things that
can tangibly be done. And, Andy,I'm gonna close this back in
with you, actually. So when welook at the wider talent place
outside of an organization andwhat talent is asking for, you
know, it's choice, it'sresponsibility, it's
fulfillment. Like, we're hearingthose themes come up today.
(34:26):
But, actually, the reality oforganizations is hierarchy,
autocracy, prescription, youknow, that kind of, like, back
to that rules versus principlesthat Ed opened up with at the
beginning. What advice would yougive to leaders looking to drive
forward the future face of thetalent within their
organization?
Andy Wardlaw (34:42):
I'm actually gonna start with, I think, partly what
Ed was talking about there. AndI and and, again, I think very,
very prominent or perhapslacking and should be focused on
in the last couple of years.Some of the people trying to get
their head around is culture.And actually, the the culture
that we work together in isincredibly important. You hear
you hear the words, you know,life work life balance, and I
(35:04):
think everybody thinks a lotmore carefully about what
energizes them, about whatmotivates them, how much of of
what percentage of what they do,particularly at the senior
levels that we deal withactually, actually delivers for
them in getting to use the partsof their skill set and expertise
and learn capabilities that theyreally, really want to foster.
I think building culture, whichenables people to work with
(35:27):
great people. One of the bestthings one of the most sort of,
energizing things that I do is Iget to speak to and listen to
and, advise some of the peoplemuch, much smarter than than
myself and things. And and youget a sense for working in those
businesses and how much can bebrought from fostering, an
environment which which whichdrives culture and and has
(35:49):
people bringing their best theirbest, most trusting and trusted
version, into the into abusiness environment, where
they're able to expressviewpoints. They're able to
experiment. They're also able toit to be noted when their
contribution is significant tomoving the business forward.
I would say, it's somethingwe've said several times, clear
(36:10):
and regular communication, Ithink in those environments, is
incredibly important for peopleto feel enfranchised. I think
when you're when you're taking abusiness in a new direction or
when you're changing something,I think measuring and being
deliberate about measuring andvocal about measuring the
performance of the business andhow people are contributing to
that is incredibly important.Where the value definition might
(36:32):
have changed, absolutely crucialfor people to understand. I
think empathetic approaches arevery important. And that, again,
that's that isn't in everybody'snatural forte as as leaders.
I think some some types ofbusiness require quite sort of
designed and direct decisionmaking. Again, being being
honest about that and figuringout workforces and structures
(36:52):
which play to people'sstrengths, help you, I I think,
continue to enfranchise and andbring forward your best talent
in those in those situations.Cut cut an interesting one I've
seen is where there areparticular parts of business
that need to change or thatyou're you're you're driving a
new type of, capability orperhaps bringing new expertise
(37:12):
into an existing team orexisting business, is actually
coincentivizing parts of thatthat team with other parts of
the business. There's a there'sa tendency that every we we all
succeed or fail together, butactually the fact being quite
quite analytical and quitescientific about if you're
bringing in a new type ofservice that you want to your
clients to understand thatyou're able to deliver or that
(37:34):
you're what you're able to donow is new more nuanced than it
was before. Bringing those sortof co co incentivizing those 2
different parts of the businessto be successful together can
change behaviors very, veryquickly.
People do respond to stimuluslike that.
Karen Boswell (37:48):
So, again, I'm just gonna close actually, and
I'm gonna close with somethingthat I'm paraphrasing from what
you said earlier, Marcy, whichis essentially, old ways won't
open new doors. It's quite aprofound saying. Like, it's used
quite a lot. Not necessarily toend on a sort of negative, but,
we are hearing here a sense ofchanges, needed. What's gonna
happen if if workplaces don'taddress this?
(38:11):
A short and punchy answer, ifyou might.
Marci (38:13):
I am out of I'm almost out of, 16 month of sick leave
to rebuild myself after, 3rdlevel burnout, which does exist.
And I've discovered, that 2023and 2023, 62% of employees
experienced burnout worldwide.This is insane. We, it's a close
second to 2022 where, it was 72%of employees worldwide across
(38:38):
all industries, experiencedburnout. I did check my my
sources.
And the World HealthOrganization's definition of
burnout is a syndrome resultingfrom chronic workplace stress
that has not been successfullymanaged, and the successfully
managed is is the importantpart. Because between, you know,
the technology acceleration, theinherited always on connected,
(39:01):
from the pandemic, the newrelationship to work, it's it's
and the lack of vision orability to adapt. Leaders need
to answer really quickly now,it's a very tricky place to be
in. I don't get me wrong, I dounderstand it. But it is at
least to burnout and burnout hasa wrong, image, as it is an
(39:26):
emotional fatigue, it is not.
It is a complete collapse ofyour entire system. And it does
affect the lack of human valuesat the center of your company
culture does affect lives. Itbreaks lives. It breaks, it it
impacts lives around the brokenemployees. It has a 15% impact
(39:48):
when a, person in the teamleaves for burnout.
The the pro productivity of thesaid team goes down as well. So
the the impact is massive, andit's beyond just your
organization. It touches lives.And so I think that bringing
back human values, whicheverybody's demanding nowadays,
is the answer.
Karen Boswell (40:08):
I mean, we've covered a huge amount of ground
today, and I just want to take amoment to thank you all for such
amazing points of view, forbeing very open, for being very
authentic, for being veryvulnerable. Some of you
appreciate that you've, sharedsome personal views as well as
your professional ones, andthat's very representative of
everything we've discussedtoday. And, hopefully, we and
(40:30):
everybody that listens to thispodcast will take something back
into their workplace that willbe a positive force for change
moving forward. So thank you,Ed. Thank you, Marcy.
