Decoding HR Technology with Mark Cunningham

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Welcome to the Time and Motion podcast with me, your
host, lee Stevens.
For over 25 years, I've workedwith businesses all over the
world to improve the technologyand the people within them.
In this podcast, I share someof my experiences and I chat to
guests who generously sharetheir stories of how to or, in
some cases, how not to live aproductive life.
I hope you enjoy the show.

(00:28):
Before we start the show, Iwant to talk to you about
Workforcerycom.
Workforcery helps mid-sizedbusinesses to stay compliant and
legal with both labour andsafety laws in New Zealand and

(00:49):
Australia.
It completely removes allpaperwork, spreadsheets and
manual processes by providingone easy to use tool to capture
and store your employee data.
Using features like the JobOffer Wizard lets managers and
business owners generate andsign employment contracts online
within minutes.
It also allows candidates toprovide all the information you

(01:10):
need from them online using yourown tailored application and
new joiner forms, which you canthen integrate with your payroll
system.
You can also create, manage andassign tasks to ensure that
nothing is missed throughout theemployee life cycle.
If you want to know more, headover to Workforcerycom to book a
demo, and if you mention thetime and motion podcast, you'll

(01:30):
get your first month free.
Mark, good morning or goodevening?
I've lost track of which one isit.
It's evening here.
Yeah, good morning to you.
I'm calling you from a dark,gloomy Christchurch morning and
you're in sunny Newcastle, or?

Speaker 2 (01:49):
not so sunny from what you just said.
Well, today is actually me, butyeah, it's getting, it's still
light, so it's light about 9.30here at this time of year, so
that helps.
Yeah, nice night.

Speaker 1 (02:03):
Yeah, so CEO at Anchorstone Consulting.
So before we kind of go intoyour world, just tell us a bit
about what Anchorstone is andsome of the clients you look
after.

Speaker 2 (02:12):
Yeah, so we're, I guess, an HR advisory.
I mean, we start with thetechnology but we do advisory
and strategic advice around theimplementation of HR technology,
but really the last thing welook at is the HR technology.
From my experience, a lot of itwas just failures or challenges

(02:34):
were around the peopleprocessing the data.
So as part of the Anchorstonekind of modus operandi, it is
literally trying to figure out.
You know, people want to investin technology but they don't
necessarily understand what ittakes for them to make it
successful.
And then obviously there's achallenge where it doesn't, in

(02:54):
their eyes, work.
They think it's broken, whenactually a lot of the time it's
them right.
So the customer things, it'sthe partner and the product,
when in reality it's acombination of all three usually
, but the customer themselveshasn't looked at it from their
angle.
So our business is trying tobring what we have as real life
expertise.
So we're not.
We have, we've been onconsultancies and we've been on

(03:17):
the technology side, but mostoften not we've been the
customer and we've had to be theleaders of transformation and
technology change.
So Anchorstone was born fromthat principle, which was there
was very few people out there inthe market who brought that
real life expertise andobviously having on you for a
long time and you've got thatkind of you can put it into
layman's terms and businesslanguage and that's just

(03:41):
something that still doesn'treally exist within that ERP
technology space in any shape orform, really, because it's a
sales tool more than anything.
So, yeah, anchorstone is thatsort of business, it's that
consultancy advisory, justusually in the early stages of
implementation or selectionaround the product and just

(04:03):
trying to think about why areyou doing this?
What's actually broken?
What are you trying to fix?
What's the right thing to do?
Because a lot of people buyeverything and they don't always
need everything and that canlead to a large cost and a poor
implementation if there's thingsthat they just didn't need,
that they don't value.
So we're trying to do thatearly thinking, strategic vision

(04:26):
and then we'll help with thenext action and we can deliver.
We're very strong on programmanagement, but the reality is
our job is just trying to makesure that they're set on the
right path and if they need usto hang around, it's probably to
manage a bigger partner.
So that internal projectcapability doesn't really exist
in a lot of organisations.
Why would it?
It's not their business.

(04:47):
So we try to bring a bit of thatmanaging the partner, but not
necessarily managing theimplementation, but always from
the customer side.
So if we went into the customeras much as we're a consultancy
partner, as odd as it may sound,our job is to try and help the
customer be successful.
So the management of thepartners and themselves right,
protecting them from themselvessometimes because we can.

Speaker 1 (05:10):
So we'll talk a bit about who some of those partners
are and who the key players are, and obviously, yourself being
in the UK and serving thatmarket, probably slightly
different to some of theorganisations, or maybe not some
of the organisations that serveAustralia and New Zealand.
So before we do that, let'sstart with yourself.
So let's go back, hopefully nottoo many years, so where did

(05:32):
you grow up and what was yourearly life like for?

Speaker 2 (05:34):
you.
I grew up mostly in Glasgow andScotland and the west of
Scotland, you know.
So I was there probably till Idon't know, early 30s, when I
started to move around.
But yeah, I mean, yeah, I'm anold child, so it's just me,
selfish, self-centered, all thatgood stuff, you know.

(05:54):
So I'm told and I can see sometraits as to why.
You know, I'm a little bit okayin my own company as much as
I'm with other people.
But yeah, yeah, 20 odd years,I've got a large group of
friends though, from that partof the world.
We've stuck together throughschool and beyond.
It's quite fortunate I've gotthis sort of quorum of 15 people

(06:17):
that you can just rely on, evenif you don't see them regularly
, because I've moved away about2007 really.
So I've been out of Scotland asa someone that lives here for
15, 16 years.
But yeah, just me, a smallfamily.
Obviously my parents and I hadthe kind of close knit, smaller

(06:40):
family close to me all in aroundScotland, Glasgow.

Speaker 1 (06:44):
What were some of the early jobs that you had?

Speaker 2 (06:49):
In terms of, like, school jobs and stuff like that.

Speaker 1 (06:52):
Yeah, so you started with paper and then the space
had that thing.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
My dad had property and he had like hotels, so I
started cleaning and helping mybreakfast with, maybe in my
early teens.
I mean I hated it, to be honest, but you know it was something
to do.
And I actually started workwhen I was 18.
I didn't go to university, Ihad the option.
I wanted to do maths.

(07:16):
I didn't quite get the scoresat that time, and that was 1988,
35 years ago, and they offeredme a chartered accountancy and
the last thing I wanted to bewas an accountant.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
So I just went and got a job in an insurance
company and started in theaccounts department, strangely,
and I've worked my way up fromthere, so probably not a million
miles behind you in terms ofyears, but I remember when I
first got my first job in a bankand once again didn't go to
university either, but at thetime it didn't feel like you

(07:51):
kind of needed it.
It just felt that you werestarting at the bottom and you
had to go and, I suppose, earnyour way and suppose you
literally did everything, likeyou made the tea, you kind of
did the post runs, you did allthe jobs that no one else wanted
to do.
But I think some of thosethings that you start learning
really early on around peopleand around processes as well,

(08:13):
right how certain departmentsdon't talk to each other, and so
I don't know if that kind ofresonates for you.
Did you find the same thing?

Speaker 2 (08:21):
Yeah, I think that's what's missing now, that kind of
mentorship where you went inand you learned on the job,
especially now post COVID.
But even in that whole periodwhere I think certainly in the
UK and Europe you see a lot nowwhere people are kind of I
wouldn't say forced into highereducation, but it does feel like

(08:42):
something that has a badge thathas to be ticked and I don't
know if for some people that'sthree, four, five years is
actually of any value ratherthan just getting out and
getting a job.
But then I'm not sure how clearthat job market is for people
who just come out of school andgo into, to your point,
insurance industry, bankingindustry was just a big thing
back when you got.

(09:02):
You went in as an admin or anaccount or someone that just
helped someone else and youdon't have the opportunity.

Speaker 1 (09:11):
Some of those grad programs they also kind of
fueled that a little bit as well, because I think you know
investment banks and banking inthe for 2000s and you know 10s
it was all about who could grabthe brightest, sharpest grads
and it was almost like a badgeof honor right.
And I'm not too sure if thatactually instilled the right
message into other people youknow in the market was just like
okay, well, if you go, you cango, you go to the big

(09:32):
universities, you're going toget one of those banks and you
sort it.
But I think it might have gonefull circle, though I could be
wrong.

Speaker 2 (09:39):
It may have, because I'm seeing a lot more here in
the UK, especially aroundapprenticeships.
So the financial servicesindustries are definitely more
and more of that and I think itjust comes from you know, when
you start, everyone starts lowerdown in the grid technically,
but you then get the opportunityto learn from more experienced
people.

(09:59):
You see different routesthrough the organization that
you might not have thought thatyou yourself were suited for and
I think that's what'sdefinitely coming back.
Certainly.
I worked at Barclays for 10years and they were big on that
towards the end of my tenure,2016 onwards, kind of as
apprenticeships.

(10:19):
Hsbc, a lot of the banks aredoing it and a lot of the
manufacturers.
You still obviously offer that,but I think it's definitely
from a people perspective.
I still struggle with thatmentorship.
I don't think people who gointo any organization.
I don't see enough of thatwhere someone's hooked into
someone with experience in thesame area or in the same

(10:43):
industry.
I don't see it.
It might happen, but I don'tget the sense that that time is
spent by more experienced peoplejust helping and educating and
even just building arelationship with people who are
either slightly younger or justhave a totally different
background.

Speaker 1 (10:59):
And you remember those early bosses as well.
Right, because I alwaysremember.
Obviously I did a stinkingguernsey like it's banking.
That's how we met and I wasthere for a year and I remember
my boss.
He was a South African, very,very brash, and he was like Lee,
these guys, they're tomatogrowers.
They may think they're bankersnow, but they'll always be
tomato growers and just youremember that I was like, okay,

(11:19):
that's interesting.
Yeah, I don't think he won manyfriends in guernsey for some
reason.

