People Challenges Facing Organizations in 2021

Connect with Dave:

Connect with Dino:

• 
• dino@turetskyconsulting.com

Connect with David:

• 
• 
• david@turetskyconsulting.com

Connect with Dwight:

• 
• dwight@turetskyconsulting.com 

Resources:

• Visier
• HR Data Labs Season 2 Episode 14
• HR Data Labs Season 2 Episode 12

• “The data shows that we’re a history 30-year high in people leaving organizations, and so that’s
  where I’d say the name comes from—The Great Resignation.”
• “I’ve always seen it as: inclusion is a bit more of the outcome, the real prize that we’re shooting
  for, but diversity its the place to get started.”

Announcer: 0:02

Here’s an experiment for you. Take passionate experts in human resource technology. Invite cross industry experts from inside and outside HR. Mix in what’s happening in people analytics today. Give them the technology to connect, hit record, chord their discussions into a beaker, mix thoroughly. And voila, you get the HR data labs Podcast, where we explore the impact of data and analytics to your business. We may get passionate and even irreverent, but count on each episode challenging and enhancing your understanding of the way people data can be used to solve real world problems. Now, here’s your host, David Turetsky.

David Turetsky: 0:46

Hello, and welcome to the HR data labs podcast. I’m your host, David Turetsky co hosting with me today are Dwight Brown and Dino Zincarini from Turetsky Consulting. Hello, gentlemen. Hello, David. And we have a very special guest. And I know I say that a lot. Because we try and find people inside and outside the world of HR technology, to talk to us about what’s actually happening in the world of HR. But today, we actually do have a very special guest, Dave Weisbeck, from busier. But those of you who don’t know, Dave, or don’t know, Visier, they’re a very important company in the world that people analytics, not just because of their market position, and because they just got a boatload of money, but because they do a lot of really cool things in the world of people analytics. Dave, why don’t you tell us a little bit about yourself and a little bit about Visier?

Dave Weisbeck: 1:35

Yeah, happy to my personal background is been in the analytics world for slightly longer and 25 years now. So I’ve always had a passion and love for data. What we recognize, though, is that the there was a whole world of data that we didn’t really understand very well, a lot because that data was complicated. And it was hard to make sense of it. Of course, I’m talking about people data, right? There’s really the foundation of Visier is saying that, the questions that we want to ask and answer about people more complicated than we ask about products and customers and other types of things we analyze. And so we need more innovation, we need more focus, we need better solutions to solve that problem. And so about 11 years ago, we created Visier to try to do exactly that. bring together the world of people data, and let people see the truth and create a better future through answering deeper questions on people.

David Turetsky: 2:30

Outstanding. One fun thing you may not know about Dave, and I tried, I can’t say I’m a pioneer in this space, but I’ve used it a lot, is we both use the internet for lots of different purposes. But one is a fascinating way and actually very early in the world of the internet. Right, Dave? Right. Yeah.

Dave Weisbeck: 2:49

So the actually met my wife on the internet, which, okay, common nowadays, right? There’s enough applications out there online. datings, you know, you know, I would say in the mainstream. And so the real key to why what makes us so unique, because I want my wife on the internet in 1995. Which To put that in perspective, Google was founded in 1998. So search for, right. But if you’re if you’re old enough, you’ll remember pen pals as a thing people used to do, to find out about experiences from people around the world. When the early days of the internet, they tried to create something similar. And that’s it was such a forum where I met my wife.

David Turetsky: 3:36

And when we calling those things, bulletin boards back when

Dave Weisbeck: 3:39

There was bulletin boards, but also just like the chat forums or discussion forums, they’re very clunky you type you hit the button and like, like 30 seconds later refreshed with their response. It’s not quite the real time messaging

David Turetsky: 3:52

we expect to have today. And definitely not as mobile. No, definitely not mobile. So you’re an early pioneer for Match. Plenty of Fish or eHarmony.

Dave Weisbeck: 4:01

Exactly. So. So yeah, I’m a model for for all those organizations of how to do it. Right.

David Turetsky: 4:08

The success story. Yeah, that’s excellent. So today, we’re going to talk to Dave about are some of the really incredible issues around the challenges facing organizations and 2021. First question for you, Dave, is there’s been a lot of talk about what’s been called the Great resignation. What exactly is that? And should companies actually be worried about this?