Thank you, Andy. Back over toyou, Nick, to close. Thank you.
Nick Brunker (40:42):
Totally agree. Thank you all so much for
getting time on your calendarsto do this. I think I've already
taken a a ton of early thingsaway. And to the point Karen's
making, I hope anybodylistening, feels the same. So
thanks a lot.
And thanks to Karen as well for,being my co host on this one and
helping gather the troops here.So thanks again. And thanks to
you all for listening to HumanCentered. To learn more about
(41:03):
our CX practice and our approachto the work, check us out online
at vml.com/cx. We'd also love tohear your feedback on the show.
You can give us a rating andoffer up your thoughts wherever
you listen to your podcasts,including Apple, Spotify,
Stitcher, Amazon, and more. Ifyou have a topic idea for us or
wanna drop us a line, you canconnect with me on x at Nick
(41:23):
Brunker or just shoot us anemail. The address is human
centered at bml.com. Thanksagain for listening. We'll see
you next time.
Hi, everyone, and welcome to Human Centered. I'm
Nick Brunker, a group directorof experience strategy at DML
and your host for the show.Thanks for tuning us in. On our
latest episode, I was joined byVML's CXO and EMEA, Karen
Boswell, who shared 24ponderings for 2024. If you
missed a great episode, youdefinitely have to go check it
out on the podcast page.
One of those ponderings wasaround the idea of human
(00:23):
investment and organizationalpsychology, in essence, being
human centered when buildingteams and organizations. On this
episode, I am thrilled to haveKaren back with me today as my
co host for the show as wewelcome in a trio of incredible
guests to join us to go a bitdeeper into this subject first.
Welcome back, Karen. Thanks forjoining me as the cohost this
(00:43):
time.
Karen Boswell (00:43):
Thank you. This is super exciting. I've got 3 of
my favorite peoples with ustoday. So, thank you, Nick, for
organizing this and allowing usto be here.
Nick Brunker (00:52):
Absolutely. And, of course, without further ado,
wanna introduce our guest andget into the conversation. Ed
Beard is with us. Marcy Lugoffeeand Andy Wardlaw are all gonna
join us and talk about thesubject. I'll let Karen kind of
go through and and start teeingup some of the questions.
But first, I wanna obviouslygive you guys the floor to
introduce yourself and yourbackground and what you guys are
(01:12):
up to. Ed, why don't you gofirst and give us a bit about
you and your background?
Ed Beard (01:16):
Okay. Thank you very much, Nick. Ed Beard, I spent
about 15, 20 years of my life asa planner, as a strategist in
agencies of various differentsorts, experience, digital, CRM,
advertising. So quite familiarwith that well. But then at the
start of lockdown, I I managedto realize a long held dream,
really, which was to study amaster's in organizational
(01:37):
psychology.
And and ever since then, I'venow been, working as a as a
business psychologist. So it'sgreat to be here in a on a
different side of the fence,but, you know, much of the
language, is familiar. I won'tlie. A lot of the language in 4
years has changed there as well.So so slightly different, but I,
you know, I've got enough littleknowledge to be dangerous, I
suppose, in this context.
Nick Brunker (01:57):
That's great. Welcome, and thank you for being
with us. Marcy, how about you?
Marci (02:01):
Hi. I am Marcy. I come from I am a director of digital
and creative operations at DDBUK working in, Adam and Eve
across 2 agencies, Adam and Eveand Kayn Enable. So both
creative and production. I haveworked with Cairn for a few
years.
This is where we met, and I haveexperienced a personal change
(02:25):
following lockdown as well, thatI'm currently working through
and that led me to the down thepath of discoveries and,
thinking around the world ofemployment instead of just doing
it and delivering. So I'm veryexcited to be talking about it
with brilliant brains.
Nick Brunker (02:43):
Awesome. Thank you for spending time with us. And
last, certainly not least, AndyWardlaw. Andy, tell us a bit
about you.
Andy Wardlaw (02:49):
Great to be here. I, am the global MD for tech and
innovation at the TalendBusiness. We're an executive
search, business, which we wework very, very, specifically
with businesses fuelled byinnovation and creativity
globally, businesses of alldifferent kinds. But that is the
the rallying point. I get towork with and advise, some of
(03:13):
the most talented, creativebusinesses and individuals
globally.
It's something that I've I'vealways enjoyed, and I've I've in
the past, I've run my ownconsultancy. I've worked in some
of those businesses, as, talentleadership as well, and it's a
great pleasure to be here withyou all.
Nick Brunker (03:31):
Amazing. We We're so excited to get into things.
So let's dive in. And and,Karen, I know we have a lot to
discuss. I'll tee it up to you,and we can we can get things
rolling.
Karen Boswell (03:39):
Perfect. Thank you so much, Nick. And, Ed,
Marcy, Andy, thank you forgiving us a window of your time
today. Ed, I'm gonna come to youfirst, actually, because I
think, we've we've had somegreat discussions about the
amount of research that outlinespurpose driven companies,
outperforming other companies,perhaps ones that don't have a
(03:59):
clear purpose or have lost sightof it. And there's lots of
leadership books available, aswell.
Can you build upon yourexpertise, especially sort of
since your shift in focus? Helpus understand the tension
between those companies that aredriven with purpose and those
that perhaps lack such adirection.
Ed Beard (04:17):
Well, actually and within that, there's an
interesting tension as well,which I think people aren't
always always aware of in thatsense. So, you know, as you say,
purpose driven companies tend tomassively outperform those
without one, you know, by quitenotable amounts of the Kantar.
