Deb Calvert: 0:00

People want to feel ennobled. They want a sense of belonging. They want to know that the company cares about their well being. And by necessity, HR sometimes focuses on compliance and doesn't look at individuals. And we need to strike that balance. We need to rebel a little more towards the side of let's make sure people are understanding that we actually do care about them. We need them. We want them to feel a sense of satisfaction in the work they do. This is

Kyle Roed: 0:25

the rebel HR Podcast, the podcast where we talk to HR innovators about all things people leadership. If you're looking for places to find about new ways to think about the world of work, this is the podcast for you. Please subscribe on your favorite podcast listening platform today. And leave us a review revelon HR rebels Welcome back, rebel HR listeners extremely excited for the conversation today. We have with us, Deb Calvert, she is the founder and president of People First productivity solutions. We're gonna dive into that here in just a minute. She was also prior that an HR director for Fortune 500 company, and really excited to have her here today. Welcome to the show, Deb.

Deb Calvert: 1:09

Kyle, thank you, I have been binge listening to rebel HR and just love what you're doing. Thank you.

Kyle Roed: 1:15

I appreciate it. And and I appreciate you, you bring me some of your some of your talents and expertise here, we are going to be talking a little bit about some innovation and some some strong opinions that you have on some of the established talent procedures that we have. But before we get into that, I want to understand a little bit more about your background. So tell me what prompted you to found people first productivity solutions?

Deb Calvert: 1:41

Well, about 18 years ago, I was working for that fortune 500 that you mentioned a media company. And they were an awesome company that they won every sort of award for people development and people practices and, and they were innovators in that space. And it was just a delight to be in there. And then when they put themselves on the auction block, it's as if overnight, everything changed, right? They're stripped away, to be more profitable, stripped away everything that really made them special. And I watched it and as the company went through that process coming into work felt like the longest funeral I'd ever been at one day after another. And so I realized just what difference it really made when you put people first in an organization. And when I decided to strike out on my own this, this notion of putting people first to build organizational strength, I realized that was something I highly prized. And that's the backstory.

Kyle Roed: 2:41

I love that. Yeah, and I love the name and the name, people first, it's literally in the name, right? You know, it's not like it's like, on the you know, on page two of mission statement document like it is the name of your organization. And certainly, I think something that our listeners are probably, you know, connect with, as it relates to the organization. So tell me a little bit about what, what, what the organization does. And then you know, the other thing I want to mention is you also founded the people first Leadership Academy as well. So give me an opportunity to tell us a little bit about that.

Deb Calvert: 3:15

Okay, we'll do it in reverse order, because it'll make more sense. So people first Leadership Academy is about two years old now. And it is all about offering free and affordable content, we have about 40, some odd courses, elearning live sessions, immersion programs, coaching, it's all about for HR and managers, and frontline folks to come in and be able to access something that helps them to find and liberate their hidden potential. And it too is about organizational strength. Where does that come from? personal strength? Where does that come from it it comes from being able to, to put people first not person first, but the plural. How do you find something that works for people in an organization? And so that's really what we're all about in everything that we do. And the Leadership Academy, it's just a way for people to come and access that easily, whatever whenever they want. Got it.

Kyle Roed: 4:17

Got it. So there's a couple comments you made that I I thought it was fascinating the language that you used. So you know, one of them that I thought was interesting, as you mentioned, you know, people, not person first, so So walk me through, you know why you while you kind of made sure you call that out a little bit, I guess want to dive into that a little bit?

Deb Calvert: 4:37

Well, it is a misunderstanding. So for any company, and there are quite a few anymore. Any company that says people first is one of their values. This is a stumbling point. And so I like to make the distinction. Someone in their organization gets to a place where they don't feel like their needs are being considered. And maybe they're quick to say Hey, you're not putting me first not putting people first? Well, there's a difference. Sometimes we can't put a single individual first, if it takes away from what we're trying to do for people more broadly, employees, customers, whoever it might be. So looking bigger picture and helping people to see that bigger picture perspective is part of the deliberate choice about the plural people.