Dave Weisbeck: 4:32

I think definitely, companies should be very worried. So that’s the easy part of the answer. What is the great resignation? So I would describe it since I’m come from the world of analytics. I have to go into some numbers and start there. And there’s a wonderful report that is produced regularly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It’s called the jolts data to the job openings, leaves, turnover. So they tried to track what’s happening in the movement of labor. And, you know, across the US. And when you look at that data, one of the wonderful things about that data is it not only gives you a modern view, it gives you the trend line of what’s happened for the last 30 years. And when you see consistent patterns in that data. So if we go back to 2008, and we look at the, what happened with what I lovingly refer to as the finance apocalypse. So, you know, that was a housing crisis, you know, financial world, kind of you ever had challenges, right? People hunker down in their jobs when that happens. And so the amount of resignations, people leaving organizations fail to kind of historical levels. And it’s been increasing since then. And then what happened recently, of course, with COVID, a ton of uncertainty, people hunker down again. But now that we’re coming to the tail end world’s opening, what are we seeing? Everybody’s decided that now’s a great time for change. And so regardless of the reasons why, you know, that’s a great conversation in its own right, the data shows that we’re at a historic 30 year high in people leaving organizations. And so that’s where I say the name comes from with a great resignation, is that we’re at a 30 year peak, we’ve never we were at historic levels. We’ve never seen this before.

David Turetsky: 6:30

I mean, there have been times in the past, when people have worried about the problem with the lack of thought of the lack of knowledge workers, or the loss of knowledge workers, or people who had intellectual property walking out the door. There have been lots of times when we’ve had lots of discussions about how do you keep those people? Is there the same type of thought process going on right now about how do we keep these people? Is it a question of the remote work? Is that a question of the way in which people thought they were treated during the crisis? What do we attribute this? And what can we do about it?

Dave Weisbeck: 7:10

Yeah, there’s a, there’s this notion of a perfect storm, there’s even a next movie about it right, then you get a confluence of events to put it fancy language. And I think that actually, when we get to these historic moments, I think that’s often the case that we’re in a place at a time where a whole bunch of factors are coming together. So when the economy is doing quite well, people tend to leave organizations at higher rates, the economy is actually doing quite well, despite, you know, the, you know, the pandemic, when people have a natural cycle to leave organizations, there’s a certain amount of tenure you build up and then you look for the new experience. When people pause that out. What can happen is we get a you know, it’s the, it’s the snake swallowing the large, large animal, it’s a balloon working its way through the system, right? So we get a bit of that effect. But I think one of the unique new ones that we don’t have a way to think about historically, is the work life balance the remote the do I really want to get back in the car for my two to three hour round trip commute? Do I want that experience? Do I want to go back to that? Right. I think there’s even another factor to think about as well, which is a bit of disenfranchisement, to sin. fancy word, but basically looking at particularly minorities, saying, I’ve, I’ve been losing out, and I’m not certain I want to participate. And so you’re trying to decode as well as some of the data whether people are leaving for new opportunities, or leaving the workforce entirely. So I think it’s a whole bunch of these things coming together that compound on each other, which leads us to know the great resignation.

Dino Zincarini: 8:55

And Dave, this is an interesting one, golly, everything’s interesting, but in particular for me, because turnover is sort of the the first use case or the the most compelling use case for people analytics. We’ve been measuring turnover for forever. We’ve been talking about understanding turnover, it seems forever. Is there something different and unique about this moment that we find ourselves in?