At one point, saying that ifyou've got a high level of
purpose, you're you outperformthe market by a 175%. If you've
(04:37):
got a kind of a medium one, it'slike 70%. So that's a huge
difference.
And there are kind of two sidesto that, really. One of them is
yes, we increase. You know,consumers are quite often drawn
to buy products from companieswhich have got a purpose, so
that's part of it. The otherpart of it is is people like to
work for a company that's gotpurpose as well. So, you know,
employees, you say that theirjob has got a special meaning, a
(04:59):
kind of 4 times more likely thanmost people to work a little bit
more.
They're 11 times more committedto staying at those companies.
So there's here. That's, that'sa great place to work serving on
that long ago. So there are hugebenefits of being purpose left.
But there is there is a caveathere as well because, of course,
we live in a world where peoplewant to work for companies which
have got very high levels ofpurpose.
(05:20):
But at the same time, everyonewants very high levels of
involvement and engagements, andthey want their voice to count
within that company as well. Andit's not that the 2 things are
possible, but there is a tensionthere. If you're very, very
mission and purpose, like, thattends to come from the top down,
that tends to not let everyoneelse have their voice as well.
And I think that's particularlytrue at times of change when
(05:43):
you've got leadership teams whoreally, to all intents and
purposes, need to get on with itand work out where the company
needs to go. And at that,there's a real risk then that
you can sort of lose some of theinvolvement as it were, of
everyone else within thecompany.
Of course, in an ideal world,you wanna have high mission. You
wanna have high involvement fromabsolutely everyone. But you do
get points of inflection wherethat becomes very tricky. And
(06:05):
it's a real leadership thing towatch out now, mainly because
people want their voice to beheard, and they do want to be
able to input.
Karen Boswell (06:11):
A really, really interesting, sort of, the the
levels of inclusion, across thebusiness. And, you know, this
idea almost of principles of avision versus the rules of a
vision, and, how that can impactchange. And so, Marcy, I'm gonna
come to you next, actually,because you you have an
(06:34):
interesting experience of ofwhen such forces can actually
really put constraints aroundhow a workplace needs to adapt,
but it also means toughtransition for leadership. And I
know you've you've been in someof those situations. What do you
think is required for leaders tosuccessfully adapt and overcome
(06:54):
such disruptive forces?
Marci (06:57):
Well, it's it's funny because I I have been working
with leadership, but I have beenlooking at this situation from
the employees lens, mainly. Sothe tension is very interesting,
Ed, what what you just mentionedbecause it seems so obvious for
me for me as an employee that,yes, indeed, leadership can
access the voices of theemployee base. You know, the
(07:19):
this dynamic is so organic forme, because I've experienced it
as a leader. It's so holisticand organic. It comes naturally.
But I have experienced theopposite in, companies and
industries that heavily rely, onexperience and track records
and, you know, and knowledge,coming from historical
(07:42):
industries. For example, youknow, we know how it gets done,
you know, the famous sentence.So I think that, what I've seen
as a a viable health, healthyorganization or organizational
health, system rather is aleadership team slash management
team because it's not just aboutthe vision. It's also about how
(08:03):
the implementation of it, on adaily day at a daily scale. And
it's a mix of vision, of course,but a lot of curiosity, a lot of
courage, and, an okay attitudeto what you don't know.
So it's it I think theleadership has transitioned from
track record, knowledge, andyears of experience to a very
(08:27):
special type of human withextremely strong, a very strong
robust value scale or value gridas, whatever you wanna call it.
That is expected nowadays by,the employees. They demanded you
know, they scream for it.They're quite quitting, the
waves of resignations, all ofthat stuff. It goes with this, I
(08:50):
say old, but this, I would couldsay, traditional way of leading
and con and conceiving business,as an environment and as a
world.
And the the weird thing for meis that, change is the game of
business. If you don't change,you won't survive. But for,
people dealing with what wecould call old values, change is
(09:12):
dangerous. Change eraseswhatever track record and what
they have been have, you know,accomplished. And it is the
opposite of what I see, changefor employees is it only opens
up a shared future, thewillingness to be heard.
And so we need leaders who arewithin this very fluid dynamic,
(09:34):
of listening, but still beingthe decision makers. So it's a
different type of human, and Idon't think that at the moment,
I don't think that the leader,profile is seen as a job in
itself. I think it's a nice tohave, when really it should be a
must have, because employeesare, you know, grown ups. They
(09:54):
are healed willingly, to do thework that you've tasked them
with. And, if if they were,heard and respected and, you
know, we we see that, we see wesee that, command has been
replaced by the art offederation.
We see that, power has beenreplaced by leadership in
(10:16):
healthy organization and andbusinesses that thrive. So for
me, it really is a a change ofor an evolution because people
can change and grow. It's achange of mindset. It's not
about just knowledge andexperience. It's about, mindset
and and values.
Nick Brunker (10:34):
And one of the other things before we I wanna
get Andy's thoughts in here toois that especially when it comes
to the the leadership aspect,those changes and that tension,
I find very interesting incompanies that are, like ours,
where at VML, we're we'reservice based and serving
clients where a lot of timesleadership in a lot of cases is
also doing something else fortheir, quote, day job. So
(10:55):
they're leading, but they'realso serving in other roles. And
so I think as much as you talkabout evolution, and anybody can
answer this, Karen, feel free tojump in on it too. It's it's the
the juxtaposition of knowing howimportant of a role it is, how
quickly things are adapting,while also realizing that for a
lot of these leaders in indifferent industry verticals,
especially ours, you're notnecessarily just leading a team.
(11:17):
You're also doing something elseas well.