Speaker 2 (11:27):
When I started it was life-assuring.
So good old traditional mutualbusiness and at that point you
were talking about things likewith profits, marketies in the
UK or heavy investments andstuff.
Sort of unit-linked market wasbecoming a new thing.
So commission and independentfinancial advisors were powerful
people and I work with a groupof really strong-minded women

(11:50):
and most of the accounts in thefinancial section was, and they
were very good at managing usthrough that kind of broker, ifv
, banker world where, yeah,people can talk a lot of rubbish
or they've got a powerfulpresence but the reality is

(12:11):
they're relying upon a lot ofpeople to support them to become
successful.
And that helped buildrelationships and networks from
a very young age.
And I think that also helps ifyou can get that experience
where, as long as people havemore experience or higher worth,
are prepared to do it, and Ijust wonder sometimes if that

(12:33):
exists now.

Speaker 1 (12:34):
It's amazing.
I suppose we probably soundlike every other middle-aged
person who's probably ever lived, but you don't really truly
appreciate some of those skillsand some of the things you're
learning until like 20 yearslater.
Right, and it sounds like youmay.
Yeah, you don't, because it'sjust a bit of a blur.
And when you're younger you'rekind of just getting through
life and it's probably all aboutthe weekend and you're just.

(12:55):
You know, the career is not thebig thing.
But you're probably like me.
You're sitting meetings and youhave a flashback from, say,
something 20 years ago and yougo, oh, remember when that
happened and they said theydealt with it, and so you kind
of they do instill certainlythose early jobs when you're
learning your trade.
They instill a lot of reallygood values and a lot of really
good behaviors.

(13:15):
I think.

Speaker 2 (13:16):
Yeah, I think, because you were, I was in there
and I grew up in that world,but you were trusted right as
long as you put in a good shift,you did your best and you
turned up in the morning even ifyou were slightly hungover.
You know it was recognized andthere was flexibility and that

(13:37):
in itself was a part of theworld of just learning to.
You know, what can I do in thenight out?
What should I do in the morningafter?
So, yeah, I think that's where Ilook back now and just think,
when I see people who've comethrough the last four or five
years finishing school or gonethrough uni, finishing uni,
going into a job and even goinginto that job now, with really

(13:58):
very little face to face,personal onsite interaction,
it's like this, right, it'svirtual and I just, I just, I
don't think people give enoughthought to how difficult that
must be for that, that group inthat kind of age group.
And I think I see it.

(14:19):
I've got an FU who's justcommitted uni, he's just
graduated, so he's went throughthat whole process and he missed
two or three years ofuniversity life and his first
year of work is is virtual, youknow, it's just a bit so
destroying something.

Speaker 1 (14:34):
yeah, that seems to be the world now, and I do think
, though in your distance a fewlittle noises on Twitter and
LinkedIn, I actually think it'sgonna go full circle.
I think people start to realisethe value.
I don't think it's ever gonnabe the same in terms of you know
, you'll be in your fist fight,which, you have to be honest,
you and even 15 years ago theywere starting to show signs of
that but I think I think peoplestarting to see the value in

(14:57):
those son of softer skills thatyou might start learning and
developing from just beingaround good people.

Speaker 2 (15:03):
And you were in investment bank with me at that
time and I'm glad those kind of7 to 7 wearing a tie days have
gone and I don't even see thatnow in the investment bank here
and you did wear some nice tiesI might have.
Yeah, well, you know, I stillhave them.
I still have the suits and theties, but I can't tell you that

(15:24):
unless it's a wedding or afuneral, I can't tell you
anything.
And I think that's the sort ofthing that is good.
The flexibility is a bit morecasual in terms of how you look
and how you feel.
Hopefully that doesn't relateinto casualness and relaxed
nature and some types of highpressure environments, but it

(15:45):
definitely has changed for thebetter there.
But I still think, and I'm withyou, I thought by now, and I
don't know what it's like in NewZealand and Australia, but when
I see, certainly in the UK andEurope mostly in the UK, I think
, and even in the US to someextent people I thought would

(16:05):
just naturally go back, you know, three days a week and I'm not
seeing it.
I'm really not.

Speaker 1 (16:13):
I read there was a chat called Scott Galloway and
he does his weekly podcast.
He's quite a professor but heshowed some of the data from the
top five cities in the US andessentially it was the key fob
data from major offices.
And he showed the data.

(16:34):
You know what it was pre-COVIDand obviously you saw a bit of a
spike when the lockdown starteddisappearing, but even now it's
only at 50% what it waspre-COVID in terms of the key
fob entries.
And he says that you knowthat's having a huge effect on
real estate values, having ahuge effect on those cafes and
coffee shops and Canary Wharf,like where we used to work.

(16:55):
I'm guessing that would havebeen hit pretty badly because
people just aren't in theoffices as much as they would
have been five days a week,right.

Speaker 2 (17:02):
Yeah, it's definitely there.
City of London is the same.
You know that I pray ski.
You know, have an evening you'dfinish the job, you'd have a
paint and go home.
It's not the same.
It might be one or two nights aweek.
I'm not saying it's good or bad, it's just it's different.
So the market around pubs andrestaurants and just even cafes

(17:23):
or coffee shops, you know it'schanged.
And when you in the UK, whenyou see a pret among you closing
down, that's a big thing, right, and you see a lot of that in
the city.

Speaker 1 (17:35):
I mean, there was one every ten feet.

Speaker 2 (17:36):
So it's not a bad thing that way, but the fact
that it's not, the turnoverisn't there, the footfall isn't
there, it's quite irregularstill.
I mean you can guaranteeTuesday, wednesday, thursdays
are busy, then Monday is intrade, but it's still not a
consistency that I'm feeling ofpeople coming in three days a

(17:57):
week, every week.
I think that's good or bad,it's just how it is right.

Speaker 1 (18:02):
Yeah, I agree.
He also said that office blocksare like the pyramids, so
there'll be things that peoplemarvel at but actually serve no
purpose.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
So yeah, we are finding like ex-department
stores getting turned intoleisure places.
Now there was one on the newsthis morning.
It's now a go-kart arena overlike five floors and that was an
old department store.
So it's that's right in thissort of high street environment.

(18:32):
So it is just totally different.

Speaker 1 (18:36):
So, mark, you obviously cut your tea for Abbey
.
Who was there?
What?
16 years?
So, looking at your LinkedInprofile, you definitely stay
around quite a bit, right, yeah?
So, yeah, just talk us throughyour time from Abbey to HBoss
and then you know all the waythrough to Barcap and then.
So, yeah, just talk us through,kind of when you use cut your

(18:58):
tea for learning your tradearound program management,
program delivery.
Yeah, just talk us through that.

Speaker 2 (19:03):
Yeah, abbey National Scottish Materials I was and
Abbey National bought it.
They bought a big bang, boughta life assurance because that's
where the market's beginning togo, that kind of end to end
product offering.
So when Abbey National broughtScottish Materials we saw an
opportunity to get involved indelivery of projects change.
I was previously operationaltype management so I just that,

(19:28):
yeah, it was the year 18 yearspoint.
I left school effectively till Ileft my first job in 2004, as
it would be, and I started outas operational management worked
up into.
I remember my first bigpromotion was in Abbey National.
I went from just being a personin a team to being a team
manager and probably in my late20s and then early 90s when this

(19:50):
kind of financial service youstarted to change around bank
assurance, which was the banksbeing allowed to sell their own
products directly.
And that's where I saw thisopportunity to get involved in
that kind of change and ended upbeing programmed out for the
sales division in Abbey and thatwas quite dramatic for me

(20:10):
because I went from beingoperational person to a project
person and you're very muchisolated in that world because
you're the project manager andyou have to bring people with
you to deliver the change.
So that was a whole new thingfor me.
But that was the second half ofmy tenure, that Abbey was
becoming that program directorfor sales and just delivering a

(20:32):
huge change.
There was a lot ofconsolidation of branches and
staff and redundancies and newjob.

Speaker 1 (20:38):
So just for the benefit of the international
listeners, because not everyonewould know Abbey National and
obviously I know it because Iused to go and stick my five
pounds of pocket money in usingmy little deposit book and you
get it stamped or get written in, I think even in the old days,
but obviously poor.
But it was a building site andmember owned, is that right?

Speaker 2 (20:56):
It was, yeah, until, I think, the late 80s, when
everything in the UK started toget nationalised so it became a
public company late 80s I thinkit would have been early 90s was
when it started to expand, soit was a financial services
organisation by the time I wasin it and left it.
So life assurance banking had ahuge corporate part of it owned

(21:18):
like the largest amount of leastaircraft in the world.
Bizarrely, it was just in thestart yeah, it was in.
That whole banking was startingto invest in other things than
traditional stuff like propertyand bonds and guilt and they
were just buying up assets.
So, yeah, and they had gonethrough this huge change and
then grew so quickly that theyhad to take action because they

(21:41):
were in consistency in thegrowth and then they had to cut
back on the head count and so Igot this opportunity to deliver
new products into the marketthrough the bank but also to
have this kind of ability tostart to affect people change as
well as kind of customer andoperational change.
And that's where it took meinto HBOS and how the facts bank

(22:02):
of Scotland as it was HBOS isagain a large, mostly retail
bank is headquartered out andfocused on the UK and I went
across there to deliver the kindof HR change program for them,
which was the.

Speaker 1 (22:16):
So was that your first experience of HR software
and HR tech.

Speaker 2 (22:21):
Yeah, I'd gone from this program director for sales,
event products and people tothe delivery of HR technology
into the people organisations orthe people within the bank.

Speaker 1 (22:33):
And how did that come about then?
Was it a case of right?
We got this, because I'mguessing that's coming up to 20
years ago now right, yeah, 2004,.