Kyle Roed: 5:23

Absolutely. It reminds me, and I'm sure many HR professionals listening to this or, or know exactly what I'm talking about, it's the conversation that you have, with the individual about a process. That's, that's a challenge for them. And it would be really easy if you just changed one thing. But you have to have the broader context of what that does for the person in front of them and the person behind them, right? It's like, well, yeah, this would make your life easier, but it make everybody else's life harder. So like, you know, let's, let's come up with an alternative solution. The other thing I wanted to talk about, which is really, one of the items that I was really excited to dig into today, was you use the word potential. And, you know, depending on your school of thought, you know, that word could can be a little bit, you know, inflammatory and can, you know, like, because we associate that word with how we have thought about our talent systems, you know, and a lot of times we've labeled people with the label of levels of potential, right, so high potential, low potential mid potential. And what I'm really getting at is, is the ever loved and utilized nine box talent review model, which before we hit record, we were talking about a little bit like, that's the school that I was brought up in, you know, I, I also started in a fortune 500 company, and they had all the systems, all the structures, and one of those structures was the nine box. So. So I'm gonna pause there, because you have a fresh approach to the nine box. So I'd like to understand maybe, first of all, what prompted you to come up with a different approach to the nine box? And then if you'll humor me and give me a little bit of insight into your fresh approach?

Deb Calvert: 7:13

Absolutely. So the nine box talent review approach that so many HR professionals likely use and are familiar with, it was developed first by McKinsey was developed for GE, and that was in 1970. So three years ago, we I thought, just It's ancient. And that's maybe the first clue that there's something that isn't up to up to date. So when I was a director with the fortune 500 company, I participated in the standard talent review process across the organization. And my input along with just six other people in our ivory tower, corporate office, right, the six of us, we determined how senior executives in 31 markets were paid, how they were promoted, how they're perceived, did everything that they did, and those impressions that we offered, they had the power to override facts and figures. And the impact of our mostly unfounded opinions lasted far longer than whatever formed our impressions in the first place. So I, my initial experiences with it were that, you know, maybe, maybe something here isn't quite legit. Maybe there's too much subjectivity in this process. And you nailed it, when you said that it's about potential because those are the two dimensions performance, okay, that that's easier to make an objective, that potential How dare you think, sets my potential I don't even know my own potential. And know in this day and age in the workplace, we have all these extra difficulties, all these challenges. We're short staffed or burned out, we're constrained by trying to figure out are we remote today or not? All the challenges that we have, and they influence me they influence what I can do they influence what I demonstrate. Plus, I might be a little disengaged and holding back not applying my full discretionary effort. What you're doing as an employer has a bearing on how I show up and then you're using that against me to assess my potential it. It makes no sense in my opinion. So that's my beef with the model. As it stands, it's the dimension called potential. Part two of your question was So Deb, what do you think we should do differently? And I think it's just as easy as let's replace that dimension. That arbitrary subjective, insulting dimension. Let's not tapper cap, people buy something that's objective. But instead if we take a look at the dimension of performance, keep it as it is. That's That's what people do. Right? What people do, how much of it they do? Let's make the other dimension how they go about doing it. And let's try to make that every bit as objective as those performance indicators. The way you do that, as you define how we do things here, use your values, what are your values look like in action, set professional standards that codify them with examples of behavior. This is what it looks like, when somebody's excelling. This is what it looks like when somebody's average, this is what it looks like when they're, they're not meeting those those standards. And if we can get to now the two dimensions are what you do, and how you do it. And it's all behavioral, and it's all objective, keep it as a nine box, but take that subjective potential peace out. And by the way, you'll also be taking out a whole lot of unconscious bias and other challenges that that you're facing if you're if you're trying to look at people through a subjective lens. So when when, and you won't have people anymore that you're labeling. Hypo LoPro. Most people are really just popo. Right? Once they find out about it, they're they're feeling passed over and pissed off. So let's just stop.

Kyle Roed: 11:15

Popo passed over pissed up. I like that. I like that.

Deb Calvert: 11:20

So I think, you know,

Kyle Roed: 11:23

a couple of, you know, I've had a couple of lightbulb moments as you're as you're talking about that, you know, I think I think the first one and, you know, I, I tend to agree is is, you know, potential is so subjective. Right? And, you know, in fact, if anybody's familiar with with Steve Brown, that was he was on our show a number a couple years ago, and that was one of his big pieces is like, kill that word. Right? Like, like, you don't know, what somebody's potential really is, like you said, sometimes you don't even know what your potential is. And oh, by the way, sometimes your potential ebbs and flows, depending upon the day that you're having, the week that you're having, the year that you're having, you know, I mean, it's it's like, you know, it's just kind of, it's just an unfair measurement. And what I've seen you I mean, I've been in the room, just like you were in the room, Deb. Back, when, when you were an HR director, I've been in the room, and I've had to be the person sitting there. Thinking about these, these hypose and going, Are these hypos actually really? hypose? Or are they just similar to the people that think they're hypose? Right, you know, the, the whole ever loved halo effect? Or? Or is this person friends with this person outside of work? And they, you know, and they like this person, and they get along, or they share interests, or they like the same sports teams, for God's sakes, you know, like, there's all these different reasons that somebody could be high potential. And, and, and many of them are, are fallacies. Yeah, they're unconscious