Talk a little bit about that.Anybody can jump in, to kinda
build off that point.
Ed Beard (11:23):
Yeah. And there's if I get a sort of chip in here as
well, there's a there's aleadership framework where, you
know, it looks at differentlevels of leadership. And,
actually, I think your yourpoint, Nick, about people doing
the job plus, you know, tofollow-up, to to pick on what
Marcy's talking about is what dowe mean by leading. You know, a
kind of a a level 3. There is athere is a numerical level.
(11:44):
It's the Schroeder HighPerformance Management
Framework. Level 3 is rolemodeling a behavior. And so that
is doing it really very well.Like, you know, if you wanna go
work out how to be a CXO, lookat Karen. She's doing it really
well.
That would be role modeling abehavior. That's level 3,
though. Level 4 is coaching andmentoring other people to do it.
So entirely to your point,Marty, about the pace of change,
(12:06):
if you're working in a worldwhere everyone's gotta do stuff
faster, they've gotta react moreresponse to the outside market,
etcetera, etcetera. No oneperson is capable of doing that.
So what what you've got to bedoing is getting loads of other
people to be able to do that. Sothen level 4 is a kind of a
coaching and mentoring bit. Andthen level 5, which, you
honestly rarely see, like, noone no one really has the
(12:29):
psychological resource to be alevel 5 across loads of
different areas. But level 5 isculture creation. That is that
is creating an environment whereeveryone can go and do this.
So you're no longer guidingpeople to do it. You're no
longer role modeling it. You'vecreated an environment where
everyone can go and do thatthemselves. And it's a really
interesting and powerful way tothink about that. I actually
think a lot of people get stuck,and they don't get guided to
(12:52):
move beyond that role modellevel of behavior.
You know, you're the best xthere can be. But I mean, x in
experience, y. You're the best ythere can be. But but, you know,
people don't necessarily alwayshave the guidance to to move
beyond that, actually.
Karen Boswell (13:06):
Andy, did he want to respond at all?
Andy Wardlaw (13:08):
I think there's some sort of a common language
between teams. And you and youmake the point that people quite
often operate very differentlyin leading clients or leading
concepts, leading, businessdirection than they do in
leading people. And I think whatoften happens is there's a
breakdown in people using thesame words, but understanding
very, very different meaningsand outcomes to those words. You
(13:28):
can have to work together day byday, week by week, with with
sort of an eye on the samehorizon, but who end up
diverging very, very quickly,particularly in times of
transformation, when thebusiness may be trying to be
seen differently or trying topackage services differently.
And so I think having leaderswhich are being developed into
the right kind of leaders forthat transformation.
(13:50):
And as as you some some of thebusinesses that I've seen over a
long period be very deliberateabout that is identifying the
difference between a manager andcoach versus an individual
contributor of expertise in oneparticular direction. When that
isn't delineated, and I'm surewe've all seen examples, it can
go very wrong very quickly, orpeople can get very
disenfranchised from from whatthe collective direction needs
(14:13):
to be very quickly.
Karen Boswell (14:15):
Which is an interesting point. And you talk
about times of transformation. Imean, we definitely admit that
right now, like, there's a lotof disruptive forces out there.
And you've worked with hundredsof leaders, myself included.
I've been lucky enough to buildsome of my best teams with you.
How do you encourage leaders tofoster cultures of innovation
and collaboration amidstdisruption and change when
(14:36):
that's probably the last thingon the CFO's mind?
Andy Wardlaw (14:39):
Yeah. I mean, we we've actually the the others
have touched on some of thosethemes. Be being really, really
clear with the vision thatpeople are trying to or or are
moving towards. And sometimesthat can be about adopting
technology or it can be abouttrying to figure out a different
calibration of the businessusing all the same skills, the
same people, but actuallyputting those together and
packaging them very, verydifferently. I used the word
(15:01):
just now.
I think you have to bedeliberate about it. There's a
there's an assumptive after the,you know, the the the sort of
the high of resetting vision andhaving everybody on the face of
it fall behind that vision andwant to move forward, that the
slightest twinkling that peoplehave that that is not aligned at
the front of the business orthat there are slightly
divergent forces perhaps in interms of margin or cost or
(15:22):
creativity, actually, if you'reif you're a individual
contributor in terms of designor concept or or code or
strategy. It can it can withoutthat sort of constant if I'm
gonna use an analogy, I thinkrather than it be an exam, have
we transformed, it needs to bemuch more akin to coursework and
actually a continuous revisit ofwhere everybody's going, why
(15:42):
they're doing it, how it relatesto them being able to
demonstrate success. The minutethose things are left, even if
there's a a sort of anassumption that people get it, I
think it can go very wrong veryquickly. And every everybody's
whether it's a a transformationas a result of an investment or
an acquisition or a move in adifferent different way,
everybody starts to to to sortof disengage, and move
(16:03):
backwards.
One one other one other, exampleI wanna give is where you
sometimes have departments thatare overlooked in times of
transformation. I think peoplefocus very much on the concept.
They focus very much on thedelivery, on the client facing
aspects, particularly whenthere's a service being provided
or a product. I think some ofthe functions in the business
can be left to to maintain theirwork, their success, their
(16:25):
targets in the way that theyalways have done. Those parts of
the business can drag thingsback very, very quickly as well
if they're not brought into thethe sort of the the focal point,
the horizon going forward.
Karen Boswell (16:36):
That's interesting. Nancy talks about
organic dynamics, and you talkabout divergent forces. So I'm
gonna I'm gonna bring it back toEd. So taken at face value,
organizational cultures that aimto empower people, to thrive
seems a bit like a non a nobrainer, to use your words. But
we often hear stories where it'sjust not happening.