Speaker 2 (22:40):
Yeah, now it's just running.

Speaker 1 (22:41):
But was it a case of right?
We've got this really importantsoftware we need to put in.
You know, hr software who do?
We know that's quite good atdelivering big stuff.
Yeah, I mean like everything.

Speaker 2 (22:52):
My boss at Abbey moved there and then about a
year later he asked me acrossthe help of my business change
program.
So he had gone to take on thewhole finance change and
procurement function for thechange elements and he asked me
to come across and do the HRwhich was my first then, not
just technology but SAP at thetime we hold on premise East

(23:14):
well, it's SAP 4.7 a bit of athing for those that might
remember that.
So that was my first experienceof HR, of delivery of actual,
pure, proper technology.
I was a huge diamond curve forme.
I think that that bank was goingto anyone that might know the
history of it, when thefinancial crash came, they were

(23:36):
one of the first banks in the UKto basically fall and be bought
back again by the government.
So and they had again had thismantra of sell it stack, a cheap
sell at high I don't know howpublic this is, but that was my
perception of it and yeah, point, how could they afford to do
this?
And it obviously turned out,frankly, they couldn't.
So, yeah, but my job is todeliver that end to end HR, you

(24:01):
know, higher to fire,recruitment, performance comp,
all this stuff that hangs off ofthat for the bank, and we did
that over just over two years.
At the time, again, it was newto people this whole ERP end to
end, and like everything, whenyou buy an ERP, you sold the
whole thing.

Speaker 1 (24:20):
So, mark, just I mean , this is nearly 20 years ago,
right.
I guess this is.
I guess one of my frustrationsin New Zealand and maybe
Australia, is that there's stillbusinesses, maybe of equal size
or equivalent size, that havenot even invested in a HR system
and not invested don't see thebenefit of data.
So this is 20 years ago, right?
So one of the banks 20 yearsago would have someone in the

(24:41):
business would have said we'vegot these problems and
challenges, we know we can fixthem through a, through SAP, hr,
and obviously SAP was why Idon't know which will come on to
but what were the challengesthat HBOS were looking to solve?
And they say this is 20 yearsago.

Speaker 2 (24:56):
I simply it was headcount reconciliation between
finance and HR and a bit oforganizational design and
organizational management.
So knowing how many people I'vegot where and what they do and
how much they cost me, that wasthe simplest way I can put it.
And they had.
That's why they then try tointegrate and join up the

(25:18):
finance and HR technologies andat the time, hr wasn't seen as
if it still isn't something as astrategic partner.
How good and how key was thatpeople data?
At the time, I don't thinkthere was anything really given
to that.
It was just simply I have got aheadcount cost of this and I'm

(25:39):
not entirely sure how manypeople I've got, and then you
start getting into headcountversus FTE, versus heads, versus
costs and then the OD around it.
So the organizational designand organizational management.
So that was specifically themain thing they were trying to
solve for and recruitment at thetime.
So talent acquisition is nottoday.

(26:00):
Recruitment was also a key,getting people through the door
quickly and effective from dayone, and technology was seen as
a kind of main driver to allowthat to happen through, at the
time, mostly recruitmentconsultancies and job boards, so
you weren't looking at directrecruitment and all the online

(26:21):
stuff you get in our own appsand stuff, but it was mostly
figure out how we've got wherethey are, how much the cost for
me manage that, and now I've gotthat when I need to change it.
Whether it's a joiner, a moveror a lever, I have a cycle to
recruit and exit and that wasliterally it.
And then you started to exploreperformance management talent,

(26:44):
but in those very early stagesand that came in mid-2000s,
probably through the late 2000s.
That was literally the mainfocus of the HR technology
deployment, so it wasn't reallylooking at much else.

Speaker 1 (26:59):
So probably less about humans, more about assets.
So how do we get the most outof what we've got?
Are you our people?

Speaker 2 (27:05):
Yeah, there was, I think yeah, a lot of that still
was on the ground floor.
If you had a good manager, yougot good development, you got
good focus, you got goodopportunities.
And that stayed relevant to methrough the late 2000s and
actually the naughties I guess,until I then moved into Barclays

(27:29):
when it started to become moreabout employee management,
self-service, the ability tomanage comp and performance
management.
That's when it started tochange.
It became more about thatbecause in the organisers that I
was focusing on, they had atleast a stable baseline, you
know, they had a decent CoreHR,they had a good understanding of

(27:52):
their organisation and the dataand they were trying to now
expand into that and unless youdo that baseline it's jumping
straight to the kind of futureit can present challenges in
adoption and change.
But it's also a very difficultthing to do CoreHR and just get
that baseline around data.

Speaker 1 (28:14):
So you went into Barclays 2009, which would have
been just after the globalfinancial crisis and the credit
crunch and whatnot so, and Ithink I started working with you
2010, so probably not not longafter, but just talk us through
what life was like in bothinvestment banking and Barclays

(28:34):
capital, which it was at thattime.

Speaker 2 (28:39):
Not certain Coward Co .
I mean at the time, obviously,that seismic shift of the
financial crisis had landed.
I'm not sure I hadn't seen itpre the crash.
I don't think I can't imaginewhat it was like pre the cash,
because post the crash was stillquite vibrant and exuberant as
an organisation.
You know they still had a crashto spend and they still had a

(29:02):
lot of good, capable people, butit's a very demanding world.
You know you came into.
The expectations around howquickly you could do things
exceeded anything I had ever hadbefore.
The capability of themanagement also exceeded that,
so you did try to start to liftyour game.
I think that's and I did reallynotice a huge difference in

(29:25):
that leadership capability.
You know, whether you agreewith it or not a very strong
delivery mechanism,decision-making, points of
control and that's where I saw ahuge difference from anything
I've come across before and areally strong view of where that
organisation, especially withinthe investment bank and the

(29:45):
wealth management I honestlywould go in, because that was
under control of Bob at the timeand that was 2010 through 2012,
.
2013, and that was focused, asyou know, trying to build out
capabilities to support thefunctions and HR around
recruitment and talentmanagement, onboarding you know

(30:08):
all of that stuff.
When I look at what you're doingnow as well and I look back to
what was probably 14 years ago,13, 14 years ago, that's still
relevant, right, it's stillrelevant 100%.
They don't do onboardingproperly.
They don't really focus on theexperience of the candidate at
the point of onboarding.

(30:29):
But yeah, that wholeenvironment was very demanding,
really challenging, but trusting, and you were allowed to go and
do it and failure wasn't anissue, as long as you failed
fast and reacted and fixed it.
Or if you had to do somethingthat wasn't perfect, it was kind

(30:49):
of silver standard.
That was acceptable as well.
Even though it was a demandingenvironment, they were still in
acceptance of giving mesomething and then I can try and
make it work from there.

Speaker 1 (30:58):
For me it kind of epitomised the kind of work hard
, play hard kind of and in agood way, though, because
everyone seems to think, oh, youknow you're burning people out,
but people genuinely enjoyedworking.
I mean, I remember that teamyou had there and, you know,
people weren't there at 7because they felt that you was
trying to crack the whip.
People actually just reallyenjoyed delivering something

(31:19):
that was transformational, whenthere was actually you could see
, literally you could see had adirect impact in the business.
Right, I'm not just saying thatyou could.
It actually changed the waythat business operated and how
that business, you know,functioned right.

Speaker 2 (31:31):
Yeah, it did.
And I think if I look back now,if I was to go back and pick
people and bring them into newplaces, that's what I go for.
I go for the team or the peoplethat the extended team of
people either who worked throughand with me or connected to me,
because you just got that levelof you know they get it and

(31:51):
they can cut through a lot ofthe crap that exists there as
well for you and for customers.
And yeah, yeah, it was prettyhard, you know.
I wouldn't say it was willfulof Wall Street levels, but it
was definitely it wasn't there?
No, I know, but my life thinksit was, but there wasn't, you
know.
I think that's where it yeah, Idon't think you'll ever see
that again.
Even Jeff Hitton you rememberJeff.

(32:13):
You know New Yorker Races.
Yeah, he's now my chairperson,so he's a business partner with
me he would say you can't dothat in 2023.
Stuff that we did and even thenit wasn't extreme, it was just
things that you think youcouldn't do that.

Speaker 1 (32:32):
Well, you talked about the quality of leadership
and management there and that'sone thing that always impressed
upon me there was because Isuppose for me, like I've worked
at the Co-op Bank and Investec,which was still amazing, but
you know, when you went there itjust felt it was like it was
like probably going from goingfrom West down going to play for
man United or for man City,right, it was just probably just
three, four levels up and butyou know, you look at, like Nick

(32:55):
and Jeff and all those guys andyourself as well, you know I
put yourself in that category.
It's just, you had a veryrelaxed way of managing and you
know, I like to think some ofthe things that the way you run
your team kind of rubbed off onme, because what I liked about
the way you did things is thatyou were just ultra confident.
There was no desk banging orkind of shouting or swearing,

(33:18):
because I think you just knewyou had such a good team, right,
you just let them get on withit.
You know, look at you knowBancy and Mike and all those
guys that work with you, justthat you just knew they were
fantastic or they did, and Isuppose so.
But was that a case of becauseyou and I think at the time
Barcat Capital money wasn'treally a problem, so you just
was able to go and put that thatgood team together, or have I
completely misread that?

Speaker 2 (33:40):
I think it's just a bit of luck as well that you're
finding and land with thosepeople.
Yeah, I don't think we were.
The reward was good at Barcat,let's not argue, but I think it
was a bit of luck.
So some of those teams wereincumbents, I inherited them and
some I went out and got and youknow you, you know that's right

(34:01):
.
You can tell within a fewminutes whether you're going to
be able to work with someone butyou don't want them to be a
clone of you and I think that'swhat we built there and I think
that's just an inherent my wholeethos is always based on if
people want to have theopportunity and are prepared to
take the opportunity, even ifit's a little stretch for them,

(34:22):
let them.
You know you gotta trustsomeone and you, as long as you
get a say and back them right.
So when things don't go well,you take the hit as much as they
do.
It's not it's much your faultis it is their fault.
Someone's in a job that you'veoverextended and we stretch them
into.
And even if there is an issue,you address it one to one,
honestly and directly.

(34:42):
So I think that's thatcertainly was a.
I've always had managers likethat.
Maybe in this sort of 90s, as Iwas coming through that I had
the manager was prepared to giveme the opportunity and I felt
that's what got me to where Igot to it.
If anyone else wants to getthere, as long as you're
prepared to put the hand up andgive it a go and do their best,

(35:05):
then then, more often or not,people will do it and a lot of
the time they'll surprise thepeople who thought they couldn't
do it.
Maybe not you personally, butthere would be a bunch of people
who think, why would you dothat, as long as you back and
trust, but that that was a thatjust seemed to exist across that
whole HR leadership functionand to be fair across the whole,
that whole part of the bank.

Speaker 1 (35:27):
And, yeah, demanding but fair, direct, challenging
and rewarding if you, you did agood job one thing that always,
I remember this make you soundquite profound, so it's probably
another big compliment, but youuse this term and just a bit of
context.
So what happened was I thinkyou had your really strong team

(35:50):
there in the HR and the SAP teamand there's a few people on the
periphery.
You kind of went on and went onto other areas or you know,
wanting to move or change andyou know quite a big deal
because you're losing a big, bigmember of the team.
But I remember you just beingreally relaxed about it and you
and you said something along thelines of Lee, I'm a farmer of
talent, you know, and so I wouldbe.
I want to be known for that asmuch as I want to be known for

(36:10):
my delivery.
And I thought, well, greatquote.
And I still use that quote now.
And but yeah, I think you, youknow that a lot of managers have
kind of lost sight of it.
It's all about them, right,it's all about me and what I'm
delivering, rather than how canI be?
Remembers this, this personthat's gone and grown, this team
who go off and, you know, flyyeah, I think, as my background

(36:31):
was project management.

Speaker 2 (36:32):
You know, ultimately that's what I built my expertise
on, and as a project manager,you're not the expert.
If you think you are, you'regonna fail.
The only way you get somethingdone well is to bring the
experts to the table andcollaborate and encourage and
have your moments right.
We'll all fall out.
We'll all have disagreements,as long as you get the time to

(36:54):
hear it so.
But it's the same in any team,or you know, project management
or people management.
If you're not prepared to putthe time in to sit down with
people and understand what theywant from you and vice versa,
you'll never get there.
Nobody will get there.
You know, individually you mightget something from it, you

(37:15):
might be successful, you mightbe rewarded, but I think, unless
you know, to me delivery wasn'tabout getting a pat on the back
.
It was where the noise was low.
That was a good thing, right,and the people praised it all
the better as long as the peoplewho've done a good job got the
reward and praise for it.
That's what I always target.
I still do.

(37:35):
I still do to work withcustomers who have the same
thought process.
They're not in it forthemselves.
They're not in it for theirorganisation, per say, but
they're trying to achievesomething that they know will
make it better.
And if they can't articulate,it's going to make it better.
I don't want to know.

(37:56):
I really don't, because it'slike what's the point in putting
the time and effort intosomething that you don't think
adds much value?
Some people just do it for thesake of doing it, and that's, to
me, wrong.

Speaker 1 (38:08):
So Barclays and Barcat chose SAP, and you
touched on this earlier.
So just tell me why SAP and SAPSuccessFactors is such a big
deal in those corporates.

Speaker 2 (38:21):
Payroll.
A lot of it is payroll right.
If you go back to the 90s andmaybe the 80s and SAP was a
payroll engine that it literallytook payroll data and paid
people, and as long as peopleand the stylifies get paid the
right amount every month on thesame day, then that is a good

(38:43):
job done and trust me, you'llknow this it's not an easy job
to do that.
It really is not.
So many variables right.
Yeah, and then when you try tochange those systems, wow, don't
screw that up right, it's theone thing you cannot break, and
people have lost sight of that,I think, although I'm seeing a

(39:04):
lot more focus now on thepayroll here in Europe
especially, complexities aregetting greater with regulations
and stuff like that.
But yeah, sap and at that pointOracle, peoplesoft it was a
payroll engine and the power wasin that people data for payroll
, so your organization data andsome really simple people data

(39:27):
around salaries and tenure andjobs.
And then they just upsold right, they sold you the extensions
of this ERP, which was now theend to end HR system, from
recruitment to performance, tolearning.
And then obviously, sap acquiredSuccessFact and it became more

(39:49):
about a better user experienceand, frankly, the time in 2013,
14, that was just a goodinterface.
It wasn't like it was anybetter than a good old fashioned
ERP.
That was a bit more spreadsheetlooking and worked.
But yeah, so it's really justbeen that growth of the baseline

(40:10):
of payroll, and that applies toOracle and some of the products
that we've got.
If you guys are aware of Workday, that was a whole different
thing.
That started as an end to end,but it was developed by people
who built PeopleSoft right, theywere the PeopleSoft owners.
They sold it to Oracle, theythen built Workday and but they
had learned from that.
But SAP is just a big playerbecause and a lot of companies

(40:33):
owned SAP finance as well.
So payroll and finance and whenfinance is a big deal for these
organizations as ERP and as anorganization in the corporate
world and HR then just becamealmost like habit, for free
sometimes.
So there was really low cost tosell it on.
An organization would buy itand then they would never know

(40:55):
what they'd actually or and thecapabilities that they might
bring to them.

Speaker 1 (41:01):
It was interesting coming to a, it's fair to say,
like a smaller country in NewZealand in 2014, because
obviously it had come from thatbackground and you kind of just
got used to that.
Everyone had SAP, like you say.
It was so prominent, especiallyin the corporates.
And then you come to NewZealand and they've got like
things like the vision anddynamics and I was like what are

(41:24):
these things?
I've been in Microsoft WorldFray.
I've never heard of it and Ithink it's just because of the
scale and the size.
You know.
The reality is is that theydon't, they can't, justify the
cost of the implementation costsfor those, for those big, big
corporate systems, so to speak.
So we touch on SAP.
So let's just look at thelandscape now, right?
So we're really good tounderstand, kind of, how your

(41:46):
background is and how you work.
So, if we look at the keyplayers in the HR and, by the
way, I'm just going to ask you aquestion Is HR or is it people
in capability?
Hr is what everyone knows,right?
So I suppose that's why westill refer to HR.

Speaker 2 (41:59):
Yeah, I mean, hr directors are now becoming chief
people officers, and you know.
So I just remember them as headof staff department.

Speaker 1 (42:08):
So yeah, head of personnel would have been a
whole lot.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
Yeah, I think HR.
I think I mean frankly andhonestly most people in this
world.
They still call me HR experts.

Speaker 1 (42:17):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you just know what it is.
Yeah, even though you know it'smoved on.
Okay, so let's talk about thekey technology.
So obviously you, you left barcap to set up on your own, I
believe Yep, you did so, andobviously SAP would have been
such a big part of your life.
From guessing that knowledge,product knowledge, the change
knowledge and the, just theprogram, how you actually

(42:40):
implement it, I guess would bepretty useful.
But at the same time, all ofthose skills would be quite, you
know, could be well applied toother technologies.
And you put in, I suppose, atthe end of the day, the
technology often in, as you know, in our world it's often the
least important thing, but it isprobably the most important
thing at the end of it.
So let's talk about some ofthose key players in your world,

(43:00):
in in in London and you'refurther afield.
So you got SAP, yes, and as yousay, they've come because they
were the incumbent that comefrom the finance and most of the
time it was the, the bolt onfor that.
Who are the other players?

Speaker 2 (43:11):
Well, the big ones are.
Oracle and HSM, yep, and they'rean amalgam of a number of
things as well.
They've acquired as our SAP inmany ways.
And then what they would be theother big Kenneth, if you want
to go with it, a huge serviceand those larger organizations

(43:32):
what.
They would be the same.
And they started from what wasthe founders of PeopleSoft, so
to Oracle, and then built oneday and one day became a kind of
new kid on the block.
At the time, you know, they werestill small, they weren't
focused on those largeorganizations and they were very
much end to end and you had togo all in.

(43:54):
So when I talk aboutimplementation, there's, there's
, there's picking shoes, there'sgo where you want and there's
all in.
And picking shoes is you don'tneed all of it from.
You don't need the wholeproduct to have the benefits of
some of it.
Go where you want is you buythe whole thing but there's no
sequence.
Well, there is reasonably asequence to how you should

(44:16):
deploy it, but you don't alwaysneed to have corey charts and
get value from a learning andperformance or equipment system.
And then there's the all ends,and the all ends is you have to
switch all on at once, doesn'tmatter how big or small you are
or complex you really have to.
So what do you was that?
Tim at that time was kind of ifyou want, what do, you've got a
gold full hog on day one andthat's a huge change agenda.

(44:39):
Right?
That's not just abouttechnology, that's about culture
and behaviors andorganizational change.
So those are the kind of steadyplayers and they offer the end
to end.
They are trying to sell you thewhole thing around the benefits
of an integrated solution andthe data and all the AI that can
come from that.
The predictive analytics maybenot AI as the market defines it

(45:02):
now, that predictive analyticsand then you've got still got
best of breeds.
I don't know how that plays out, where you are in the world now
, lee, but you know.
Basically, you get a goodrecruitment system, you get a
good learning system, you get agood core payroll performance
comp and there's more and moreof those coming back into the
market.
In the past there might onlybeen three or four players.