Dave Weisbeck: 9:18

Yeah, I actually want to a pretty common conversation I have is, so you know, Visier, we have some great technology that relates to trying to predict turnover, for example, we can say who has a higher propensity to leave, you know, we have we have a number of ways that we can help organizations and a pretty common conversation is even around the idea that some of the historical things that we look at, we can’t look at anymore, because it’s such a unique point in time. So what happened last year, is not a you can’t look at it and go, let’s compare that to this year. Because last year was such an anomaly. And so I think I think that’s part of, you know, the answer to your question is, is We’re seeing patterns we’ve never seen before. And I think we’re also seeing people being driven by choices. They never thought about before, that they didn’t like remote work as an easy example of that. It’s, I have this wonderful phrase I learned in biology of all places called punctuated equilibrium. What does that mean? It’s a fancy term. And it’s a really simple idea. Change happens really slow, until all of a sudden it doesn’t. There’s like something smashes the system. remote work has been something that has been slowly coming in, and increasing overtime, very slowly. Now, suddenly, we had a crash to the system, we were all remote for a while, you know, as long as the work could be done remotely. And now people have realized, hey, we can actually be productive. It’s actually a better work environment for many. For some, it’s worse, let’s be fair. And so I, I now am contemplating things I wouldn’t have contemplated. If my employer won’t allow for remote work. Maybe I’m not going to a different employer, who will, because it allowed me to manage work and life better. Because it loses again was, you know, three hours stuck on whatever freeway is your local freelance choice?

David Turetsky: 11:22

Well, I think that brings us to our next topic, which is the world of hybrid work and burnout, actually, which is that when we think about returning to the office, and we think about the decisions that not only as good consumers, but also as good employees slash employers, how do we possibly make those decisions and not disenfranchise a bunch and not destroy our productivity? What’s the linchpin here? What’s the data showing about one of the right decisions? And what are the right answers? And what are the even the right questions about hybrid work? And bringing people back?

Dave Weisbeck: 12:02

Yeah, it’s a it’s a rich tapestry. Another one of my favorite expressions, it’s a complicated topic. I think if you boil it all down, what is the single greatest question that people are asking? productivity? If we can be just as productive? Why not? And so then what do people throw into the mix around productivity? So I don’t know, I probably, it’s definitely north of 50. You know, leaders and organizations I’ve talked to about this topic, in the last probably even six months, let alone a year asking what it is they are seeing, did they see productivity fall rise stay the same. And I’d say the broad consensus has largely stayed the same. There may have been even in the early days, a little bit of uptick in productivity. But most people put that in the bucket of like, there’s a sense of camaraderie of that that we’ve got, plus all of the fun parts trappings of life, we couldn’t do any more. We couldn’t go to concerts, I couldn’t bars, we couldn’t do any of that stuff. And so there’s maybe a small uptick, but in that, probably, even in terms of productivity, but then people throw in what are the benefits of the watercooler is the shorthand for like the network effects that we get from the hallway conversations, the water cooler conversations, what about losing those? What about those people as well, that are in your one bedroom apartments, and they just don’t have a place and a space, so they can’t be productive. And then of course, there’s a whole classes of work that can’t be done remotely. So you throw all of that into the mix. But the one that also comes up fairly consistently, is this notion of a trust, that if I can’t have some of I can’t look across the floor and see people busily working. Do I trust that the work is being done. And that’s the one that I think is the big trap. Because ultimately, the right way to do this, if we’ve known for a very long time is to focus on outcomes, not tap. And then, you know, it goes all to the nature of modern work and the way work is done. But there’s still, you see it most often in places where, where there is a low trust, where they say, Hey, we need to break from this and look at doing bringing everybody back to the office. And I think most of the the burnout pieces, you know, the all of the other trappings of life that we you know, we have to we have aging parents, we have young children, all of those things. People I think also realized that remote work can either be a big positive or a big negative to that. And so there’s I don’t think there’s one consistent answer that they took on more work or they are they’re able to see how they could manage that better because they are just close and near to where they were. To be done?

David Turetsky: 15:00

Well, this is definitely a multivariate equation. And it is going to be very different for the different types of industries that you’re talking about. Some industries cannot work remotely. Some industries have some functions that actually can and would probably be better off being remote. But I think and as a leader yourself, you’ve probably gone through this math about the renting really big real estate versus the revolution, and evolution of remote work and the technologies needed to support it, there’s got to be some kind of meeting of the minds on the employer side. But then, you know, the other part of this equation is that not only the results, and you were mentioning just a little while ago, the personal issues that people have to deal with on the personal side, because we’ve all taken economics, and it’s 24 hours in the day is equal to leisure plus work, right? It’s 24 equals L plus W, there is no other, I mean, you can add a lot of other factors in there. But that’s it, there’s only 24 hours in a day. And solving for the W or solving for the L, you know, we both have to optimize both work or work. working remotely, is no different. When you committed to the office, it’s just different ways of being able to manage W and L. Right. Exactly.