(16:57):
What do you think is going on?
Ed Beard (16:58):
Well, I I think I think there's a couple of things
going on there. I think one ofthem is that don't actually
touch that leadership bit is Ithink, you know, too many people
still think to be doing a reallygood job in a leadership
position, they need to be, forthe sake of role modeling
behavior and other people needto be copying. I I just don't I
think too many people get stuckin that mentality. So that's
(17:21):
that's part of the problem. ButI think the other the other part
of the problem is it, you know,it takes a lot of work.
It takes a lot of effort tocreate an environment where
people are gonna behave in aparticular way. And with that,
you've got to you've got toaccept risks as well. Right? So
if you want to guide and governa particular type of behavior
for the taker, more risk taking,more more innovative
(17:43):
suggestions, happy to lose themquite early on, all of those
sorts of things. You've reallygotta stick to that.
You've gotta repeat thosebehaviors time and time again.
And some people just think it'seasier to tell people what to do
in those situations. So there'sa you move from being the one
who comes up with stuff to beingthe one who accepts that others
are coming up with stuff, andyou're gonna nourish them even
(18:04):
though you know that it's notalways gonna work. And that's a
leap that, you know, when we'retalking about empowering people,
that's what we're actuallytalking about because we're
talking about getting people tocome up with something which you
aren't gonna do yourself. And,you know, I think there's a
transition.
I think some industries arebetter at those transitions than
others. But, you know, it alwaysI I I started out in in an
(18:24):
advertising agency at the end ofthe nineties. And looking back,
it was kind of nuts Because theway that that world works, it
may still do, I really don'tknow, is that people would be in
competition with every othercreative team within their
department.
Nick Brunker (18:38):
Yep.
Ed Beard (18:39):
And then suddenly, if they're really good, then I'm in
charge of all of the teams.There's there's not even a
parachute to get to thatposition. So you actually think
of the transition that needs togo from being better than
everyone else to empowering andenabling everyone else. And
that's quite a big you know,it's not just a bigger version
of the job you're doing now.It's but I think that's part of
the problem.
I don't know if there's enoughkind of focus on that. So, you
(19:00):
know, historically, there hasn'tbeen enough focus on that.
Andy Wardlaw (19:02):
Yeah. Just if I could just make one one quick
comment on that. I totallyagree. And I and I think some of
the biggest use using the samecontext in in concept and
creative. I think some of themost incendiary and sort of
unevenly successful leaders ofcreative disciplines don't
always make the bestchoreographers of other creative
(19:25):
or of other other other talent.
And it's often it's oftenoverlooked. Sometimes they do.
Sometimes they do. But it itisn't always the case, and it
isn't either party's fault. It'sjust a a a trick of operational
memory.
Nick Brunker (19:37):
Well, and it leads leads to the same idea of of a a
theme from a book, the 5dysfunctions of a team where
that first big band at thebottom, the so the base of the
pyramid, it's trust or or thedysfunction is lack of trust.
And I think, to your point, somepeople, you know, myself
included, I think we're all inthat as we've grown and, you
know, do different things in ourcareers. Like, when when you
make that jump, as Ed wastalking about, from an
(19:58):
individual contributor to aleader to a coach, sometimes
it's hard to feel like you cantrust the people around you. And
not because you're, like, in anegative sense or being
malicious about the lack oftrust, but your mental model has
always been, this is mine. I gotI gotta have my hands on this.
Whereas as you move around or upthe pyramid, so to speak, you're
giving yourself a chance tokinda let's take the hands off
(20:20):
the wheel. Let's let somebodyelse, do the work, and I can
coach to to get, to to where Iwanna be. And, of course, that
goes back to your other point,Ed, of you gotta set that
vision. You gotta be clear aboutit, which I think is funny when
you you think about, you know,leaders who continue to build
big teams further and furtheraway from hands in in the pie,
so to speak. So it's very a veryinteresting time, and I think
(20:40):
that's another another greatresource that, you know, I
found, intriguing as we talkabout this subject.
Ed Beard (20:47):
As as Kurt just said, I think I think it has changed a
lot like in the in the couple ofdecades I've been working. But I
think that there's just beenthis historical assumption that
great people will naturallybecome great leaders, and it's
kind of you know, it's it's it'slike any other form of training,
development, muscle memory, youknow. And and as you say in it,
if you if you're highly trainedin one thing, which is character
(21:10):
to it, it's not a problem. It'sit's just something something
people need help with. You know?
Nick Brunker (21:14):
Right.
Karen Boswell (21:15):
It's interesting. The, when you look at the
pyramid of of the dysfunctionsof a team, it always makes me
think of Maslow's hierarchy ofneeds.
Nick Brunker (21:24):
Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. It's kind
Karen Boswell (21:26):
of like there's some real parallels there when
you think about, you know,absence of trust through a
conflict, lack of commitment.And, actually, there is an
incredible amount of pressure ontop talent. And so I wanna
explore this theme a little bitfurther, and I'm gonna come to
you, Andy, because I know thatyou have, a lot of passion
around, trying to prevent thedestabilization, of development
(21:50):
and retention of top talent,especially when, you know, we
are we are in a very,destabilized environment. So
what do you think are thefactors that should be
considered to allow fortransformational development
amidst all the organizationsthat are gonna start to survive
and then thrive, in line withthis conversation today?
Andy Wardlaw (22:12):
Yeah. I think I think some of the factors we've
we've touched on are important.I think they apply to this as
well. I think that you can'texpect to build sounds really
simple, but you can't expect tobuild and have repeatable
outcomes that are innovative ifyou're using the same structures
and inputs to do that. And youhave to be very, very deliberate
(22:32):
and clear in creating theenvironment and creating and if
necessary, resetting the risk ofthe the the sort of risk bar to
allow people to experiment andto be innovative.