(45:24):
People might know of Colnestoneas a learner.

Speaker 1 (45:26):
It's a little bit more fragmented, I think, over
here, because we just don't havethe businesses of that scale.
So there's a few that kind ofuse.
Workday I'm going to ask youabout that in a moment.
But yeah, workday is sort ofhere and SAP is certainly for
for the bigger, biggerorganization and I'll probably
actually say, because it's comefrom a finance background, it's
an easier plate.

(45:46):
But the HR landscape, hrTechlands get very, very
fragmented, so it's very fewcompanies actually have a you
know one or maybe two.
It's often 10, 15 tools.

Speaker 2 (45:57):
You remember the old?
You had to have the bigconsultancies to implement it,
right?
Yeah, the UI, the law, kpmg,Accenture, and now in Europe and
the US and Asia, because forthe last 15 years I've delivered
into global organizations witha reasonable spread across the
world, so it's not all kind ofEuropean focused.
There's been a reasonable splitbetween Asia, the US and Europe

(46:21):
and they've.
There's definitely I'd call ita tier two implementation
partner now who will bring you apre-canned solution end to end
and they can do it in.
They can do it in eight to 12weeks at a low cost, right?
Whereas in the past you weretalking 18 months to three years

(46:43):
, millions of dollars of pounds.
And now you're seeing here theSAPs and the workday's now,
because, to be fair, what theyhaven't have always kind of
targeted what we would callmid-market, and reasonably
mid-market would be based onemployee size.
So anything upwards of 10,000between sort of 2,000 and 10,000
, you could argue, is mid-market, and then 10,000 employees and

(47:05):
above us is global.
You know in the RP.
But now with the world, withthe way you can have small
organization with massiverevenues or a big organization
with low revenues.
I don't know how it works now itjust seems to be people should
be looking at it from.
What do you want the tech to dofor your organization, rather
than it's always been SAP?

Speaker 1 (47:27):
It's a tough one, though, right, because that
still happens.
And so, yes, we can sit hereand you know, and have a yarn
about what you should have, andyou're looking at problems
you're trying to solve.
Look at the people, look at theprocesses, but I can tell you
now, once KPMG, deloitte or oneof those big four involved, it's
always going to be one of thosetwo and, interestingly, and by

(47:47):
the way, they happen to be thepeople that can implement it.
Service now is obviously thebig one as well, right, which is
come out of left field loss,probably five or six years.
So the reality is that they gowith those because they probably
, you know, they tried andtested.
And what's that saying about?
No one ever got fired forpicking IBM?

Speaker 2 (48:05):
I'm going to guess it's probably the same for SAP
or any consultancy, any, anyproduct, as long as you can
blame someone else for pickingit.

Speaker 1 (48:13):
And that's where we've come in at.

Speaker 2 (48:15):
You know, that's where I've seen that I did SAP
success factors For the lastthing I ever did in Barclays and
that was implement that.
And the one thing that I wouldlearn and there's a couple of
people that I would trust thathave left there and I would say
the same as we could have pickedany of them, we'd have had the
same challenges around legacy,data, integration, processes,

(48:37):
culture, behavior Because wewere SAP going to success
factors, it made no difference.
It's a totally differentproduct, sap to work.
They would have been exactlythe same.
But what we learned was itwasn't the product, it was the
focus on what is going to changein our organization to get the

(48:59):
benefit of what this productgives me.
Because in 2014, 2015, we wentto an organization one of the
bigger ones, well, three of thebigger consultants and said what
do we do with our in-houseon-premise technology?
And everyone said move to thecloud.
That was it right, so we movedto the cloud and I frankly have

(49:19):
no idea if it made anydifference and when I learned,
what I learned in that lastthree years through implementing
the cloud technology was it'sthe same principle.
It's an ERP that does what itdoes.
It isn't broken.
Will you like it?
Maybe, maybe not, but it's notgoing to change because that's

(49:40):
the way it does it and millionsof people around the world use
it.
And just because a leader in abank doesn't like it, what we
should have done is showed themwhat it did and then asked them
how will this not work for you?
And then given us two or threeyears to make the change and the
adoption focus, rather thantrying to rebuild a technology

(50:03):
that was never going to changewhat it was doing at that point.

Speaker 1 (50:08):
So you talked about that hire to fire kind of
employee life cycle, right, sohire to retire, you know, if
you're not in the States but thewhole employee life cycle.
So everything from positionfulfillment okay, we need to
create a position, we need toget approval, we need to
advertise it, we need to screen,need to on board we didn't need

(50:29):
to manage and then we need toperformance and then eventually
end up doing offboarding, right,and so that whole kind of life
cycle.
Those challenges you talkedabout earlier there, what they
were, they've always been thesame.
That you know, even from theyear that I'm guessing you know
the old sort of coplas back inthe dark ages would have
probably had the same change,but the tools are just different

(50:50):
.
So I suppose the businessproblems, the same tools are
different.
But what's changed, would yousay, if we bring it forward to
say twenty, twenty three, welook at those key challenges
across that life cycle, whatsome of the big trends are, some
of the big things you're seeingnow.

Speaker 2 (51:09):
It's easy for people to move now In terms of if you
think about how impacts what anorganization has got to think
about.
So you know, theoretically youcan be anywhere in the world now
more for anybody to do anything.
So finding and farming thattalent is key.
You know, linked in would havebeen the previous one and now

(51:32):
you can do it through a wholenumber of other things.
So the trends to me are stillaround.
There's a whole, there's a bigfocus on talent retention, so
keeping the people that you wantto keep but you still can't
identify who they are sometimes.
But everyone talks about talentretention is cheaper to keep

(51:54):
people than it is to lose them.
And then we hire because youget.
The cost of hire is excessiveIf you're doing it to through a
recruitment agency or the market.
So there's definitely like analumni culture beginning to
become more prevalent, which wasalways kind of In my world.
The, the consultancies, werealways good at that.

(52:16):
People who left was stilltagged to keep in touch, whereas
a lot of other organizationsdon't do that.
So the trends are definitelytalent retention and talent
development.
Now the trends I'm not sure thebehaviors are there to make it
work or if there's the rightfocus, but definitely I need to

(52:36):
retain and farm the right talentand, if you need new talent,
making sure you get the rightpeople suited to your culture.
So culture is also a kind oftrend that we are seeing a lot
of focus on values, vision,culture and the understanding of
that in an organization.
I mean, I don't know if he is atrend that we're seeing, but

(53:00):
there's definitely a lot ofstuff around Chatbots and
automation of interaction.
I don't know what that means,frankly, is an old guy now you
sound like you heard that on apodcast.
No, but it's like funny right, Idon't know.
I know we can jump to it, but,like you know, I've always
understood what he is.

(53:22):
I've always told people I wanta chatbot.
Right in the good old days,probably not even that long ago,
chatbot was a really good thingto have.

Speaker 1 (53:31):
Oh, it's a robot.

Speaker 2 (53:34):
It's a thing, but you know, people thought because
then, like a service now orsomeone would walk in and go,
we've got one of those and yougo, well, yeah, but it doesn't
know what I do, it doesn't knowwhat my people want, it doesn't
know what people don't know whatthey want.
Does that make sense?
So?
So what I was just saying isyou know, that's right, you did
this with me and if the contentsnot there or it's rubbish, well

(53:55):
, it doesn't matter how achatbot or a search engine finds
it, it's rubbish, right?
Yeah, so a chatbot only learnsfrom being asked the questions.
It doesn't.
So if you give it time, it willgive you value, but it doesn't
have all the answers.
I think the eyes is same.
I mean, I know there's a wholedifferent world thought around
that If you don't give it thetime, it's not going to do it

(54:19):
from D1.

Speaker 1 (54:21):
I think for me that I had to explain to someone the
other day and I said to me how,lee, what is a I, how is it
going to help my business?
And, as you say it, we are nowalso probably couldn't waffle on
too much, but the key thing was, I think I said to me as well,
okay, the number one is contentcreation.
So he's a real estate guy,right.
So I said to me how did youwrite your, your property

(54:43):
profiles?
Moment, I'll pay someonehundred bucks per, probably.
I went, let me share this, showthem, get going, create a
property ad for four bedroomhouse in rich area in
Christchurch, bang.
He was like, oh my god, I justsaved me like a grand or two
grand a month because I don'thave to pay that.
And I was okay, yeah, butsomeone still got to do that.
So I said that all of that kindof grunt work, you know it's
taking that away, right.

(55:04):
So number two what do you dowith your data?
And they call it data area.
So I'm mad.
What do you do your data andwhat do you mean?
I said, well, you've got itfrom your viewing.
You got your, you got yourregistration, you open homes?
I said so.
Imagine a world where if youdigitize all that, you can stick
it into one big bucket and youask that some questions.

(55:24):
You say what are the, what arethe main reasons people aren't
buying houses in this road orwhatever?
You can see, his head was justblown right and I guess you know
he wasn't from our world of I Tand you know corporate well and
he just saw it as a yeah,completely mind blown.
But I think there's a lot ofpeople even in the corporate so
that probably in the similarsort of mindset they probably

(55:45):
don't truly get that.
It's just gonna make life easy.
It's not wanting to try tochange some of the things you do
and it's just gonna Simplifybut then, but get the basics
right.
Right and people data data aswell as well.

Speaker 2 (56:01):
Yeah, yeah, I still, the first thing I'll ever ask
the organization, whoever needsit, is Show me your structure,
show me your people organization.
Do you know who you've got?
Where do you have a bricks andmortar and a people structure
and do you have a financestructure?
And more often than not, theydo.
But there's still big gaps andvery simple things to fill that

(56:25):
can give you more values andorganization without having to
invest in a massive HRtechnology.
You could run it from adatabase.
You could run it from aMicrosoft dynamics.
You can run it from a wholebunch of things.
You probably got in yourorganization already and we will
always say that to business.
What have you got today thatyou're paying for?
Because more often than not,that will allow you to do

(56:47):
something better with yourexisting technology stack.
But it needs you to look at thedata that you've got and the
data that you need to try tomake some of those decisions.
So you know, I'm working withan organization who has a
retention at well, an attritionrate of 80% in the first two

(57:09):
years.
80%, I mean that isn't that?
It's a huge cost to thebusiness.
Why is it 80%?
Nobody can answer.
Is it the wrong people?
Did you put on people?
Did you sell them the wrong job?
Just simple things that youneed to answer before you can
even move forward.
And now most small, medium andbig size or message still cannot

(57:31):
answer the very simplequestions like how many people
have you got, what did you do?

Speaker 1 (57:37):
and where they be even in a small organization
with a small number of it'samazing and that's what I
suppose, that I was just acrossright because you know, in the
Microsoft consulting where,where I was and he was
predominantly SAP, but we, Ithink we delivered over 250
projects before I sold mybusiness in December and I
reckon of those 250 probably askthe question so how's your

(58:01):
corporate data and your HR data?
And I reckon of that 200 youcan see CIOs or it directors is
heading hands so almost cryingbecause they just couldn't tell
you know, they just couldn'ttell you how many people they've
gotten, and a lot of us to say,well, depends who's asking.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
Yeah, and that's what we see.
What we now see is because I'mtargeting customers who maybe
haven't got the biggest statsand the need for the bigger ERPs
is that Sometimes you can buildthis bespoke right.
And I don't mean bespoke rightwhen you think of the Microsoft
suite that you know you'll beold fan and Do you think of some
of the other sort of more nicheproducts that are out there

(58:38):
that are building a goodpresence?
You know, if you want to, ifyou want Candidates to be
engaged, give them a goodexperience as they come in.
So the recruitment process isthe interview process, but once
you've signed a contract, fromthat point forward you need to
make that person feel Wanted andwhen they give you information,

(58:58):
capture it and play it back andthen when they come in they can
see it.
That's it then how you managethat person through the
performance or the compound,it's not that difficult.
But as long as you've you knowif you've understood what that
person's capabilities are, whatthe person's aspirations are,
you know, just put that corestuff in there.

(59:19):
You don't.
These products will give yousomething simple, easy to use,
quick to deploy.
But a lot of the effort I seein any organization
implementation is fixing thedata if it's a legacy complexity
, a lot of the integrationsaround data.
But the single second biggestthing is the sort of process and

(59:41):
operational business changethat's never Manage properly and
a big organization that'sdifficult in a smaller one.
You can do that so much easierIf you put the right focus on it
, such that you can acceleratetechnology.
Whereas in a big organizationyou can't accelerate technology
because you're waiting on achange to happen.
Be, educated into the population.

(01:00:02):
So I work with a lot of smallercustomers now because they can
be agile and They've got a goodview of the vision.
They've got a decent view ofthe data fix that we implemented
an end to end HR small ERPproduct in eight weeks, end to
end.
You know it's being used andyou think it's not 250 people,

(01:00:25):
it's not Difficult and it's notexpensive.
I actually, if you buy some ofthese.

Speaker 1 (01:00:30):
I mean, that's the thing that you're talking about,
dollars per user, right?

Speaker 2 (01:00:34):
sometimes you know, and yeah, people don't see
because they never get there isthe predictive nature of that
solution is where the power is.
Because you never get there,you don't put the right data and
and others gaps.
These things are unbelievablyaccurate at telling you when

(01:00:55):
someone is at risk of loss.
Performance ratings comebenchmarking stuff, that's all
out there public market and theycan tell you 80 to 90% accuracy
who's going to leave thisorganization in the next six
months.

Speaker 1 (01:01:13):
Yeah, I think I think I saw a post the other weekend
it was over here actually andthere was this massive Facebook
discussion.
I it was one of the recruitssaid I will be able to predict
when you're going to leave.
And it was just up for youcould see.
Just it was complete clickbaitand people going oh my god, the

(01:01:33):
robots are taking over the world.
How can they do this?
How we're all humans.
And I just replied let's behonest, yeah, we've known this
stuff for years.
I kind of we, as you say, thosecommon.
If you mash up three, four,five bits of data, you probably
gonna know.

Speaker 2 (01:01:47):
You know this right.
You've managed pretty good.
Managers play fifty or sixtypercent accurate understanding
who's unhappy news at risk ofloss and they will leave.
So you know, if you're lookingwide enough at LinkedIn and
Facebook you get a higherpercentage.
But you know, obviouslyTechnically you can't do that in
an organization with yourtechnology.
Look at your data and externaldata really.

(01:02:08):
I mean there's legal Barriersto that.
But even within the internaldata spread, a decent spread of
data in the right to give somuch insights organization it
doesn't.
Even it doesn't.
It's not about risk of loss,it's about capabilities to
redeploy.
You know when there's a new jobpops up or someone leaves a job

(01:02:30):
and there's someone in thedepartment over there you just
don't know of probably mighthave that skillset.
The system of the least flag toyou.

Speaker 1 (01:02:38):
You've got someone in turn that might be right for
the internal mobility piece,yeah, I still think it's under
tapped personally, because,especially those big
organizations, the first thingthey'll do in the man because
they all work in silos, right,and so, like you used to say,
being a farmer, a talent.
If I've got someone who candeliver projects, as good
personal skills, as a goodleader and actually a good human

(01:02:58):
, then why would you not moveinto the department you know if
they've got the right skillset?

Speaker 2 (01:03:03):
so In these tools, if you want to call them that, if
you just put your existing datainto it and ask the right
questions, it can tell you.
So I'm also the man when youthink of a front end dashboard
type concept for a leadershippopulation or just a management
population.
Do you need that integratedsolution as you're plumbing if

(01:03:28):
the thing at the very top can doit for you, as long as, as a
user or a colleague, you canfeel engaged in the technology
that you're using and it feelslike it's consumer grade rather
than corporate grade, so it'skind of real world stuff.
There's something up here nowthat can do a little bit of that
more visualization that theleadership or the business

(01:03:54):
leadership need to see.
So I'm beginning to see a lotmore I wouldn't call it
desperate landscapes and goingback to that best of breeds, get
the right recruitment, get thebest.

Speaker 1 (01:04:05):
So I went to the.
It's a really interesting pointactually, and hearing your
thoughts on that, because I wentto a conference last year and
they talked about it was a SaaSconference, but they talked
about vertical SaaS and theytalked about horizontal SaaS,
and so horizontal SaaS would beyour SAPs, your Microsoft, so
literally you do everythingacross the whole landscape,

(01:04:27):
whereas your verticals now theysay that's actually come back in
trend again now.
So what's the one thing thatyou do, like workday, for
example, I'm pretty certaindoesn't do finance from a memory
service, but not maybe as wellas SAP or Microsoft.
But then you look at otherthings, but yeah, things that

(01:04:48):
just serve a very tacticalsingle need in one particular
area and so but I sort of spokeabout this quite a lot it's a
lot easier to integrate thesedays, right?
So whether you've got best ofbreed, two or three best of
breeds, you can connect thosethings a whole lot easier than
you could have done 15, 20 yearsago.
So does it matter that it'sthree different things?
Possibly not.

Speaker 2 (01:05:08):
I don't think so.
I think it's probably morecomplex.
If you've got that legacychallenge of huge amount of
legacy integrations and oldsystems and new systems.
But for you know, for anyonethat's smaller and more capable
and you understand yourlandscape, you can move around,
and I think it's part of my moveto the cloud.

(01:05:31):
What I realized was, if I gotthat baseline right and the
service and the product wasn'tgreat, when I come to renew it
in three or five years time, Ican pick another one.
It's not the technology that'sgoing to stop me, it's just the
change in the user interface.
And what you'll find in anyorganization is a lot of people.

(01:05:53):
Leaders try to train andeducate in the old fashioned way
.
I need user guides, I need howto videos and you think, well, I
don't get my banking app, Idon't get that on Amazon, I
don't get that on, you know,instagram.
It always changes.
As long as it's intuitiveenough, these people will.

(01:06:14):
These people, people will findit.
The one thing I remember is thatat Barclays this is what blew
my mind at the time was we puteverything in.
We put, but we had a talentprofile, so basically, you could
fill in your own bio and I tooka reference at the time from
Coca-Cola and Coca-Cola had saidif the data is not there, don't

(01:06:35):
go asking people to fill it inbefore you go live, which was
the old way of doing it.
All right, all I've got gaps.
I need to fill this data in,even if it's things like
previous work experience orstuff that you would have given
it the point of onboarding.
Don't ask for it because theway the world is now, people
will just fill it in.
So if people see this was atthe time when Facebook and

(01:06:56):
LinkedIn were the big things,right, people see that gap.
They just nobody then goes andsays I gave you this, they just
did it.
We didn't tell people there wasa talent profile, which was you
know bios, work experience, keepyour thoughts on your
capabilities and 80%.
So I think it was like 100,000people had completed it in some

(01:07:21):
form within the first threemonths of it going live and we
hadn't told anyone where itexisted and it wasn't that easy
to come across.
But because people were goingin and doing performance or
learning, they started to dig abit deeper and that's what blew
me.
It was like well, that's justproven.
What I thought, which is Idon't want to waste time trying
to educate and put outdocumentation to tell people how

(01:07:44):
to do something and ultimately,if they can't find it or they
don't find it, it's either notworth it or when they do find it
, they just use it.