Dave Weisbeck: 16:22

Yeah. And I think there’s another factor as well, that people forget in the too often in the equation here, as you’re thinking about from the employer side of the fence, which is your talent pool, right? Did it just grow by 10 times? I don’t know, maybe more like 20 times. So most work with most employees were hired, you know, within a, you know, call it an hour radius, maybe two hour radius if you’re unfortunate, or a long commute of the of the office. So now how big is your talent pool? And what is the benefit of that? And so the and that’s where I was, you know, it’s, it’s, it’s a very complicated equation to solve for. And then on the employee side, I mean, even speaking personally, I have eaten healthier, much healthier. My office life was, you know, go out to the whatever local shop, right, which was never quite healthy food. Oh, there’s these little small conveniences of what the kitchen is not that far away. For some that’s a negative because the kitchens not that far away. So no, one answer for everyone.

David Turetsky: 17:23

Absolutely, don’t The one thing I wanted to ask you with an end with was as a as a human. You know, my hope is because you were talking about the revolution and evolution of how the pandemic has changed things. We’re now in a global world, we can actually find gig economy workers around the world using things like Fiverr, and work market, and be able to pick people up relatively inexpensively and get a lot of great work done. And I can work for organizations around the world relatively easily, and with very little transaction costs much, much better than I ever could before. So to your point, as a human, now, the borders have really kind of opened up for us, as long as the productivity is there, and we get paid from the results of our labors there.

Dave Weisbeck: 18:13

Yeah, and so the, the idea that the talent pool now is very global. The temple has been global for some time, but it was kind of compartmentalised. We could produce a thing here, we could ideate a thing here. But now, teams themselves can you know, so we’ve narrowed that what we can do, you know, so that which expands the opportunities, so we narrow the work, expand the opportunity. And so that means we’ve got access to a whole host of talent, we didn’t, but again, to this idea that the we’ve had this, because we’ve had this, this big change hit us all at once, it forced us to also to home, the communications and collaboration tools. And so we even saw, you know, there was winners and losers by an industry perspective, with the pandemic, you know, certainly hospitality, you know, everybody can understand, but a lot of technology was actually a winner, when it was any sort of communication collaboration platforms. And so now we’ve made those investments and put those in places which can hold the line on on that productivity. And I’ve seen, you know, even personal experience little things, where when you are most when you have a big center of gravity for an organization, there’s one city, which is your headquarters, and most employees are there and some portion of your workforce is remote. Often, you know, on the sales side, very common way organizations are structured. The remote people never quite feel attached. Right? Because you’re in a meeting and there’s eight people in the room and two people remote and those two people can’t really participate. But now all 10 can participate because we’ve solved some we’re all remote or we’ve solved some of the communication gaps. So there’s all these little benefits of well as well that are coming in or, or or infrastructure platforms we put in place that also are helping us to be more global and thinking about the talent that we can provide. We still don’t solve basic problems like time zones still matter. I don’t think we really have a solution to that problem. I don’t think tackle assault on one. Not anytime soon, at least, but but you know, you know, three hours, we can manage, you know, timezone differences. So, so it’s still, if nothing else, it’s still a 10 or 20x improvement in the amount of talent that we have available. Right.

Dino Zincarini: 20:28

I’m curious, Dave, what you think about how companies use analytics, because I mean, it’s not new, right. We’ve been using people analytics for a long time. We’ve been building them for a long time. And what you were saying earlier is interesting, in that we described a unprecedented event, a change, which, at the same time, and very rapidly changed both both the demand side of labor, and the supply side, the nature of work has changed PR, the whole remote work option. So suddenly, there’s a lot of flux in this labor market, is the way we use people analytics, does that need a dusting off? For example? I see a lot of companies that think achieving a people analytics deployment means I’ve got a dashboard. Right? I put my metrics out the dashboards there, the executives can look at it, once a quarter, they go through their KPIs. We’ve achieved people analytics, or is there something more here? What are your thoughts in how we do it? And even if a company already has people analytics, given what we were saying about this monumental change? Do they have to dust off perhaps how they’re using it?