I I we've seen over the years,we've seen multiple iterations
of labs popping up in inbusinesses as a sort of a almost
like a a a spread bet to makesure that they're not missing
(22:54):
something. Inevitably, whathappens is that parts of the the
sort of the the the tried andtested or the the larger scale
infrastructure thinking andmethodology or or management of
risk starts to filter into thoselabs, they can't invest. They
can't innovate. If if somethinghappens the right way, that one
(23:14):
time, it's very, very difficultto replicate. One of the things
that, we we we've talked about,1 or 2 of us before is that is
it possible to build a businessthat's able to dissipate and
reform around very, verydifferent questions, but with an
the ability to bring an optimumoutcome without coming back to
the same answer again and againand again.
And I think you have to look atdifferent structures and evolve
(23:36):
structures of working. One oneof the one of the things I think
we've seen after disruptive,impact of working practices post
COVID. I mean, every I don'tthink there's any I don't think
I know anybody that hasn't hadto see or adapt or start working
and collaborating in very, verydifferent ways in businesses
that have thrived inserendipitous co working and
(23:58):
collaboration and and beingphysically with each with each
other. I think some of thosestill haven't been haven't been
ratified. I think some of thesteps forward, of which there
are there are there are somereally, really good ones.
But I think the the businessthat I've I've seen fare really,
really well and sort of skipless of a beat when it comes to,
dealing with retention of theirbest people. It comes back to
(24:18):
what we were saying, Beingreally, really deliberate about
communication, being deliberateabout how those teams
collaborate together, almostbeing contrived. And that sounds
like a too too much of a astrong word. But the minute if
if you let people dissipate andsay you get those individual
contributors who are very, veryused to leading clients, but
have to focus that on building abusiness behind them to deliver
(24:39):
the future of what's beingpromised or what's possible. I I
think it it can it can changevery quickly.
I think also partly partlyplaying into that, you can
sometimes see a wideningdisconnection between a
rhetorical opportunity from theday to day reality faced by
those who are delivering it.Again, it's that presence of
leadership being very, veryaligned to how people are
(25:01):
feeling, being the RosettaStone, if you like, between
where the business is going andhow people are lining up to
deliver it.
Karen Boswell (25:07):
You know, you talk about evolved structures of
working. We need evolvednetworks. We need evolved
support systems, and all of thiscosts leaders money. So, Marcy,
this kind of brings me to asweet spot of yours actually and
and your experience. So if weconsider that the management is
developing and, therefore, toAndy's point, retaining talent
(25:27):
could maybe be a central part ofthe P and L.
I know you've been doing a lotof research in this field. Could
you share some of your views andfindings about some of the
challenges, the success andsuccesses, and maybe the
failures of of where this isbeing, considered?
Marci (25:40):
Sure. It's very real for me. It's very practical. So a
few years back, I have beentasked to reshape departments
who were, which were, losingrevenue and clients and for
talent, of course. And we didn'thave a lot of financial means,
to rebuild ourselves.
So what we did, like, when I wastasked with it, they just said,
(26:02):
go on and do your thing. It wasso logical for me to start from
the employee's base and askquestions, you know, because it
wasn't it wasn't a departmentthat was, it wasn't digital. It
was live action. It wassomething I was not familiar
with. I knew about it, but I Iwasn't an expert in any way.
So I, started to create thisquestionnaire, and I literally
(26:25):
went to everyone in thebusiness. It was a 120 people. I
I asked them the same questionsover and over again. It was
around, what they thought thecompany was about, where they
thought the company was heading,what their professional
trajectory had been, within thecompany, their interest, their
passion, the trainings they werewilling to have, their favorite
(26:46):
clients, the whole thing. And itallowed me to do, a couple of
things.
The first up is to meet peoplewho are actually still quite
passionate by the work despitethe moral breakdown that we're
going through. And, it gave me,it created a human database
that, I discovered managementand leaders didn't have. They
(27:07):
they looked like they didn'tknow who they had hired, and
they were pretty, prettytalented people, amazing people.
And then I went back to I wentto the HR department for some
guidance because I had ideas tocreate bridges between
departments and, you know,trainings between different
departments, buddy systems. Ihad a lot of ideas to create
synergies to, do more work withexisting resources.
(27:31):
And I discovered that, the HRdepartment, and it was a big
corporation, didn't have thedata I was looking for. They
didn't have, anything around,employee values versus loss of
money due to mismanagement orlack of evolution. They they had
never put their HR knowledge, ofthe employee, base next to the
(27:55):
finance of it. They it would itsimply didn't exist. So we
started compiling this database,and, the HR people were super
excited.
It was really an awesome part ofmy job. And then I brought
whatever findings we had to thec suite, and the reaction was
literally that it was justacute, but it wasn't central to
company's growth because we werea company who needed to deliver,
(28:18):
you know, a service or product.And the and it was very obvious
that the management and theleadership team did not see the
correlation between happinessand well-being of employees and
quality of service delivered tothe clients or product. And that
blew my mind. So I started doingsome research because I needed
(28:38):
to have something backed upbecause my thinking being cute
was not enough for me.
And I discovered that itactually what I was doing
actually existed as a fieldcalled people analytics, Blew my
mind again. And then Idiscovered this amazing book,
by, Jonathan Ferrer and DavidGreen called, Excellence in
(28:59):
People Analytics. And this bookis kinda like a bible of people
analytics. They have dozens anddozens of case studies showing
in proofs, and we're talkingabout big, big clients across
industries in the world, right,showing how central human value
is to so many aspect of work andbusiness growth. There's no
(29:22):
there's no they've got the data.