Deb Calvert: 12:55

biases, you're talking, you're talking about familiarity, bias, affinity, bias, proximity bias, all of those. And then how about conformity bias? It's easy to pass through? Well, they've been hypo, the last two years. Let's just keep them there.

Kyle Roed: 13:11

Yeah, they haven't delivered a project in two years. But they've been hypo for the last year. So you know, we might as well, we don't want to make them mad. So we're just leaving on the list. Yeah. Yeah. And I think the other thing too, and and, you know, I say this with with all you know, all honesty, like as an extrovert like it, it helps me just because I'm like, the loudest one in the room a lot of times, right. And so a lot of times you're also passing over people that actually have an extreme amount of potential to do wonderful things. But they're just not like noisy enough, right? Or they're not noticed as much as people who are and and, you know, in a lot of times, I think that we can put people and categorize people unfairly to the point that then they either a quit or they're just underutilized in your organization.

Deb Calvert: 14:00

So I agree style over substance, it we can deceive ourselves if we are looking for something superficial.

Kyle Roed: 14:08

Yeah. That's, that's, that's my own bias. Like, I know that about what I've just noisy, right. So, which is why I have a podcast. I mean, let's be honest. Right. So trying to fit into my, my, my category here. So I think that that potential one I think is really I think that's a really important call out. You know, I guess one question that I have that I'm curious to get your perspective on is one of the challenges with disrupting and being a rebel and driving innovation is you're fighting against the current and, and because this has been around since 1970, GE did it and everybody assumes well if GE did it, then it must be right. Let's not look at G's current stock price, but you know, that Be that as it may, and but what you'll find so often is is, if you want to make a change to that type of model, you are fighting against the current. And typically that current is somebody sitting in like an executive level chair that was raised with that school of thought, or has always used this tool and doesn't necessarily see a need to change it. So, So Deb, what, what advice or guidance would you give us as we sit here in these seats? And we're all probably shaking our heads and agreeing with what you and I are talking about. But then what do we what do we do? How do we overcome this natural kind of inertia? With a tool like the nine box,

Deb Calvert: 15:36

you know, I have two responses. The first is, let's get their attention, let's get their attention. Because here during the Great resignation, employee engagement matters more than ever. And if you want to retain people, you have to be careful about what you do. So we know that we know through research that employees don't really like the nine bucks, nine bucks model, if they know about it, they have some suspicion around it. And if you can only put if you've got stack ranking, like GE did, if you can only put 20% of your people in the top boxes, that means you're providing less, you're thinking less of and you're providing less to 80% of your workforce, less opportunity, less esteem, less support less than noblemen, you name it. So can you really this is the question I'd be posing to people who want to keep the nine bucks, can you really afford to disenfranchise 80% of your employees wouldn't make more sense to create more development opportunities, more support more ways to create a sense of belonging and a belief in the organization and organization that believes in every employee? So that's my first thought is let's let's leverage employee engagement and what we know about that, and none at all for the question, if you are using the nine box model, and you're using it in a way that sets those thresholds like 20% and 80%. I would caution you because there has been litigation about stay stack, stack ranking systems, there's a tongue twister.

Kyle Roed: 17:09

We all we were all falling. It's all good.

Deb Calvert: 17:11

Yeah, that sort of step ranking systems. They're subjective. They're arbitrary. They allow for discrimination. I'm not making that up. It's it's been found to be true in courts of law. And that's why Ford and Microsoft and Accenture and, you know, lots of other companies, they've all dumped ranking systems. Maybe it's time for other companies to do that, too.