Dave Weisbeck: 21:40

Yeah, so I’m fond of pointing out to people that everybody does analytics. So the only question is how well you do it. And I think that’s a lot of the heart of what you’re relating there is that the the producing the the headcount report, just showing a breakdown of turnover of, of which departments, which regions, things like that, the it doesn’t give you something that’s actionable. And I think that’s the key of what people really need to be fixated on. I used to relate this in terms of the you know, you back, remember, when we used to travel, remember those good old days, very common in your hotel, you get a copy of us a today or slide under the door and go in the bottom left corner, some, you know, interesting factoid, I just always related. See, that’s interesting. But it’s not actionable. And you always have to think about analytics in that vein, is it interesting information, because actual information and go seek the actionable I can make a decision, I can change something. And as it relates to the theme of the great resignation, there are real actions that you can take that you’re right, that there’s this upheaval in the market that gives you opportunities to acquire talent. Because now we have an influx of skills coming into the market, we have an opportunity to look internally and internal marketplaces or for talent. And so developing people learning is is going crazy right now, because people are looking to skill and rescale. And then of course retaining. understanding why why are people leaving your organization is a is a question. If you can answer it, you can take action. Who left? Yeah, okay, put it in the history book. I can’t I don’t have a time machine. I can’t change it. But I can figure out why people are leaving, I put in programs that change that. So a lot of people leave for career advancement? Do I need to look at my own compensation and promotion cycles, opportunities for advancement? Can I can I go after that problem, and actually make material benefit to retaining people. That is a really simple straight line, you can draw from understanding why people are leaving to putting in a program that can change.

Announcer: 23:49

Like what you hear so far, make sure you never miss a show by clicking the subscribe button. Now. This podcast is made possible by Turetsky Consulting and listeners like you. Thank you for your support. Now, back to the show.

David Turetsky: 24:02

And I think that brings us to our next topic, which is talking about diversity, and talking about how we measure it, talking about what we can do about it. And with some of the new sec regulations, and some new regulations are actually coming out of the US Congress about the mandatory reporting of material metrics in the people world, the people analytics, Dave, what are we seeing in terms of being able to report on substantive or substantial diversity metrics and what companies are doing about them? Yeah,

Dave Weisbeck: 24:38

I actually find this very fascinating that the, the, a lot of the focus for tip of the spear to create change is coming through the investor world, you know, the thinking, SEC, NASDAQ as well as looked at some of these reporting. And so it’s it’s fascinating. To me, that is coming from the world that we can most easily be cynical about just all about the money, right? You know, who cares? It’s all about the money and, you know, return on shareholder, you know, or returns. And so but I think that what that also tells us this is something about the two things really, one is, there’s tremendous amount of research that shows more diverse boards, more diverse, more diverse leadership teams outperform less. And I’ve always had a simple way to justify that for those who need an illogical argument. You don’t look like your customers, it’s hard to relate to your customers. And so your leadership team should reflect, you know, the grand melting pot, right. Um, and so I think that, you know, that that’s one side of it. And I think the other side of it is, transparency, is one of the greatest ways to create change, you manage what you measure. And if we don’t measure this, we won’t manage it, we won’t improve it, we won’t make real change. And that’s one of the other powers of analytics is it tells you what matters because you measure what matters. And so if this matters to us, we’ll measure it. And one of the things that we’ve always you know, we live in a capitalist society, you know, there’s no apologies for that we do, right. And so I’m the pinnacle of the capitalist world, the investor world, if that is telling us this matters, that’s a great thing, because it’ll help all of us to put time attention and to make real change.

David Turetsky: 26:31

And one would hope that with these sec regulations, that companies are going to do the right thing, tell us real issues, real data, real problems, and how they’re going to solve them. So to your point, we can vote with our feet, we can vote with our dollars, or or whatever unit of measurement we want to use, and say, I don’t want to invest in companies that are not like me, or have thoughts like me, or that are treating people the way I hope they’re treating people just in the exact same way we did that with their environmental disclosures, their carbon footprint disclosures, their sustainability disclosures, however you want to put it. So hopefully, what companies are going to do are start to foment what are the right things to tell the audience, which is the market, and the market will be smart about what they’re hearing, and to your point be able to vote with their dollars.

Dave Weisbeck: 27:28

Yeah, and I think it’ll, it’ll give us more individual choice, when it relates to you know, I spend my hard earned dollars and whatever the store happened to be the grocery store, the you know, the car lot wherever it is, it’ll give me some more agency there, which is always good. But it also gives us the ability to the idea that you know, the the data and more transparency is good, it also gives us a view to look across, where where’s the outliers, we could start to see them by industry, we’ll start to see them by looking at, you know, the is their patterns of what you really great companies are doing, the patterns of lots of great companies are doing. And so it’ll give us not only the the individual view and some agency and also give us the bigger picture view will help to fill that in. And I think the other thing that will also help us to do is diversity in some senses, the easy one. And what I mean by that is it’s it’s a, we mostly think about diversity in statistics into counting and math, what is the ratio? How many of the hard ones inclusion, right, but the I’ve always seen it as inclusions, bit more of the the outcome, the the real prize that we’re shooting for, but diversity is the place to get started. And so I think what we also see here is a, the faster we get through the diversity problem, the faster we can start to take on the conclusion problem. And so it gives us It gives us that starting block out of the starting block rather kind of focused, I think we need to start to get to the tougher problems.

David Turetsky: 29:09

We had a Harvard researcher on her fellow and she was talking about the problem of diversity and inclusion, and really dive in, she really double clicked on the nature of inclusion and what it means and trying to figure out how do you change real behaviors about how do you promote people? How do you give them opportunity for advancement? How do you give them opportunity for overtime, and for hours worked? We have to start measuring it and bring it to light and then be able to train people on how to actually utilize it and the data to show the patterns and be able to prove to ourselves that either something’s going right or something’s going wrong. And then how do we change those behaviors to change to make them different and to cause impact?

Dave Weisbeck: 30:01

Yeah, actually I have I have a lot of fun debates with Lexie Martin who should be familiar name to start off. And she’s she’s a, she’s an icon in the in the people analytics but even just the larger, you know, HR HCM space. And so we have fun debates trying to figure out the truth of you know, these many complicated topics and inclusion is one we have quite a bit of discussion about. A lot of times inclusion is looked at as a feeling of belonging. It’s a it’s at the very least it’s feeling as is a key piece. If I feel like I’m included, then I’m included. And the obvious point that both of us go to so how do you measure that? And so there are many of these things that we try to measure in the world that we that are, we can’t directly measure. For those who refer all to people listening who are fans of quantum mechanics, it’s a bit Heisenberg principle of shut up to those two people. But, you know, so you can, there’s certain things we really can’t measure. So we have to look for proxy measures, things that we can start to look at. And so inclusion, we start to think about, can we start to get to some basic things like looking at meeting participations, promotions? Sure, we can go there more directly, we can look at, you know, spans and layers and organizations and, you know, understand participation. But can we go to some more, seemingly mundane, but actually might be more powerful things to measure in the organization, that they’re included in the conversations that matter? Which leads to the obvious question of, well, how do you figure out what are the conversations that matter, but there’s a lot a lot of decisions, and a lot of ways decisions are made in organizations that don’t always just follow the straightforward organizational structure that, you know, people build personal networks? How do you start to decode some of that and find out who’s in those networks? And is and how diversify those networks? You know, and so we would talk about it in more cliched forms of like, you know, the the old boys network or something like that, right. And we can all go to a country club or wherever they went. But there are modern, you know, less easy to see versions of that, because so we can we start to intersect those? And understand, is there a network that is leveraged for decision making? Is it inclusive? Or is it not? So it’s a it’s a fascinating place. And I think, though, there’ll be tons more research and tons more innovation done to try to really unpack and inclusivity.

David Turetsky: 32:30

And I think we could actually have an entire podcast on Oh, na and DNI with oni with RNA? And how, you know, you could talk about the circles and talk about the inclusive inclusivity of those circles and what, you know, what it shows?

Dave Weisbeck: 32:46

Yeah, absolutely. It’s the way modern work is done. It’s in these virtual networks more often than just the team structures, the the organizational top down team structures. And so, you know, trying to measure those is is just in itself is ripe for a lot of innovation. Absolutely.

David Turetsky: 33:07

So, Dave, we had a lot of really passionate conversation today, around a lot of the challenges facing organizations, when it comes to people in 2021. We talked about the Greg resignation, what it is, and how to deal with it, or how to at least approach it. We talked about hybrid work, and what’s actually happening with people either coming back to the office, and then how do they deal with the personal side? And then we talked about some of the new ways that the SEC is requiring mandatory disclosures and how that’s impacting diversity, equity and inclusion. Any other thoughts that you had before we close today?

Dave Weisbeck: 33:41

Yeah I think a couple. I mean, a couple they the first one comes to mind is I think there’s a sense that people have that the resignations, and you know, people leaving is there’s a, there’s not much you can do about it. The you know, the data, the science says, No, you can’t. And it’s, there’s more opportunity than people believe. Yes, we can spin up more recruiting, you know, yes, we can look at, you know, providing more opportunity for internal people. But we can also get ahead of, of the real reasons that people are leaving the the data can hold out truths that that we wouldn’t otherwise understand or know. And we can we can change the answers. I think what also goes with that is, is people underestimate the cost of people leaving replacement cost as a simple number that gets thrown around a lot, it’s pretty easy to defend. It’s gonna cost you about one and a half times the base salary of somebody to replace them. And so it is an urgent problem. It’s not a, a, you know, the great resignation is not just something that will we’ll put in some history book and we’re done. It’s an urgent problem today that is real impactful to the success of the business. So it’s also where the HR team can rake in real difference to the top and bottom line of an organization and I think it also connects last point it connects to What we discussed around diversity, because I think that that notion of disenfranchisement, disenfranchising experiences that minorities women have in the workforce, I think they’re, you know, women in particular hit harder from COVID, because they took more of the work life balance they had to take on both sides. Right. Um, that’s also impactful. And so what’s happening for the investor community is a good start, but we all have to contribute. Absolutely.

David Turetsky: 35:32

Dino, any other thoughts?

Dino Zincarini: 35:34

Yeah, I mean, I’m, I’m still reflecting on the discussion how this crisis is unique and unprecedented. Our previous data may not help us understand, neither how we got into it, how we manage through it, and most importantly, how we get out of it. And so for those of us who are data nerds and people, analytics, nerds, this is an opportunity to, as Dave was saying, really revisit what we’ve got out there and ask the question, is this actionable? Can my business partners take this and use it for something tangible? And if the answer is maybe, then I need to do more work? I need to think about how do I tie this to some of the things we’re seeing happening or anticipating happening, so that I can help my organization put this stuff to work?

David Turetsky: 36:26

Outstanding. Dwight, anything?

Dwight Brown: 36:29

I think we’re really in a fascinating time. And I think that this highlights that fact, the, you know, the great resignation, what’s going on there. And this idea of hybrid work. And like Dave said, we just went through a period that put that in fast forward, even though it was already in motion, but a more slow pace. And so this is a fascinating conversation around that. It’s a really exciting time, that very fascinating time and gives us a lot of opportunities from an analytics perspective, to help to start to explain what’s happening. what are we seeing, and what can we do about things that we feel we need to do something about? So certainly appreciate having you here, Dave.

David Turetsky: 37:13

Absolutely. So thank you very much, Dave, for coming and sharing your thoughts.

Dave Weisbeck: 37:19

Thanks for having me. It was it was a lot of fun. It was my pleasure,

David Turetsky: 37:22

our pleasure, as well. And hopefully we’ll be able to do this again soon. Looking forward to it. Great. And thank you, Dino. And thank you, Dwight.

Dwight Brown: 37:29

Thanks, David.

David Turetsky: 37:30

Anytime, and thank you for listening. And if you like this podcast, please hit subscribe. And if you know somebody who might find it interesting, please send it off to them. And thank you very much. Take care and stay safe.

Announcer: 37:42

That was HR data labs, please visit Turetsky consulting.com forward slash podcast to review the show. add comments about this episode, or add new ideas about upcoming shows you’d like to hear. Feel free to be creative. But please be nice. Thank you for joining us this week on the HR data labs podcast and stay tuned for our next episode. Stay safe