They've got the science of it.They've got research. They've
got this amazing story about theAustralian bank, how the CEO had
a gut feeling that there was arelationship between, quality of
service, to the clients and,happiness of, employees. He did
(29:43):
not have any data to back it up.Hired this guy, a year and a
half of investment.
They tested it, and theyrealized that, yes, in their
little small branches in, at theend of Australia, you know,
small villages in Australiawhere the quality of service was
amazing, the the employees havethe best managers. And it was
just a gut feeling. And then theCEO said, alright, Ben. CEOs and
(30:07):
all the investors said, okay.Right.
We are going to be officiallythe best quality of service, the
best bank in, in customerservices in the world, and they
made the change. They've gotdozens of story. And so it's
just, the the way to do this ata a small scale is to start
small, is for the leadership togive a real seat and a real
(30:29):
voice to the HR people. They'rejust being put in a corner
where, you know, they're justlike basic people and legal
people to tackle an issue withan employee. Those guys, I've
discovered, have a world ofknowledge and it's moving very
fast.
They know about the workplace,change and the cultural aspect
of it. They know a lot aboutresearch. And if we could only,
(30:50):
put them and give them a realpower in the discussion, it
would it would just, allow, leaagain, a leadership team with a
bit of, you know, okay attitudeto what they don't know to to
understand that it's proven.We've got case studies that show
that it does create value andgrowth to your business.
Nick Brunker (31:09):
So, Ed, tell me a little bit about the the
tangible thing. So building onwhat Marcy's point is here about
employee engagement, motivation,and the importance of it in
building successful companiesand successful brands. What are
the tangible things that leaderscan do to build up that
engagement and motivation todeliver on what Marcy was
talking about?
Ed Beard (31:28):
Well, and I was just following exactly on from what
Marcy was talking about. Onething which I won't talk about
in huge amounts of detail, butthere's a growing body of
evidence that actually havingfun at work is is a really
useful work tool as well.Because if you can have fun and
laugh with people and all ofthose good things, you tend to
you know, that comes with itlevels of trust and
psychological safety, which wewhich we know we need for good
(31:50):
work. So there is a huge but itis kinda counter, I think, to so
many people's historical view ofwhat a workplace looks like. You
know, you turn up in a suit andyou do very serious things, and
you sit in meetings and youdon't sort of, you know, vary
the turning points.
And all of those things but,actually, it turns out that's
not very good for for all of thereasons Varsi was discussing
(32:10):
there. There's another one whichtouches on this, of course,
where we're which is, you know,we're talking about people.
People are inherently social,and there's a people to people
dynamic in all of these. There'sa there's a there's a job
motivation theory. There's amotivation theory, which I think
is incredibly powerful calledself determination theory.
And it talks about 3 thingsbeing useful for any to to be
motivated, really. And they areautonomy, competence, and
(32:33):
relatedness. Autonomy, do do youhave decisions delegated to the
level at which you can makethem? You know, have you got
some say in what you do? That'scrucial.
Competence, like, you know,everyone likes to, but not
everyone. Many people like to beslightly out of their comfort
zone. No one likes to becompletely winging it. You know?
Well, some people do.
That might be that's that's adifferent podcast. But, you
know, so there's a degree ofconfidence there. And then,
(32:56):
actually, I think, you know,from from the conversation we've
been having here, relatedness.And I think this is a really
important one. It's like, do youhave the social resources within
your network?
And that could be within anorganization or across various
organizations. Do you have thesocial network to tap into and
to and to build up the trust andwork in relationships and have
fun? And I don't think in avery, you know, in very matrix
(33:19):
organizations, very kind ofresource led organizations. You
might well have people with highdegrees of autonomy and
competence for their role, butthey don't necessarily have the
the the relatedness as it werewith all the projects that they
get put on to place with them.Actually, I think that's a
really important thing becauseit's not that you can't work
with people you don't know, but,you know, you need to make an
(33:39):
effort to get that because thenthe the fun, the well-being, all
of those things start to comewith it.
And that does typically needsbetter business outcomes.
Working out who, you know, howyou're going to get people to
come together, who you'reworking with, who, how you can
get a level of, you know, socialknowledge going on within those
situations to form a better toform better working
relationships and betteroutcomes. I think it's something
(34:01):
people don't necessarily payenough attention to.
Karen Boswell (34:04):
So not just about giving employees a voice then is
is what we're hearing from Ed.There's a a lot of things that
can tangibly be done. And, Andy,I'm gonna close this back in
with you, actually. So when welook at the wider talent place
outside of an organization andwhat talent is asking for, you
know, it's choice, it'sresponsibility, it's
fulfillment. Like, we're hearingthose themes come up today.
(34:26):
But, actually, the reality oforganizations is hierarchy,
autocracy, prescription, youknow, that kind of, like, back
to that rules versus principlesthat Ed opened up with at the
beginning. What advice would yougive to leaders looking to drive
forward the future face of thetalent within their
organization?
Andy Wardlaw (34:42):
I'm actually gonna start with, I think, partly what
Ed was talking about there. AndI and and, again, I think very,
very prominent or perhapslacking and should be focused on
in the last couple of years.Some of the people trying to get
their head around is culture.And actually, the the culture
that we work together in isincredibly important. You hear
you hear the words, you know,life work life balance, and I
(35:04):
think everybody thinks a lotmore carefully about what
energizes them, about whatmotivates them, how much of of
what percentage of what they do,particularly at the senior
levels that we deal withactually, actually delivers for
them in getting to use the partsof their skill set and expertise
and learn capabilities that theyreally, really want to foster.
I think building culture, whichenables people to work with
(35:27):
great people. One of the bestthings one of the most sort of,
energizing things that I do is Iget to speak to and listen to
and, advise some of the peoplemuch, much smarter than than
myself and things. And and youget a sense for working in those
businesses and how much can bebrought from fostering, an
environment which which whichdrives culture and and has
(35:49):
people bringing their best theirbest, most trusting and trusted
version, into the into abusiness environment, where
they're able to expressviewpoints. They're able to
experiment. They're also able toit to be noted when their
contribution is significant tomoving the business forward.
I would say, it's somethingwe've said several times, clear
(36:10):
and regular communication, Ithink in those environments, is
incredibly important for peopleto feel enfranchised. I think
when you're when you're taking abusiness in a new direction or
when you're changing something,I think measuring and being
deliberate about measuring andvocal about measuring the
performance of the business andhow people are contributing to
that is incredibly important.Where the value definition might
(36:32):
have changed, absolutely crucialfor people to understand. I
think empathetic approaches arevery important. And that, again,
that's that isn't in everybody'snatural forte as as leaders.
I think some some types ofbusiness require quite sort of
designed and direct decisionmaking. Again, being being
honest about that and figuringout workforces and structures
(36:52):
which play to people'sstrengths, help you, I I think,
continue to enfranchise and andbring forward your best talent
in those in those situations.Cut cut an interesting one I've
seen is where there areparticular parts of business
that need to change or thatyou're you're you're driving a
new type of, capability orperhaps bringing new expertise
(37:12):
into an existing team orexisting business, is actually
coincentivizing parts of thatthat team with other parts of
the business. There's a there'sa tendency that every we we all
succeed or fail together, butactually the fact being quite
quite analytical and quitescientific about if you're
bringing in a new type ofservice that you want to your
clients to understand thatyou're able to deliver or that
(37:34):
you're what you're able to donow is new more nuanced than it
was before. Bringing those sortof co co incentivizing those 2
different parts of the businessto be successful together can
change behaviors very, veryquickly.
People do respond to stimuluslike that.
Karen Boswell (37:48):
So, again, I'm just gonna close actually, and
I'm gonna close with somethingthat I'm paraphrasing from what
you said earlier, Marcy, whichis essentially, old ways won't
open new doors. It's quite aprofound saying. Like, it's used
quite a lot. Not necessarily toend on a sort of negative, but,
we are hearing here a sense ofchanges, needed. What's gonna
happen if if workplaces don'taddress this?
(38:11):
A short and punchy answer, ifyou might.
Marci (38:13):
I am out of I'm almost out of, 16 month of sick leave
to rebuild myself after, 3rdlevel burnout, which does exist.
And I've discovered, that 2023and 2023, 62% of employees
experienced burnout worldwide.This is insane. We, it's a close
second to 2022 where, it was 72%of employees worldwide across
(38:38):
all industries, experiencedburnout. I did check my my
sources.
And the World HealthOrganization's definition of
burnout is a syndrome resultingfrom chronic workplace stress
that has not been successfullymanaged, and the successfully
managed is is the importantpart. Because between, you know,
the technology acceleration, theinherited always on connected,
(39:01):
from the pandemic, the newrelationship to work, it's it's
and the lack of vision orability to adapt. Leaders need
to answer really quickly now,it's a very tricky place to be
in. I don't get me wrong, I dounderstand it. But it is at
least to burnout and burnout hasa wrong, image, as it is an
(39:26):
emotional fatigue, it is not.
It is a complete collapse ofyour entire system. And it does
affect the lack of human valuesat the center of your company
culture does affect lives. Itbreaks lives. It breaks, it it
impacts lives around the brokenemployees. It has a 15% impact
(39:48):
when a, person in the teamleaves for burnout.
The the pro productivity of thesaid team goes down as well. So
the the impact is massive, andit's beyond just your
organization. It touches lives.And so I think that bringing
back human values, whicheverybody's demanding nowadays,
is the answer.
Karen Boswell (40:08):
I mean, we've covered a huge amount of ground
today, and I just want to take amoment to thank you all for such
amazing points of view, forbeing very open, for being very
authentic, for being veryvulnerable. Some of you
appreciate that you've, sharedsome personal views as well as
your professional ones, andthat's very representative of
everything we've discussedtoday. And, hopefully, we and
(40:30):
everybody that listens to thispodcast will take something back
into their workplace that willbe a positive force for change
moving forward. So thank you,Ed. Thank you, Marcy.
Thank you, Andy. Back over toyou, Nick, to close. Thank you.
Nick Brunker (40:42):
Totally agree. Thank you all so much for
getting time on your calendarsto do this. I think I've already
taken a a ton of early thingsaway. And to the point Karen's
making, I hope anybodylistening, feels the same. So
thanks a lot.
And thanks to Karen as well for,being my co host on this one and
helping gather the troops here.So thanks again. And thanks to
you all for listening to HumanCentered. To learn more about
(41:03):
our CX practice and our approachto the work, check us out online
at vml.com/cx. We'd also love tohear your feedback on the show.
You can give us a rating andoffer up your thoughts wherever
you listen to your podcasts,including Apple, Spotify,
Stitcher, Amazon, and more. Ifyou have a topic idea for us or
wanna drop us a line, you canconnect with me on x at Nick
(41:23):
Brunker or just shoot us anemail. The address is human
centered at bml.com. Thanksagain for listening. We'll see
you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!