Kyle Roed: 17:31

Yeah, if all else fails, if there's lawsuit risk, right, that that can usually get an executives attention. Right. You know, usually you don't want to start there necessarily, but but but, you know, coming from somebody who worked in an organization that was was a plaintiff and one of those lawsuits, or a defendant won the lawsuits rather, yeah, we Yeah. Change now, before before here in that situation. But, you know, I think it's really, it's a really important topic to think about, because and, and so often, in our world of human resources, it's easier to just take the tool that's already there. And but but I'll share a story that, you know, that, you know, a personal story, when, when I was in an organization, we did nine box, and I'm the guy doing the nine box. And then of course, there's a nine box about me, and anybody you know, and so it's like this, this big, this big system that we would would utilize. And at one point I went into, went into my leaders office, and I and at that time, I was I was planning to get married, I was getting ready to start a family. I wanted to put down roots in the in the town that I was living in. And you know, I just enjoyed living there. And so I went in, and I told them, it was my HR leader, I said, you know, I don't want to be relocatable for the next few years, I want to put down roots, we want to start a family. And then you know, and then once once we've done that, you know, we can we can have that dialogue. And he looked me dead in the eye and he goes, Okay, but you won't be high potential anymore. And I'm like, wait a minute, wait a minute, okay. Are you telling me that one of our values is integrity, and I'm coming to you in advance, trying to have integrity and our relationship as you know, employer employee, and you're telling me by doing that, now, I'm, I'm kicked off the list and you know, and at that point, I'm like, okay, whatever. But to your point, what happened next over the next year, is my, the entire, like, the treatment that I got from my employer after that change in status was terrible, terrible employee experience, you know, I lost all my training opportunities, didn't get to, like, you know, go, you know, do the things that were kind of enjoyable. I was kind of, you know, as pulled off of certain like project teams that were enriching and valuable and taught me so much in my role. And, and, you know, in that I had a conversation At one point with one of my, one of the other leaders in the organization, and he said, listen, when you said you couldn't relocate, you basically shot your head off with a shotgun in this organization, you might as well just go find another job. So I'm like, well, so I wouldn't find another job, right? I mean, but that is, that's, that's a real life story. And, you know, it's one of those things that as, as an HR professional, I'm like, Okay, this is effed up, I'm not going to do this. My organization, I don't want this to happen to anybody else. Right. And I think, I think if anybody else has had that sort of situation, or anybody's had that happen to an employee within the organization, it's on us, as leaders of organizations to not let that kind of thing happen. So I'm off my soapbox, but that's a true story.

Deb Calvert: 20:50

I'm gonna give your former employer a little bit of credit, and then I'm going to take it away. But the credit, the credit, they get as if they had objective criteria. So like it or not, you know, that's a crummy criteria, but they had an objective criterion. Fair, unfortunately, right. They weren't transparent about it, let them if you're gonna have those, let everybody know about it ahead of time, here's what we expect for the people that we're going to invest development dollars into, put it out for mass consumption if you're going to do that. Right. Right. Yeah,

Kyle Roed: 21:27

yeah. So you know, I mean, it all worked out fine. In the end, you know, but my career's is is, is intact. But you know, certainly that organization, you know, had had an opportunity for improvement. And, yeah, it and so, you know, to this day, you know, there's skepticism, from my standpoint, as far as how the nine box should be leveraged, utilized. The other thing I want to talk about a little bit, so and I think this is really, this is really where I think a lot of the, the light bulbs for me went off when you were talking about it is the, the changing of potential to something that's, that's objective. And, you know, so So you had mentioned, you know, how somebody goes about doing the work that they do, and I think, you know, to me that I immediately went to like a kind of a competency framework or a model of, you know, like, really defining behaviors. Am I on the right track there? You know, how should we think about the how, because that, that, that could also be subjective, potentially?

Deb Calvert: 22:32

Well, I do think behaviors are a great, great way to keep it more objective. And being able to define the behaviors, not just, this is what we expect. But here's what it looks like under performance, here's what it looks like top level performance really give that range to people paint a very, very clear picture. And this includes your organizational values, translate them into the actions or the behaviors that you believe are appropriate demonstrations of those values. Because something like integrity. I'm sure we all have a working knowledge of what that word means. But I don't know how to activate that so that it's seen by you and appreciated by you. Let's just Let's just take the mystery away.

Kyle Roed: 23:15

I think that's yeah, I think that's really, that's a really powerful concept. And I think I've seen that done well. And I've seen it done really poorly. Right. And, and so I guess I'm curious what, for the organizations that are going to use this type of model, and they're going to start to measure, you know, maybe, maybe, let's just say high medium, low behaviors, you know, what are some ways that that an organization can can do this in a way that that is really, truly objective and, and understood by the broader organization. So that there's not some of that kind of that mystery around it?

Deb Calvert: 23:56

Well, it takes a little time to set up like most systems do that, if you're going to do it well. And part of that setup is that you communicate it very, very transparently. You know, I recommend that you create a little framework, if these are the behaviors, the competencies, the values of how you do the work, spell them out for me, give me a document, have a mini training session or communication session with me have me sign off on it, that I understood it, and then give me coaching and feedback and regular inputs about how I am or am not living up to that. And I think it's like anything right? People will rise to your expectations. If you're clear about those expectations. When you don't have the transparency, you have an inherent unfairness. Why are you holding me to a standard that I don't even know about? I want to meet and exceed your standards, but I can't if they're shrouded in some kind of mystery. So let's just put it all out there.

Kyle Roed: 25:02

Yeah, I couldn't agree more. You know, I think you use this, I think this is a perfect kind of example, you know, the example of integrity. Right? You know, we, we all think we know what that means. But, but when you really look at it, how you define that people interpret that completely differently, right. And high integrity behaviors, in someone's mind may be very different than high integrity behaviors in somebody else's mind. And so if you don't have a common, you know, almost like a vocabulary dictionary behind it, then then you're going to struggle. And so is that something do you help with that type of like that type of framework it at people first productivity solutions, then I'm assuming?

Deb Calvert: 25:44

Absolutely, yeah. And the consulting we deal with, with HR organizations, or smaller organizations that may just have one or no HR folks, we help we build the expectations, we build the performance expectations, as well as the sort of the standards of how we operate around here. We do competencies and job descriptions. But ultimately, we get to this place where there's something cohesive, it's it's competencies and behaviors that wraps around the people systems, so that everybody has simplicity and a high degree of understanding around it.

Kyle Roed: 26:21

I want to pause it for a minute, because I think that's a really critical, that's a really critical way to think about it. And that's that you use the word wraparound, right, like like that this is that this is a part of the entire system. So walk me through what that looks like, you know, so So you've gotten in and you've you've kind of you know, you've we've been talking about the nine box, but you and I both know, it's much, it's much larger than that the nine box is really just a tool. And there's a system underlying that tool. So so when you say like a wraparound system, what what does that mean to you? How do you think about that in the context of the overall kind of HR, talent system and structures?

Deb Calvert: 26:59

Well, I'm biased toward competency. So you as a as a podcaster. Kyle, what are the competencies needed to really excel in creating a podcast and and delivering that podcast and marketing that podcast? You know, let me let me find those, let's call it 10 competencies that really, really don't describe Kyle, but they describe the perfect ideal candidate for the job that you happen to be doing right now. Now, I'm going to use that to to hire and source candidates, who are the people who are the closest match to my pre established very well defined competencies. And when I do hire somebody who was a close match, what did they have some opportunities for development. And let me just start there day one is their onboarding. I know what those opportunities are for them to develop, I'm going to set my expectations for growth. The job description includes the competencies, the onboarding has mentioned of them, the regular check ins and stay interviews and, and performance appraisals, that we do the KPIs, they all reflect the growth in competencies and the ways that that you're acquiring and building them. Well, now, talent review, time comes along nine box model, it's the same thing, we're not spraying something new into the mix, the behaviors are similar. When we look to promote somebody internally, we look at the next job level. The next job level is a different set of competencies perhaps, or you want to move somewhere diagonally, crosswise cross functionally in the organization, you've always got something that you can go to and see how close a match are you What would you need to do to develop? Because competencies give you that that awesome foundation?

Kyle Roed: 28:41

Absolutely, absolutely. You know, I think, I think it's, it's, it's a really important thing, from my standpoint, at least to the seat that I sit in now, is that whenever you're using a tool, such as nine box competencies, you know, something as simple as a performance evaluation, or an interview guide, that it all connects, right? That it's that it's not like, the flavor of the month, like, this is what HR says we need to do this month, that month, like it should all come down to kind of the foundational systems that matter and, and, you know, I, I tend to be a little bit biased towards competencies as well, that's kind of the school of thought that I was, you know, kind of, kind of spent a lot of time in but the reality is, I've seen it work, when you actually define what somebody should be doing, and then you define how they should be doing it. And you do that in an objective way. Now you've put in the, you've put in like the guardrails for somebody's success or failure at their job and it just makes everything easier it's it's really you know, really all it is is we're just not we're a little bit lazy we just want to make our jobs a little bit easier right so let's let's all be a little lazy and and make our lives easier.

Deb Calvert: 29:57

Absolutely and and protect ourselves. ullstrom accusations of favoritism or not giving somebody a fair shot, it's all.

Kyle Roed: 30:08

Yes, absolutely. And you know, I think, you know, the other thing I always say is like, listen, it's not about like, it's not about not getting sued, right, or like, you know, it's not about compliance, it's not necessary. That's not what it's about. But it is about making sure that you have a system that doesn't put you at risk for those things. Right. So it's like, if you do it, right, if you focus on people first, you won't have to worry about that stuff. Right? If people feel like they were treated fairly, and they were treated fairly, and you had objective, you know, criteria, a, they're going to perform more effectively. And if they don't perform effectively, and it goes south, they're not going to sue you. And if they do, you're gonna have objective criteria. Why, you know, like, all, it all works together in the system. So So for anybody out there that's like, that's, that's thinking about their system or thinking about their structure or thinking, oh, yeah, our nine box process, we need to change it. Well, I think, before you jump in and start just throwing tools at it, make sure you've got that underlying foundation in place first. So

Deb Calvert: 31:08

I agree. And you know, what, before anybody ever ends up in a courtroom, they're in the boardroom, the Zoom Room, the break room, and in all those places, you want to be sure that they're highly engaged, and that they're feeling good about the work that they're doing. And so when I talk about unfairness or favoritism, it's about, like the immediate impact.

Kyle Roed: 31:26

Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. I Yeah. My head's in the lawsuit clouds most. So yeah, it's the Yeah, what's that? Yeah, yeah. But yeah, it's Yeah, wonderful conversation, we could probably keep going like, like, we could go through all these, like all, I could probably just go to the list of all the the old like McKinsey slash GE tools that we used to, you know, that I guess, we could go through all we could start like, just like an accent and oh, and we could whiteboard this whole thing over the next nine hours, but, but we don't have nine hours. So we'll do that next time. We'll just do like, we'll just go full, like nine hour podcast, bring popcorn, it'll be good time. But for purposes of our time, today and with with respect of your, your time, I'm gonna shift gears, we're gonna go to the rebel HR flash round.

Deb Calvert: 32:14

Are you ready? Okay. All right, perfect.

Kyle Roed: 32:17

Question number one. Where does HR need to rebel?

Deb Calvert: 32:21

I think it's still where we are right here. It's it's people practices, that people want to feel ennobled. They want a sense of belonging, they want to know that the company cares about their well being. And by necessity, HR sometimes focuses on compliance and doesn't look at at individuals and we need to strike that balance, we need to rebel a little more towards the side of, let's make sure people are understanding that we that we actually do care about them, we need them. We want them to feel a sense of satisfaction in the work they do. Love that.

Kyle Roed: 32:58

Question number two, who should we be listening to?

Deb Calvert: 33:02

I think I have to go ahead and say this podcast, you've got some pretty good guests talking about a lot of very interesting things and in a professional way. But mainly really, the answer is our employees. Let's listen to the frontlines. Let's not just let it all filter up through supervisor or manager. Get out there in the trenches. Talk to people.

Kyle Roed: 33:23

Absolutely, yeah, we we can't do our jobs just sitting in an office. You know, I appreciate the podcast call. But you can't just sit in an office, listen to a podcast and have all the great ideas. You've got to go listen to your organization. Listen to your employees, listen to your what I call your internal customer group. Right? So go out and listen. Alright, last question, how can our listeners connect with you and learn more? And I hope

Deb Calvert: 33:45

they will. So go to the Leadership Academy and find some free classes that you like, people first potential.com All three words are spelled out people first potential.com. Or you can email me or connect with me on LinkedIn. I always love hearing from folks. I'm Deb Calvert, and my email address is Deb dot Calvert, at people first ps.com, the PS standing for productivity solutions.

Kyle Roed: 34:12

Absolutely. And we will have all that information in the show notes. So open up your podcast player, you can click right in. There's a bunch of wonderful tools out there. Just really appreciate you putting all that out in the world. Deb and thank you for spending some time and sharing your expertise with us today.

Deb Calvert: 34:27

Well, Kyle, really my pleasure. Thank you.

Kyle Roed: 34:29

Thank you. All right. That does it for the rebel HR podcast. Big thank you to our guests. Follow us on Facebook at rebel HR podcast, Twitter, at rebel HR guy, or see our website at rebel human resources.com. The views and opinions expressed by rebel HR podcast are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any of the organizations that we represent. No animals were harmed during the filming of this podcast. Maybe