Speaker 1 (01:07:55):
And that's.
I think we've got a lot ofthose consumer apps to thank for
that, though, right, because Ialways say Batman and Nan test.
So my name's still still aroundand she's on Facebook, right,
and so now I post pictures ofthe kids and if we go we'll go
away, because I know Nan's gonnakind of like that and see that.
And I always say to my we saidto my team and I'm saying
meetings now, and obviously wework for so the same same rules

(01:08:16):
apply.
We've got to design it so thatmy name could use it.
Right, and actually we've gotto take stuff out, not put more
stuff in.
So if my name could use it then, then we're winning, and so the
Nan Lee's Nan test become athing, right, so from a year
it's so true, trust people andtrust managers of people.

Speaker 2 (01:08:35):
Because what I've always, as soon as you cross
that corporate threshold andthis is any organization, I
actually see it in tech startupsthat working everything has to
be square, right.
So you're, the boxes on thescreen have to be square, or you
know I mean, whereas actuallyif you go home, it's what it is

(01:08:56):
right, it can be any shape.
It's just a strange even like Isay tech, small tech startups,
you still find this mentality ofit has to do this, what it has
to look like that, and you think, well, nothing else does.
Now you know it really doesn't,so why would we all do it?

(01:09:17):
I think to some extent, onceyou cross that office threshold
or factory threshold, you becomea little bit different in your
thought process.
Actually, you step back andthought about it what can I put
up with?
What do I not like?
But I still use it's the samewherever you go.
You know, and that's what we tryto instill in any organization

(01:09:38):
is you've got to try and trustthe fact that if you have
employed the right people,they'll figure it out, don't,
you know?
Don't feed them by hand, don'tlead them through the path.
Let them figure it out, and aslong as it's broad enough and
decent enough, it will.
At the end of it, it will giveyou data, and that's all you

(01:10:01):
want, right?
You just want the data to beable to determine what you need
your organization to be and letthe data drive you.
Let the data tell you what itsees as maybe issues or risks or
challenges, what I actuallythat's right, you know.
Just let that tell you.

Speaker 1 (01:10:18):
So, mark, if we, if we were to ask you the big top
three challenges and issues Iguess you're now helping
businesses solve, yeah, and ifwe take, maybe, if we take the
big corporate out, you know,maybe some of those more
mid-sized ones you talked aboutthat you work with, what are
those top three challenges?

(01:10:39):
Now that you're seeing thatbusinesses and I guess I want to
ask that in a slightlydifferent way as well is what
would be the three things thatthe HR tech space would be
helping solve at a board levelor advisory or management level?

Speaker 2 (01:10:56):
Well, the first thing is still recruitment.
It's filling the gapseffectively and efficiently.
Lots of the factors, peopleinvolved, right, I have a need
to have this role and that isstill a very high priority for

(01:11:17):
all organizations that I workwith.
So that would be kind of numb.
It still remains to this dayand that's what you can find in
people, yeah.
You know you, obviously you camein to Barthes to help with a
lot of that stuff and what wasthat 10, 12 years ago?
So it hasn't.
It hasn't changed and that'sstill what blows me and I think

(01:11:37):
I'll be honest with you.
I think it hasn't changedbecause it still focuses on what
the recruiter thinks is neededand nobody thinks about what
does the candidate need and whatdoes the actual hiring manager
need.
You know, a recruiter, in allhonesty, is a salesperson with a
target to deliver a certainnumber of things by a specific
point in time, whereas a hiringmanager is looking to fill a

(01:12:00):
role that's relevant to theirsuccess as an organization and a
candidate wants to be in theright role.
So that is still a huge gap inany organization.
I still see that as a failureof people to consider where you
should be looking at this from.
And then it's about thedevelopment and retention of

(01:12:23):
that talent.
That is kind of it is apriority, and I think people
still struggle because theydon't have the real core data to
determine what can my people do?
Not what are they doing, butwhat else could they be capable
of doing?
And the technology and any kindof data solution can give you

(01:12:46):
that easily if you put the datain and let the people put the
data and don't force it in forthem.
You know, ask them what theythink they're good at and the
system will tell you.
You know, leo, he's great atthis, because Lee told me he's
great at this.
But I'm not going to give you ajob without having a
conversation, right?
People forget that.
People forget that this allstill comes back to some layer.

(01:13:09):
Somehow you have to have aconversation.
The tools can drive as much asthey can to narrow the pool down
, whether that's new recruits orinternal mobility opportunities
, but somewhere, somehow, youstill have to have a
conversation, and I think a lotof that is being missed.
That people then focus on thesystem and the data are telling

(01:13:35):
me this, but you can still havea conversation, that person
could be 100% match, but you sitdown and think it's not going
to work Because there's all thewhole dynamics around the
environment, the people, thechallenges.
So that's definitely somethingthat I see as a trend, but the
challenges around thatconversation and then, the third

(01:13:59):
one is I see real challenges inthis is hybrid working in the
new world and people can'tdefine it.
And I find a lot of that.
A lot of the time, people can'tdefine what they mean when they
say hybrid, and then they lookfor the bigger consultancies to
tell them what does hybrid mean?
And you think, well, if I'mjust being a normal, regular Joe

(01:14:23):
, my hybrid to me is there's aflexibility level and that might
be in the days I'm in theoffice or the hours of work when
I'm in the office, or if I worklunchtime to midnight, or you
know.
And people are getting reallyhung up on hybrid working and

(01:14:44):
what that means.
And I think what they're losingis again, as long as a person
has a job to do and they do dothat job to the right timelines,
with the right capabilities,does it really matter?
But what you want to encourage,I think, the hybrid working, is
that there's still anopportunity for people to

(01:15:05):
interact and physically, youknow, face to face, and build
that kind of relationship that Ithink may be missing so much.
But setting the hybrid as achallenge for any organisation
in any part of the worldactually really is.

Speaker 1 (01:15:23):
Yeah, I think we spoke about it just before we
came on in.
The reality is that's justchanged.
I think the techs probably thebiggest change, because I
remember, even like 12 years ago, like it was hard work just
getting on to the system, right,you know, because the cloud
tools weren't there andeverything was accessible.
As it would have been, it wouldhave been battling with VPNs
and whatnot.
So I think the techs not theissue now, but, as we said, all

(01:15:46):
of those kind of softer aspectswhere the things you learn from
your managers, the things thatwill call a moment there's just
the hearing stuff, the languagethat's being used and the good
or bad.
There's so many things you kindof miss out on when you and I
don't know about you.
I go mad when I'm just working.

Speaker 2 (01:16:08):
You know, it's really funny, right, even like phoning
.
Someone has just disappearedand I've done it a few times
recently, but I've just phonedthem and thankfully they pick up
and it's a differentconversation than having a face
to face virtual conversation,you know, like in the good old

(01:16:28):
days when all you had was aphone or you met them and you
have a slightly differentconversation.
And I've found as well in thiskind of hybrid virtual world
that if you want to have a chatand you have to do it through
Skype Zoom or Skype go and Zoomor Teams somebody invites at

(01:16:48):
least one more person to thatchat and usually it's six to ten
.
And you think if I had been inthe office and I walked down the
corridor and we just had tograb a coffee, or I just had a
five minute chat, we'd be done.
But we have to have an hoursmeeting with five other people
to just it blows my mind thateveryone thinks you're more
productive, but I'm not entirelysure you are.

(01:17:10):
But that's my personal opinionand I think that's just me,
because I never thought I'd sayI'm more of that interactive in
person and actually as abusiness owner now, and I don't
know how you felt in the lastfew years.
But nobody was coming to meetyou and you can't drive a new
business frankly revenue ifpeople won't come and meet you.

(01:17:34):
You can do it through a virtualmeeting.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
I guess we were trying to think about the gold
rush, the guys that are sellingthe shovels, because I think
when COVID hit, we were sellingthe tech that enabled people to
work remotely and digital, and Ihad a couple of universities
over here and they said you know, all that kind of cloud based
stuff that lets people accessfrom anywhere, can we have that

(01:18:02):
now?
Because we need that?
Obviously, what happened isthey had the on-prem solutions
and it would just take us caughtout.
So we had a real lucky momentbecause we just got absolutely
smashed in COVID for thosereasons, but on the good side.
But at the same time, like yousay, selling was almost
non-existent and when you'resuch a people or an entire

(01:18:23):
person like myself and just wantto get face to face and face
time, it was extremely difficult.
But I thought you have to adaptand we can see there's two
middle aged men and Ramon aboutit, but that's just the world.

Speaker 2 (01:18:34):
I mean the other thing I saw as well.
It's certainly in my backgroundthat it's very much banking,
heavily regulated environments,whether it's banking or not, but
within a month all of thatstuff would flip.
So the ability to accessYouTube or LinkedIn or external

(01:18:55):
apps from within your internalnetwork, it had disappeared.
I mean, I was sitting in a bankbased out of Asia and they
would not allow anything to be.
You know, zoom Skype Teamsdidn't exist back then.
I don't think it was justbecoming one, wasn't it?
And probably did exist you, butit wasn't in my world yet.

Speaker 1 (01:19:14):
Yeah, it took off in it in current year.

Speaker 2 (01:19:16):
But within a month, everybody had it because you had
no choice and nobody could thendetermine why did we not have
it in the past?
Because we're behind theregulations, saying you can't
allow this to happen.
Well, you can.
You have to control it still,because it's an external facing
app that you can.
Then you know if you're bad,fraudulent, you can use it for

(01:19:40):
that purpose.
Yeah, and that's why I've seen,like things like LinkedIn and
YouTube and that learningenvironment and career
development, just generaldevelopment A lot of places have
got a huge advantage fromopening that up.
It reduces the whole contentproduction around a lot of your
education and training material.
It's not that expensive to getaccess to a huge library of

(01:20:03):
content and things that LinkedIn, learning and YouTube within
reason and again, I think that'swhat I've seen in massive again
goes back to that the verticalsand horizontals.
The verticals are becoming moreprevalent again because people
have got point issues and theyneed to fix that and they don't,
and actually because more oftenthan not, they don't need all

(01:20:24):
the other stuff because theyforgot what was broken and what
they needed to fix and somebodywalked through and says, well,
we need this and you need all ofit and you need it now and you
think, well, somebody lost site.
You could go in and ask anorganisation what do you
actually have?
And I bet you 90% of them can'teven answer what you've got.

Speaker 1 (01:20:47):
It's just amazing especially in the ERP space
there as well how people stillthink Big Bang works.
So we're just going to doeverything all at once and it'll
be on time, on budget andeveryone will be happy.
It's no person ever right andit's just like amazing and
there's always one of the bigfour involved as well, and you
just sit there and from theoutside and you just check it.

(01:21:10):
Was that saying about insanityis doing the same thing over and
over again and hoping for adifferent result?
And it just amazes me how thisstill is a thing in 2023 and how
you just wouldn't do ititeratively, you wouldn't pick
one or two modules and do thatstuff really well and just
constantly enhance.
Right, but I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:21:31):
You were being small, you had to buy the whole thing.
Right, you have to buy up front.
I think the next second time Idid it I went into the ERP and
said, well, I'm not doing that,I'm not having the customer.
If they're not going to usethat thing for two years,
they'll start paying for it intwo years.
We don't do that.
And I sat there and we don'tget the business.
Then.
And then that changed theirmind.

(01:21:52):
Right, you do it, you'll getthe business.
So, I've seen more of that, butyeah, I think if you're in a
smaller organization or just asmaller focus.
Just figure out what's notworking and fix that, and more
often than not, everything elseis then usually okay and you can

(01:22:14):
join it up as you say.
You can find a mechanism togive you some joined up stuff.
You don't have to buy the dream, you just buy the things you
need.
Yeah and then yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:22:26):
What do you think some of the big trends are
marked in the next couple ofyears in the HR tech space?

Speaker 2 (01:22:31):
I dread to think what AI brings to it.
I really do.
I think it's just going to besuch a confusing area for a
while.
I honestly don't know.
I'm just crossroads myselfbecause I just wonder how do you
sit down and explain that it'snot going to end the world and

(01:22:54):
it's not going to solve all yourproblems because it's only AI
if it's got the time and thequality of time and data and
input to give you the results.
It's not going to be thepanacea that everybody thinks it
will be.
So I think that unfortunately,that's going to be a trend
because you said it earlier, thebigger consultancies and the

(01:23:18):
bigger software houses aretelling you it's a trend.
I'm not sure it's important.
It can be highly valuable ifyou understand and use it, but I
worry that people will get soldit and, like the original ERP,
then the original Cloud Dream,it doesn't realise the value

(01:23:41):
that you thought it would.
So I honestly think that is ahuge challenge.
I see more and more of it whereit's just a sales message
getting punted out there intothe wider world organisations
and people just think, becauseeveryone else has got it, I need
it and everyone else has got itprobably doesn't understand

(01:24:01):
what it can do.
So I think everyone will goround the cycle of technology.
I hope they go back and justfigure out what's broken and fix
that, but I do.
I think AI is massive, but Iworry that it's for the wrong
reasons, if that makes any sense.

Speaker 1 (01:24:22):
Yeah, I think the real opportunity there is to say
, if you just can show, use itas a tool rather than as a
transformative kind of concept.
I think that's the best way tolook at it and it helps you do
things 10 times, 20 times 30times quicker than you know.

Speaker 2 (01:24:39):
I'll go back to it.
I said it before unless yourcontent, whether that's a policy
or a process or you knoweducation, unless that's halfway
good, it will be of absolutelyno value to you.
So you need to fix for that,you need to fix for your data.
I have it's never changed.

(01:25:01):
And people, people,unfortunately people get sold
the dream, although I think whatI'm seeing more and more in the
markets that I work in, a lotof people have been doing this
now for a while.
So, like me, you've done this adozen times and they're looking
for the same type of people tohelp them.
And because more and morepeople have done it, there is a
wider group of people who can berealistic enough to say to

(01:25:24):
leadership, I wouldn't wasteyour money on this as long as
they listen.
But I think in you know, 20years ago that didn't exist.
10 years ago it was still asmall pool of people.
But I think what you're findingis a lot more people have moved
around.
They've had the experience ofgoing back to the people you
trusted and they're beginning tosay you don't need to do all of

(01:25:47):
this, it's not, it's not worthit.
So if I'm an organisation rightnow, I generally I'll say this
to any people officer, talentmanager, I see is what are you
trying to fix?
Let's just figure that out andthen we'll figure out what it is
you need to do.
And the second question is,when you know what you need to
do is what have you got already?

(01:26:07):
Because even the Microsoft, eventhe Microsoft suite, those
stuff for you you know, I didn'tknow about dynamics even till
two years ago, right, and youknow a lot longer than me.
And someone showed me and I waslike why has nobody told me
this before?

Speaker 1 (01:26:22):
I'm sure you probably told me way back in the
SharePoint, but Well, no, I mean, I think the Microsoft world,
they've caught up right with theother key players in ERP space
and I think they serve that midmarket really really well,
whether they do it as well asSAP or work day or you know.
But for New Zealand especially,you can see why it's so because
it's reasonably priced as wellfor what you pay in the and the

(01:26:45):
breadth of product.
But but yeah, I think that thereality is there's and I just
probably kind of echo some ofthe things you've been saying
there's very little in whatthose players can offer.
Now, right, you know it's quitehard to be different in that
space because they all do it sowell.

Speaker 2 (01:27:00):
Yeah, yeah, and look you know I really I can honestly
say I'm not entirely up tospeed on I don't see why it'd be
any different, maybe small interms of the organization spread
.
But you know I've worked inorganizations where it's all
slightly different than you, butthe challenges are always the
same.
I keep going back to data getyour baseline right, figure out
what you're trying to fix forand then get someone that's

(01:27:23):
hopefully done it before thatcan help.
You say, here's where youshould spend your money and
there's always a constraintbudget time scope and you can
work around that.
There's so many really goodproducts that will solve for
point issues.
Fix that and then you might getfrom those products extensions

(01:27:47):
and enhancements and move onfrom there.
But don't, don't, don't jumpall in until you've tested the
water.

Speaker 1 (01:27:55):
Yeah.
So, mark, as we bring it theinterview to a close, I'm going
to ask you a question, to askeveryone.

Speaker 2 (01:28:01):
If you could go back and give 21 year old Mark some
words of advice, what would thatbe Probably, maybe not to take
things too personally in your30s and 40s yeah, yeah, I think
it would be along those lines,is you know?

(01:28:24):
I think you get absorbed inwork sometimes and, as much as
I've had a great career and I'vereally enjoyed everything I've
done and most people that I'veworked with and I've learned
from most people, there was a puwhen I wasn't learning and I
think I wish I had taken actionon that sooner and that was just
through stagnation and the sameorganization doing the same

(01:28:45):
thing, probably.
But yeah, I don't think I wouldchange much, other than maybe
not to worry about the smallerstuff.
When you're in the detail, it'sdifficult not to.
But yeah, because at the end ofthe day, everyone's trying to
do their best.

Speaker 1 (01:29:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:29:05):
Yeah, so that would be the only thing is yeah, try
not take it as personally as Imay have done for a period of
time, but yeah, I can't arguewith what I've done.

Speaker 1 (01:29:15):
So good advice, okay.
And then if anyone wants tohear a bit more about you and
kind of what your organizationdoes, what's the best way to get
?
How?

Speaker 2 (01:29:25):
are you?
You can drop me a note at mymarket, angstonconsultingcom,
and I see this.
Everyone right, I'm absolutelyhappy to give everyone anyone in
our time to just click aroundthoughts.
It doesn't matter where theyare in the world.
I'm not looking, actually notlooking for business.
I enjoy that more than anythingbecause actually the answer is
you to the same question isalways the same.

(01:29:48):
I'm not.
I'll tell you an honest view.
I've always done that withpeople.
So, yeah, if people arethinking about it, regardless of
product, set, as you say, isagnostic.
I don't.
I don't support any product.
I haven't really done, althoughI'm tarnished by the ACP brush,
but the reality is thechallenge is about identifying

(01:30:08):
what your problem is and some ofthat adoption challenges if you
bigger.
But yeah, I can always givepeople on earth just to kick
some stuff around and give somethoughts.
I don't expect anything withTom, but I just hope that people
get value from and if I do,great.
If I don't, it's really not anissue for me, okay.

Speaker 1 (01:30:27):
Perfect, all right, mark.
Thanks so much for taking thetime.
Coming on to time emotion, andI'm sure lots of Kiwi and Aussie
listeners will be fascinated tohear about the world of banking
and HR tech over in the UK.
And so yeah, thanks so much,mate, and I've been good
catching up.

Speaker 2 (01:30:43):
If they understood it , we but thanks anyway, it's
good to see you.
Cheers.

Speaker 1 (01:30:47):
Mark.
So that's another great episode, done and dusted, as always.
I'd love to hear from you ifyou know anyone that's got a
really good story to tell abouthow they are or not living a
productive life.
If you want to get in touchwith me, please do so by my
website, wwwleastevansco.
That's wwwleastevansco.

(01:31:11):
You can email me, lee atleastevansco, or get in touch on
LinkedIn, which way I also hangout In the meantime.
Have a good week.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial

Betrayal: Season 4

Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Decoding HR Technology with Mark Cunningham

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial

Betrayal: Season 4

Crime Junkie

All Episodes

Decoding HR Technology with Mark Cunningham

Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial