3Sixty Insights #HRTechChat with Maurik Dippel, Co-Founder and CEO of CircleLytics

Technology has advanced to the point where we don’t really have to subject ourselves to the inflexibility of a number of traditional, conventional practices anymore, in human capital management. One of these is our approach to measuring employee engagement and collecting employee feedback. Technology has evolved. We can dive much deeper now and achieve several objectives at once. We have much more at our disposal now than just one-to-many surveys set to quarterly, twice-annual or yearly cadences.

“We’re finding that a lot of the old ways, the conventional or traditional ways of doing things, just don’t cut it,” says Maurik Dippel, our guest for this episode of the #HRTechChat video podcast. Annual employee engagement surveys and the like just aren’t “up to the to the task. The employee survey is an inflexible instrument.”

Innovations in driving employee engagement and gathering employee feedback outside the confines and limitations of the conventional employee engagement survey — these are areas of expertise squarely in the wheelhouse of Netherlands-based CircleLytics, where Maurik is CEO and co-founder. The CircleLytics solution comprises artificial intelligence; natural language processing; well-thought-out, tailored, guided open questioning; facilitated follow-up interaction between parties, who see and react to each other’s responses; and additional activity to make the gathering of employee feedback highly interactive, dynamic, meaningful and… engaging. It’s an approach that in fact promotes employee engagement as a part of the process. This is far more insightful and helpful than the administering of a survey to measure employee engagement, in my opinion.

Maurik agrees, of course, and notes that the model has a way of optimizing management-employee relations and helping these and related stakeholders reach consensus and accord internally on challenging issues. With its AI and NLP, CircleLytics’ solution analyzes their answers and interactions to capture as broad of a spectrum of organizational sentiment as possible, to help employers reach consensus more readily and in ever better ways, over time. As a microcosm, it’s not unlike the idea in the macro that we must inform algorithms right now with as broad of a spectrum of human sentiment as possible, to help ensure that AI evolves as humanly as we want over time — the focus of another episode of #HRTechChat, from November 2021 with leaders from Cornerstone and AbilityMap.

But before you view that episode from last year, be sure to watch this one. Maurik does an excellent job of explaining how CircleLytics works. Plus, he and I covered lots of intriguing ground. Candidly, Maurik really made me think, and we think our chat will make you think deeply too on new possibilities in employee feedback and engagement.

Our #HRTechChat Series is also available as a podcast on the following platforms:

See a service missing that you use? Let our team know by emailing research@3SixtyInsights.com.


Brent Skinner 00:00
Hello, everyone, welcome to the latest episode of the HRTechChat, video podcast. And very excited today to have with us Maurik Dippel. And I think I’m saying his name correctly. He is the CEO and co founder of CircleLytics and CircleLytics is focused on employee feedback, some very innovative thinking around that with AI and, and really, really doing it very little justice with that description. I’ll give you an opportunity to describe it. Thank you for thank you for joining us today. And I know you’re from you’re joining us from the Netherlands. Is that correct?

Maurik Dippel 00:42
Yep. Yeah. A few hours away.

Brent Skinner 00:47
Well, you know what, we have a little bit of a comment today, maybe? Because it was actually negative 12 degrees Fahrenheit. I’m not sure what that is centigrade, but it’s, it’s pretty cold. Today here in New England. So I felt like I was I was there with you in spirit, at least whether

Maurik Dippel 01:07
we do have some summer days. But you can count them to ants. I admit. We’re now in the same cold as you are. Yeah, yeah, I guess, right. All this distance stuff and people in different time zones, and working remote, etc. Well, there’s basically instantly but who will talk about this?

Brent Skinner 01:31
Yeah, yeah. It’s amazing the technology that enables us to have these conversations with people across the globe. I absolutely love it. And I hope to visit the Netherlands sometime. Maybe more, you could give our viewers just a little bit of insight into what circle Linux does. And I just we had a conversation you and I, maybe almost two weeks ago now. We got pretty deep, deep into it. It’s to me, it’s just fascinating. Maybe you could give our viewers just kind of a a primer, and then we can take it from there.

Maurik Dippel 02:09
Yeah, thanks for thanks for introducing me and having us over bread, we really appreciate it. And just to just to pitch it in a few sentences, we want to step up the game of employee listening for employee engagement. And we saw a few issues with the current methodology of a surfy based solution only. And it doesn’t really serve all purposes of HR leadership nor employees. So we thought, let’s add a component an innovation to that. And let’s enable employees better to answer open questions with their own answers. And that’s a goldmine, Calico already mentioned that people love to be taken seriously. And we thought, well, let’s put that into technology. So we introduce employee dialogues, from the cloud, to corporates and governments all over the country. And of course, also outside the Netherlands and in the US.

Brent Skinner 03:12
I love that idea in and you know what’s interesting about it, and there’s so much to talk about here. But one thing that pops to mind immediately is just in the industry, I think we’re seeing when it comes to employee experience, and gauging employee sentiment and, and in trying to ensure doing our best to ensure to help ensure the greatest, greatest potential productivity and employee satisfaction with their jobs, right? We’re finding that a lot of the old ways are the conventional traditional ways of doing things. Just don’t, they just don’t cut it. They’re, they’re just not up to the job up to the to the task. So, you know, I see some, you know, it’s a broad stroke, but I see some similarities here. So common denominator, so you take, take, for instance, the, you mentioned the employee survey, it’s kind of a it’s it that is an inflexible instrument. A lot of companies will do once a year. Sure, there’s there there’s pulse survey capabilities out there, but a lot of companies will do it once a year. And then they’ll they’ll analyze it and they’ll reach some conclusions about it maybe three four months after it’s after it’s administered when the information is no longer current it’s stale. A be the questions may not be that we’re asking that Yeah, to specific I’m not I’m not getting it the real the real the real insight that you need. And then you know

Maurik Dippel 04:48
exactly yeah, good. Yeah. Yeah. You ever feel you have no issues with surveys, but they do serve was also still good purposes. And so you do You do get generic reporting, you do get an holistic numerical view on a lot of items, once every now and so that’s good of surveys. And if you want to compare yourself with other with Pierce, then you get a lot of information. And for that you need generate questions that are same throughout the branch. But if you want to address specific matters, engage your people for specific company matters, challenge them to help solve it, and understand the why behind the numbers. They need to add open questions to this whole employee engagement arena. So we added that, and we learned that people love it, they embrace it, to the max don’t overwhelmed. They don’t want to have to say they don’t want to be taken seriously. So they type like crazy. And they type all these beautiful answers, and they truly speak up. And drill Issue five years ago when we started off is that an amazing amount of people join in these dialogues. And in the first round, they start typing and a database got overflowing with, with responses from men priests. So our first customers were really puzzled like, wow, this is one, this is a goldmine, it surprises us. It really adds value compared to surveys, but how to digest this beautiful gold. And so we invented instantly the second round in his process. That’s where that’s why it’s a dialogue instead of a conversation, or meetup or survey. So we ask people in a first round, what do you think of this in this in this? How do you assess this disease? Please explain why how to improve ABC. Why? What’s what obstacle can we take away to increase the uptake of ABC and why? So we ask a lot of why we really put them to work and they love it in a second round. We allow them to review anonymized answers from other colleagues. And data their learning starts. So we introduce a collective round, right after an individual round. That’s why it’s a dialogue and interesting thing, Brent, is that we see people actually having second thoughts for the question you put so in a second round a review in a few different people’s answers, different perspectives. And it actually makes them progress their thinking and have new thoughts and actually embrace answers that they didn’t think of themselves. So we have a much smarter, more accurate out of over three really eating the people what’s really out there. What’s really there, solution wise, thinking wise, analysis wise, you really dig deeper. That’s, that’s the level of collective intelligence. It’s quite an untapped source of information and engagement in many companies.

Brent Skinner 08:28
I have several questions. So in observation, so first of all, it’s just occurred to me, listening to you describe this? How would any organization really get to the bottom of any type of, you know, pernicious issue or, or fundamental challenge without engaging in this particular process? That’s one question of mine. It’s more of a rhetorical question. I think the answer is there. You couldn’t a be it’s, you think about you think about an annual survey. It’s an employee, they often call it employee engagement survey, where you’re measuring, ostensibly measuring employee engagement, whereas what you’re doing with your process, is you’re actually cultivating engagement while exploring employee engagement, and it

Maurik Dippel 09:30
Yeah, that’s it. Can I use that sentence? Yes, you may. Well, that’s actually it. And what I mentioned in the beginning, we were a bit struck by this surfy fatigue thing going on, and we didn’t, we didn’t we weren’t that much convinced six years ago, while researching this market of employee engagement. We weren’t so much convinced turning a survey into a pill survey was Good would solve would solve that matter. It’s still a survey. And then we, we noticed that people actually are, are full of ideas and opinions. And now they don’t share it with HR nor leadership, they share it with each other. Or they leave the company, or they just get a bit of disengaged. And we thought, wow, why not turn it around, disrupt that employee engagement survey and make people make people enable people to speak up. So we, you can actually apply the same questions you used for an employee engagement survey, in our instrument. But you add to that coma, and what’s your key recommendation to improve this score? So you actually reach out to potential and people just, they give it all to you. Just ask.

Brent Skinner 11:09
Now, this is interesting, because what you’re describing his, his a as a, let me see if I can describe this recouping or am. Okay, so, so over the course of the regular operation of an organization, right, there’s, I would say that there’s a, maybe there’s a, I don’t know, if there’s a survey out there, that’s sort of figured this out, if there’s a percentage, but I imagine I’m hypothesizing that there’s a certain percentage of innovation, that’s uncaptured, innovation or unrealized. That’s the word unrealized innovation. And it’s because of some of the things that you described, an employee just leaves, they had an idea, but they never shared it with anyone they leave for whatever reason. Whether it’s related to that idea or not, is, you know, that’s separate, or they talk about it with themselves, but it never, it never makes its way to leadership. And, you know, there’s just myriad, just myriad potential reasons why innovation? You know, it’s latent, there’s latent, I think that’s what latent innovation, it’s not happening. Right. And, and so. So thinking about this sort of, you know, theoretically, I would say that, it’s probably impossible to ensure that 100% of the potential latent innovation, your organization definitely happens. But there are ways to optimize or to increase the realization of currently latent innovation in your organization. And to me, this is one of the ways of doing so is actually fostering or encouraging these, these conversations. It’s almost so almost it’s, it’s, it’s, in addition to many other things. It’s a catalyst for innovation, is it not?

Maurik Dippel 13:08
It’s a catalyst for innovation in that’s one use case. And, but first of all, our initial focus now, a stat HR does struggle with the follow up of employee engagement post service, they have numbers, but they don’t know the why. They cascade reporting down to management teams, and stimulate them to dig deeper and find out why and work on that with their teams and departments and regions and districts more than half. They are puzzling. Because they need to have a conversation with their team. Well, when do you get all your team members in one room? One, one manager said to me, I have I have 300 people in six countries to get to get them in one team’s meeting, to follow up on an employee engagement survey report that says that they don’t like so much the l&d effort of the company and the DNI and it isn’t. I just have numbers. So what will be my first question, in a non anonymized process, are all psychological safety evaporates? It’s time inefficient, it’s unsafe, and it’s ineffective. So it takes a month to have these break down. And these are the sessions with team members and find out guys widely to score me this low did hear that so we say to HR solve that matter by introducing employee dialog as a substitute or follow up of employment and get off your employee engagement survey. And then you facilitate management teams to dive instantly dive deeper with question says, what we had with recent Phillips case, they, they took out the lifted out to low scoring and two high scoring items that are very important for a company effort that continent. And they repeated the same question in circular sticks. And they said, comma, and can you elaborate on the why behind your score? And then in the second round, people started to score each other’s answer, and actually prioritize which answers are most more feasible and more relevant, and others. And they pushed up all the elements that make more sense. So management within one week, they could act upon it. That’s a different game. Yes, it’s also a catalyst for innovation. It’s a catalyst for transformation, to catalysts for culture, for behavior, to understand risks. And so we see a lot of use cases. And so 70% of our attention is focused on HR leadership, to introduce employee dialogue to them. That’s interesting. I’ll be all over the place.

Brent Skinner 16:23
Well, I have a few questions now, around this. So one, one I’d like to get into, it would be great to get into some of the, you know, what’s, what’s the, the methodology behind this, for instance, and I know that, that machine learning and to certain extent, artificial intelligence are involved in this, but I’d like to talk a little bit for first, about where does HR sit in this? Is this know when you’re talking to organizations? Or is it is it usually HR that? Obviously HR is typically the one that’s the organized the department, the division? That’s, that’s driving the, say, the engagement survey, right? But, but when it comes to these types of these conversations, and facilitating them and making them happen? Is that also an HR play? Or do you find that you’re speaking with all sorts of folks throughout the organization? When you’re when you’re when you’re say you’re beginning, your own engagement with a new user, for instance?

Maurik Dippel 17:38
Yeah, yeah. Well, good question. And there’s no, not one answer to that. So split it up into three and limit, myself to that. A large hospital is, is introducing these dialogues. Now, on team level. Individual Team, management teams use it for their individual teams of like 40 to 80 people. They run regular employee dialogues, in addition to hospital runs a annual employee engagement survey, serving different purposes. The choice is made to apply this employee dialogues were made in the end by the board, not by HR. Because it’s much more it’s um, it’s more leadership choices. Technology choice. Right. So that’s one case that we see. Another case is that some companies really are running towards the end of a contract with a service provider. And they’re out there and beauty contesting now more innovative solutions. So one of the larger brewery companies in the world is actually now in RFP process and asking us, can we step up the game of service, because we are considering to substitute then three substitution. And the first case is that that is indeed its quality control. Its customer research, innovation and other departments that are using this tool just for the collective intelligence aspect of it. Yes, it engages like crazy, but our main responsibilities not to increase engagement. The main responsibility is to manage to manage risk to increase quality, to speed up innovation. So to use instrument to as an intervention for behavior for alignment, and to capture the intelligence of the group.

Brent Skinner 20:10
Now see that’s, that’s he brought up a really interesting point there. Engagement, we measure engagement, because we know or we assume that it’s the, the well worn premise is that, you know, if your engagement is good, then all these other things are going to be better. Right. But, to me, it seems, in this might be a little bit premature, or I don’t know if it’s too much of a leap. But to me, it seems like it’s, it might be better just to address those things, you know, just to go straight for the outcomes, or affecting the outcomes that you think engagement is probably measurements of, right. So it’s so you know, so that does what does DNI

Maurik Dippel 21:03
does collaboration as l&d There’s, there’s all kinds of things. So it’s better to instantly address with the owner of that have that have that have the topic to instantly address with the relevant audience, the item is such. And so we have companies that that have a retention matter. Now, many companies have a retention challenge. And so with the person responsible for retention, you find the right audience, people that just left the company, you still have to address this, get in dialogue with them. Understand, not with exit interviews, but understand from the people that left visibly left accompanies, what would be a key consideration to ever come back. What will be a compelling reason to have stayed with the company? What reasons? Couldn’t you share with us in an exit interview, but the relevant for our company? And then a big thank you in two rounds, Canadore prioritize, and you tap the intelligence from a group instantly, having a very beautiful intervention regarding retention. Ask the people that recently imported in the last two to six months. Don’t only introduce him to courses and how to get into the office and get a password. But also ask them an outside insider’s look. How did our company exceed expectations? Would you apply for this job again today? What would be your key reason? Understand the deeper drivers of people considering staying? Staying? considering leaving or leaving the company? Yes, it engages? Yes, you include. You include our people? Yes, you take the box of inclusion? Yes, you tap the diversity of brains of people. So it’s indeed, you, you do use beautiful diversity of all these brains all together in solving your matter.

Brent Skinner 23:16
You know, a couple of things strike me first of all, that kind of

Maurik Dippel 23:23
call your question beat in 10 years are still employed, bringing engagement service?

Brent Skinner 23:29
Well, we can get to that question. Yeah, I don’t know. I know that the thing is, that kind of information that that those kinds of testimonials, essentially, what you’re what you’re talking about right now, though, that would be good information, even anonymized for employers? You know, recruiting website, for instance, right, you know, their career careers page. That that just occurred to me now, you know, what’s interesting, it’s an engagement survey might be a good way to, to measure the, the success or effectiveness of, of a circle Linux project. Right. So you’ve, you’ve done this and I would imagine, have you seen this? Have you seen that the employee engagement scores and through the traditional survey, administered after you’ve, you’ve gone through an engagement with a user, have you seen those, those scores improve?

Maurik Dippel 24:41
Not for that we are too new in the market. Okay. And that’s one, what we do have at the end of each dialogue, so it’s considered composed of two rounds, as synchronic rounds as the Grand Rounds. And after that second round, They do ask you to what extent you enjoy this dialogue? Or do you think of it, and they can rate us, between one and five. So we are preaching now. And we almost approached a million employees and participants over the course of few years, you’re scaling up. So we’re still small. And we have from 10s of 1000s of participants, we got their rating. And we score an average of 4.1, on the five point scale of them enjoying this way of being included, and being listened to. And they know in a second round, that they know upfront that it might not be debt, their ID and their opinion, that will matter most to the company. And representing a collective of employees, it might be totally different ideas that get most support in the second round for most employees. Are they okay with that? So let me phrase it in a different way. If surveys there used to be approached as an individual, if dialogues they get used to being approached as an individual, within a second round, also be part of a collective, learn from others, listen to different perspectives, become a bit wiser, a bit better informed. And then we asked, Do you still think the same as you did a week ago? What’s your new thinking? And that’s the thinking we capture. That’s the thinking that this disclose. In the end, at the end of dialogue in the dashboard, we add a bit of AI, we add a bit of machine learning, we add some very front running text analysis, and you get an instant, real, real time result in your dashboard that you can you can quickly turn into action. Can you

Brent Skinner 27:05
talk a little bit more about the machine learning and how that how that works over time as you do more and more of these with, uh, with, say, any one user?

Maurik Dippel 27:20
Yeah, I can’t tell you so much. The second round algorithm is quite complex. And imagine that these dialogues are running also with 10 1000s of people, same time. So when you have for three questions asked in his first round, you get 10 1000s of texts back in an algorithm redistributes that in small subsets that have as least as possible look alikes in each individual set. have answers from other people. Actually, every employee in second round encounters quite a variety of perspectives and answers from other people. And that’s quite complex. And what we do learn an algorithm learns from their behavior. We know what your opinion was, for example, regarding the lnd strategy, our company’s l&d efforts of last three months, they know what you think of that. You wrote that down. We know what you encounter in the second round. We know what other people’s opinions and we know how you’re moved your thinking from what you said. We analyze your texts, and we see what other opinions you’re actually not expressing your support for. Okay. An algorithm is learning from that, from that behavior. And it’s extremely interesting. We, we learned there, for example, that the people don’t have the tendency to look for answers in a second round, that resembled an arrow. Okay. So they’re open for new ways of thinking. So if you ask, what’s our key obstacle, why project ABC got delayed like this? And it’s fatigue matter. So please put some effort in it. And you asked that question to the people, they come up with all kinds of obstacles and issues and matter. Then the second round day, start favoriting and giving support for ideas or response from others that are simply better. They don’t care that it wasn’t theirs. So there’s something collectively going on, which is also cultural matter. That’s why it’s much more choice of leadership. Pre engagement is not the selection of a tool, it’s a leadership decision. How do I want to run an engage my people

Brent Skinner 30:13
the thing that strikes me about this, that’s really interesting is this is, you know, this is sort of the, the, the, the, the ethical, diametric opposite of what we see, say in some of the consumer social media realms, where, where the algorithm actually ensures that like minded people just end up interacting mostly with like minded people, we end up with sort of, you know, a balkanized situation where people aren’t understanding each other’s views and aren’t exposed to each other’s views. This is the exact opposite. And, and of course, what, you know, it’s, why would you not do it this way, in a business setting, because you want to ensure the highest likelihood of organizational success and in that, that, you know, and part and parcel of that is, is, you know, reaching a chord, and all these sorts of things. So, that’s very interesting to me. One thing that came up during our, our previous conversation, that that I just want to bring up again, because it’s very, it’s very interesting, and it’s in this a little bit of a, of a tie in with some of the podcasts that we’ve done here with HR Tech Chat. It’s this idea that, and I’m going to try to do my best to describe it quickly and succinctly. So it’s the idea that right now in the development of artificial intelligence is very, very important to, to inform the development of AI algorithms with as broad of a an inclusive of a spectrum of employee skimming, peak human sentiment as possible. So that so that the AI will develop with the broadest understanding comprehension of the full spectrum of human thinking. Yes. In it, that’s very important, because if it doesn’t, then we’re, we have a saying here in the United States, you’re recruiting for bruising, right? I think it’s, I think it’s in the UK, too. But anyway.

Maurik Dippel 32:30
But what you’re just

Brent Skinner 32:33
kind of what, what you’re what you were describing in our previous conversation, and I’m catching it here, too, is that it sounds to me like you’re doing that within the microcosm of an organization. So your, your, your, your artificial intelligence in your solution is gathering as broad of a spectrum of the employee sentiment as possible. Right to inform. Yeah, yeah. To bring, bring about as positive or useful, effective of an outcome as possible?

Maurik Dippel 33:09
Yes. And why do we go first back to the employees in second route, instead of pushing all the data in our AI and algorithm which one have, because they know better? We ask, what sentiment? Or do you think, to what extent does it inspire you? And they can in the second round, they, they, they express their appreciation or support for other people’s opinions before between a minus three and plus three score. So we have effector. And we have an intense in the intensity of their sentiment and attack words that matter most to them. They know semantics. They know what’s ironic in a company, they know what’s a more cynical way of expressing an understatement, or they understand that machines don’t, because they don’t we work for with Unilever, we did projects for IKEA for Annika Phillips, different culture. There’s different languages, different ways of approaching solder, and the people know best. So when they start valuing other people’s perspective in the second round, they leave those scores tack words and even comment why so they express why they see it like that, and why they appreciate that idea more than other people’s ideas or their own idea. And it’s such an appealing attractive way for them to do so. That that more than 70% of the employees. Review more than 20 items from other clinics, a set amount of more than 50% reviews even more than 40 items. More than 40 Anonymous answers from other people, they review it. And he adds course tag words, add comments to it. So extreme enrichment and that’s the collective intelligence. And, and only after that we add a bit of AI to lay, and to get some additional information and some layers of information and some weighted workout instead of a flat word count. And all kinds of tools to further analysis, analyze information, after the enrichment by the people themselves. is very encouraging to and it’s fun. Yeah, mainly fun, they love it. So if they rate us a forum and five point scale on average for now, over five years, for 300 plus companies now for a few 1000s dialogues, I think they are expressing, I’m not fatigue, I will certainly fatigue, but I’m dialogue happy, I can have your listening, I can speak up. And I love to hear what others are saying I don’t care if it’s better. I don’t care. I’m also just one guy or girl. Could be wrong. I’m wrong. Yeah. So it’s, I think it’s a it’s a relief. Also for them. No one’s no one is looking at them, and saying, Oh, Mark, you, you have the mic now. You better speak up and better be told, you can be wrong. Some people say this, of course, is system one and system two theory of gaming, and fast and slow thinking, fast thinking and in the second round, you need reflection, and to learn from others and do a bit of Slavic.

Brent Skinner 36:57
Yeah, yeah, that’s, you know, to me, and I’m looking at the time and just to kind of tie this into the broader spectrum of what’s happening in HCM today. And, you know, whether you look at, you know, performance management, or employee engagement surveys, or whatever, you know, you have, we’re moving away from these inflexible sort of annual or, or, or very rigidly, cadenced processes that are, that are sort of in here, not, not purposely but just inherently sort of top down. You know, not necessarily very interactive processes that are not very good at, at harnessing capturing some of these nuances that you need to understand, to, to prepare to, to, to bolster employee sentiment and all these kinds of, we’re moving away from that to much more collaborative process processes, whether it’s, whether it’s what we’ve been talking about today, you and me, right? Or we’re talking about maybe continuous performance enablement, all these types of things where it’s much more collaborative, the technology is finally got to the point where we’re able to, to do what we’ve maybe I don’t want to get too hokey here, but maybe have unconsciously wanted to do the whole time, right? We’re kind of moving away from the old ways and really moving into a future of work. I mean, honestly, this is this, this is the future of work right here. This this collaborative, technology facilitated, new way that that’s no longer rigid, no longer inflexible, it’s much more collaborative and interactive. That that’s, that’s if I were to sort of put a, you know, a stamp on it in terms of, you know, the big picture that, that to me this, what you do with circle Linux is just another really, really rich example of this move into the future of work.

Maurik Dippel 39:12
Yeah, I like to think so. Yeah, yeah. Well, I love and I love to see brand. I love to see so much comments from the participating employees that they say, Wow, cheap. You can ask me for anything, or finally, or fighter never, never asked. And they really are. You show them trust. So you become much more high trust in culture in enabling employees to understand really management’s key words and key challenges and ask them collaborate with me a bit. Think with me. and help me solve it together. So we emphasize a bit more of this together aspect. And that means collaboration. And I believe that’s much more the future of work, instead of being all, all these individuals that in some way have to be forced to collaborate, it’s more natural to collaborate. And I think we facilitate it very much.

Brent Skinner 40:23
And you’re and you’re very much supporting the evolution of organizational culture, which, which absolutely dependent hinges on trust, feeling heard, and all these types of things. It’s just it’s really, really fascinating. Maurik thank you for joining us for this episode of the podcast has been just an absolutely fascinating conversation.

Maurik Dippel 40:48
Likewise, thank you. Thank you.

Share your comments: