Change Management & HR: What You Need to Know
Welcome to another exciting episode of All About HR! This is the podcast & video series for HR Professionals and business leaders who want to future-proof their organization and learn about the latest trends & insights from industry experts, CHROs, and thought leaders.
How can HR successfully support a changing organization? In this episode of All About HR season 2, we sit down with Tim Creasey — Chief Innovation Officer at Prosci — to talk about change management in the post-pandemic economy.
Tim is a change expert whose focus is on developing holistic, easy-to-use, and research-based models and tools to manage the people side of change.
In this episode, we’ll discuss:
- The importance of the people side of change
- HR’s role in successful change management
- The hidden cost of saying ‘yes’
Watch the full episode to find out how HR can contribute to the organization’s change effort in an effective and meaningful way!
If you want to dive further into the topic of change management, check out this page from Prosci!
The Organization Development Process Cheat Sheet
Want to add Organizational Development skills to your HR toolkit? Download this concise introduction to OD. Written by HR, for HR.Download Cheat Sheet
Tim Creasey: I think in the face of an event like this pandemic, we have two options. We can either chaotically flail, or we can actually pivot like we’re talking about. And I think in order to effectively make that turn, we have to anchor to purpose. So there was a notion that we were responding to the pandemic for a while. But now organizations need to realize that we need to shift to evolving operations for this new world that we have in front of us. And so the organizations that have been stuck in this mindset that what we’re just going to push through this and things are going to go back to how they were, those are the organizations that I think are struggling in making this pivot.
Neelie Verlinden: Hi, everyone, and welcome to a brand new episode of All About HR. My name is Neelie and on today’s episode, I speak with Tim Creasey. Tim is a Chief Innovation Officer at Prosci. And our conversation was all about change. What is HR’s role in change? How can HR drive change? How important is it in today’s environment? And what’s the role of the new hybrid way of working that a lot of organizations are moving towards? We talked about this and a lot more. And all against the background of this overarching topic of change. Go check out the episode yourself. But before you do so, subscribe to the channel, hit that notification bell, and like this video. Bye.
Neelie Verlinden: Welcome to another episode of All About HR.
Neelie Verlinden: Hi, there, Tim, and welcome to the show. How are you?
Tim Creasey: I’m doing great. Great to be here. And thank you for having me, Neelie.
Neelie Verlinden: Yeah, very happy to have you, Tim. And also very happy to finally get to get to have this conversation with you.
Tim Creasey: Yeah, this is one of those times that we were playing a little bit of calendar gymnastics with. So I’m glad we landed it finally.
Neelie Verlinden: Yeah, me too. Before we get started, Tim, perhaps you can tell our listeners a little bit about who you are, what you do, and also a little bit more about Prosci.
Tim Creasey: Yeah, so my name is Tim Creasey, the Chief Innovation Officer at Prosci. We are a change management firm. So our focus is helping individuals and organizations build their own capabilities to deliver more successful outcomes in times of change. The phrase I like to use is helping people unlock the challenges of change. That’s really what lights my fire. And what we’ve found over a couple of decades of research is that there are things you can do right and things you can definitely do wrong when it comes to helping people adopt and use whatever the solution is that we’re trying to bring forward in the organization. So as a firm, we provide training and advisory services and research and collaborative online tools, all aimed at equipping practitioners to help manage the people side of whatever change effort they’re trying to bring forward.
Neelie Verlinden: Interesting. And so Tim, have you always been interested in change?
Tim Creasey: So here’s what I’ve always been interested in, which is what makes people tick. So I actually got into school as a mechanical engineer. But before I set foot in university, I realized I really enjoyed human systems much more than technical systems. So my studies went down the path of economics and political science because I thought both of those disciplines help us understand what made people do what they did. So that has always been what kind of intrigued me. I actually had no desire to go into the business world. I had a Ph.D. lined up to go and do comparative economics. And then I was going to teach political economics, but I ended up landing that job. My partner was my girlfriend at the time in college. Now she’s the mother of my children and partner in life. But she was doing a teaching degree, so it’s gonna take her a little bit longer to get out of school than I was gonna take. So I landed this job at Prosci alongside the research function to really understand the human dynamics of change and what makes people step forward and lean into a change and what makes people question and step out of a change. So I kind of describe it like this: macroeconomics is how the whole economy works, and microeconomics is how a firm makes decisions. This is micro-micro-economics. How does a person decide I’m going to lean in to start using that new learning management system, I’m going to lean into that career path, I’m going to lean into this new hybrid workplace, or I’m going to retreat and not engage with that change? That’s micro-micro-economics, what makes people tick. And so that’s really what’s always fascinated me. And in the discipline of change management, we get to use that notion to help people, projects, and organizations be more successful.
Neelie Verlinden: So fascinating. I have to admit that I would love to dive into so many of these things that you touched on and we are going to try to do that as much as possible a little bit later in our conversation, Tim, but before we do so, perhaps for our listeners, it’s good to take a step back and especially for those of us, including me, who aren’t necessarily very used to how change happens, or how changed maybe happened before the pandemic and how it happens now, so perhaps we can start with that. How did change traditionally happen? And then I’m especially interested in how it happened in agile organizations because I believe here we have something like vertical versus horizontal change. And you’ve been, I think, very familiar with this concept for quite a while already. So maybe we can start with that.
Tim Creasey: So if you’re thinking, think about a coin, there are two sides of the coin, right? And change is like that coin. Change has always and will always have two sides of the coin. There’s a technical side of the coin, how do we design, develop, and deliver the solution to meet the issue or opportunity in front of us? And then there’s the people side of the coin. How do we ensure that people engage, adopt, and use the solution we brought forward? So every change has had both of those sides of the coin. What was interesting over the last several twenty to thirty years, and really why I think change management emerged as a discipline, is shifting value systems within the organization. Now you think about that people side of the coin, in an old value structure of consistency and control and predictability, when an employee was asked to jump, their answer was how high. The people side of change, because of the value system and the behaviors we incented and rewarded, the people side of change was really just telling people what you needed them to do. You’ve seen this evolution over the last 20 to 30 years, around empowerment and accountability and ownership and really bringing people into the organization. Now, when we go to ask them to jump, their first response is not how high. That’s not the behavior we want. We want them engaged and saying: Well, why should I jump? How does jumping help my customer? How does that help me and my team? We want them engaged, but at the same time that raises the bar, in terms of how we actually engage them in times of change. So that’s where I think over the evolution of this focus on the people side of change and why it matters. I think agile organizations, you know, that’s kind of like flipping the coin back over to look at the technical side of the coin. I think the interesting thing is iterative project management has about a 70-year history. So the project management community began chunking work down into meaningful bite-size pieces a long time ago. Over the last 20 years, we really saw it coming out of the software space. But the notion is that if I can shorten the cycle when I’m trying to make change, I can be more attuned to what’s happening now and what’s coming ahead. You know, that makes a lot of sense. It’s harder, it takes more energy and effort, it takes different muscles in the system. And I think one of the fascinating things that have come out of the pandemic is iterative change by necessity. Right? Right. Everything became iterative because we didn’t know what was around the corner, we have no idea what was going to happen four weeks from now and eight weeks from now. We’re in the midst of another news cycle about another shift in the way the world is handling a global pandemic. So we can’t look five years down the road anymore like we used to. For a while, we were looking five minutes down the road, five days down the road. That has lifted I think, but I think organizations involuntarily build the capability to change in a more rapid way. And I think that’ll be fascinating to watch play out over the next few years.
Map out your
Path to HR Leadership
Try our need tool to determine the direction in which you want to progress based on your HR career goals and capabilities.Get Started
Neelie Verlinden: Yeah, absolutely. And I think what’s very true there is what you’re saying about how the success horizons as well for organizations. They have shrunk,
Tim Creasey: Can I share with you an analogy we use internally at Prosci? Because I think you’re spot on here. We use the idea of a compass. And to be able to say five years out, we’re going to be going 17.2 degrees? That’s nonsense. That’s five years out. So what we can do is, say five years out, we want to be between 15 and 20 degrees. We know generally that’s the direction we want to go. In the next three years, let’s try to get it around the 17. And this year, let’s hone in on 17.2 degrees on that compass. Because this year, I know where I’m going. But to try to make commitments five years out to 17.2 degrees is nonsense. And so there’s the notion of the compass right, of how focused we are and then what you introduce just now is that notion of refresh rate. How quickly are we reorienting to where we are and where we’re going? And so this to me is agility and in the muscle the organization.
Neelie Verlinden: Absolutely and this is also something, Tim, I think we spoke about when we chatted before we recorded today’s episode. This is the difference between an organization reacting to what’s happening. And now we’re going to reimagine right. And I think this is what you also mentioned that that’s where a lot of organizations are right now.
Tim Creasey: I think, yeah, that’s the journey that each organization and each leader is going to be going through. How do we pivot from simply responding to a pandemic until it’s over? Which I think was the mindset in March 2020, when we sent out our email that we were closing down physical headquarters. We said: you know, six to eight weeks, we’ll be back in, we’ll all be back together, right. So there was a notion that we were responding to the pandemic for a while. But now organizations need to realize we need to shift to evolving operations for this new world that we have in front of us. And so the organizations that have been stuck in this idea like, you know what, we’re just going to push through this, things are going to go back to how they were. Those are the organizations that I think are struggling in making this pivot. Now, at Prosci, we didn’t have the luxury to do that, because we were an in-person training business. I think in the face of an event like this pandemic, we have two options. We can either chaotically flail, or we can actually pivot like we’re talking about. And I think in order to effectively make that turn, we have to anchor to purpose. One of the things I still can’t believe, and I’m probably the proudest of professionally, is that on March 10, 2020, we delivered our last in-person program. And one week later, on March 17, we delivered our first-ever virtual program. And it was through a tremendous effort by a huge, coordinated, dedicated team. But it was all anchored to how do we help practitioners feel more equipped to tackle the change in front of them. And so I think that’s pivoting around who we are as a team, as an individual, and as a program. That’s how we maintain the focus we need to navigate this crazy world we got in front of us.
Neelie Verlinden: Yeah, I heard this example before, of course, but I still find it so impressive how in only seven days, you managed to completely turn around the way you delivered the training. And basically, you completely turn around your entire business, right?
Tim Creasey: It’s surreal, right? One of the neat things we realize is you have to maintain that wow factor, right. One of the interesting things as soon as training went virtual, though, is do you know how long it took me to jump into a class that was underway? Two seconds to click on a link and jump into the virtual classroom where this class was taking place. So there was one day, it was early on in the pandemic, probably June of 2020. I started doing cameos where I would drop in on a program because it takes me two seconds to drop in. And I get to come in and talk to the practitioners and tell them, thank you for stepping into this important work. Thank you for stepping into a discipline that helps your projects be more successful. Thank you on behalf of your organization, muscling out change is critical. But most importantly, thank you on behalf of all the people in your organization who are going to experience better change when you bring this capability to life. So I would drop in, say hello, answer a couple of questions. On one Thursday, where I started my day pretty early on my side of the pond, with a class in Europe, it was wrapping up the end of their day to the course of the day. I dropped into 11 different programs. And I finished my day dropping into the next day in Australia where they were starting day three of the program. So 11 drop-ins, about 180 change practitioners around the world that I got to say thank you to. And that’s because time and place got really squishy, right? Everywhere became anywhere as a result of this pandemic, which meant I could jump into any of these classrooms in two seconds, rather than flying 16 hours across the globe to drop into that class that was happening in Australia. And I think the leaders of our organizations can realize that there are some opportunities that have been provided to us as a part of this involuntary digital transformation. Right? We’re all together, we all had to go to a party and figured it out. But we’re not all coming back together. But over the course of the last couple of years, we built some new capabilities, some new competencies. We built some new trust, we built some new courage to try new things. And so while the landscape of change looks, there’s a lot on it. At the same time, we’re stepping into new opportunities to drive more successful change with these capabilities we have in front of us.
Neelie Verlinden: I want to continue on that for a second at them if that’s okay with you, because of these kinds of questions that present themselves now, who in the organization, in your opinion, should think about these questions and reflect on them and find an answer?
Tim Creasey: It’s a fascinating and kind of loaded question, and not loaded in a bad way. Because we’re watching organizations navigate this right now, the who should be thinking about it. This is where I think senior leaders need to step up. And I keep writing my love letter to Brene Brown about how the reimagining of the workplace is going to take huge amounts of bravery by senior leaders to say, you know, what is now totally possible is because we proved it was, we’re going to go ahead and embrace that and continue to trust our employees to continue to foster individual flexibility to continue to encourage better integration and balance and wellness in our organization. And it’s going to take bravery to embrace a new hybrid workplace where we have the opportunity to potentially rush back to what had been. So I think there’s a huge piece of bravery that sits right here in terms of this navigation back. I’ve been trying to call this the low vocation location, right? Where does work get done? Is the vocation location? And who’s making the decision is one of the most fascinating things we’re watching organizations decide on. Some organizations are letting the individual employee make the decision. Some are led and be made by teams, maybe a manager and their team at a department or division. In some organizations, we’re getting enterprise-wide decisions. But that scope of who makes the decision has significant impacts, I think, in terms of the employee experience, and in the opportunity for the organization to tap into what is possible, right? We were working with one client and they did all this amazing analysis, they took every job role. And they looked at the suitability of the role to be done in a hybrid manner and the ability of that person. Is that person qualified? So job suitability, how qualified the individual is in hybrid. Every job gets plotted in, and in the end, then they let each manager make the decision for their team. So you get this beautiful set of analyses. But now we’re working with two teams, both teams have essentially the same job roles, they’ve scored pretty much the same way in terms of where the job should be done. One manager bought into hybrid work, the other one hasn’t. And you end up with some really interesting inequity challenges around vocation location. So yeah, I don’t know that anybody has this figured out yet in terms of who and how we’re going to bring to life the hybrid workplace.
Neelie Verlinden: Tim, there’s one other thing I’m really, really, really impatient to ask you about in this regard. And that is, of course, the role. How do you see the role of HR in this? Because I think what happens since the start of the pandemic is that everybody all of a sudden turns to HR as those who would have all the answers, and you know, all eyes on them. And I think that’s still very much the case, as we are now transitioning into a hybrid model or not. So how do you see their role?
Tim Creasey: Yeah, I think, to me, this is like the opportunity for HR to be that strategic partner that they’ve always asked and said, they wanted to beat. The pandemic elevated the importance of the human beings that make up our organization. It brought new levels of connectedness across the human beings that make up our organization. It’s created all kinds of new ripples and challenges in terms of the ability to waltz between being a human being with a life and being an employee in this organization and realizing that those are the same thing at the same time. And so, you know, I think it makes a ton of sense that HR was looked to as we began responding to the pandemic. And I think this is HR’s opportunity to step into being the strategic guide to help reimagine what the organization can be.
Neelie Verlinden: I can imagine that also asks from HR a certain ability to then guide people through a period of change.
Tim Creasey: Absolutely. And it’s something that hasn’t happened all that often. Right? I actually put a post about this on LinkedIn right after you and I had our initial conversation to get ready for this podcast. Because I think it’s really easy to forget about adoption and usage and how to prepare, equip, and support your people when the change is actually about people. So if we’re rolling out a new accounting system, everybody says: Oh, well, you got to help people understand why and build awareness and desire and you need to answer what’s in it for them. Help them understand the personal motivators, the organizational motivators. But then we roll out a new learning system for folks. We say: Hey, everybody, there’s a new learning system. It’s so great. We completely ignore the fact that even though we think that new learning system is going to be the best thing since sliced bread, people still have an adoption and usage journey, they are still trying to decide how much energy to put into that change versus all the other stuff they have going on. And so agile falls into the same trap, right? When we bring user stories into how we design solutions, we can get lazy about actually putting in the energy to drive adoption and usage of the solution. And in the same way, when the change focuses on people, we can forget about the people side of change. I did a fun keynote, actually just about a month ago for a global multinational food and beverage organization. And there’s all their top leaders and learning and development. We titled the talk Change is learning, learning is change, because too often when we try to bring learning into the organization, we don’t think about it as a change that we can bring proper change management to. And we see the same thing happen in a lot of people-focused HR changes for sure.
Neelie Verlinden: One thing that immediately comes to mind when I hear you talk about that Tim is so you know, when it’s easy to forget about people, when the change is about people, that how can we make sure that we don’t forget about that? Do you have maybe an example or maybe some tips that you can share?
Tim Creasey: Yeah, absolutely. And this is the essence of a structured change management methodology. Let’s use that LMS. And I’m going to pull forward Darryl Connor, which is one of the great grandfathers of change management. And he offered up this language about 15 years ago, about the gap between installation and realization. And I’m sure many on this call or listening to the podcast might think of examples where we installed the learning management system that we did not realize the value of our people growing like we thought we did. So that’s kind of that gap that good change, management will help us fill. So if I already take even kind of the Prosci core three-phase methodology. The thing that we did in the methodology in 2021, when we enhanced it, is we added what we call plain language questions, to help make the methodology really accessible for people that don’t necessarily have a neuroscience Ph.D., right? So the first is why are we changing? So what is the reason for change? What are the objectives of the initiative? And what’s the organizational benefit and gain? So why are we changing with this new learning management system? Because we know it’s important to help our people grow, they are our most valuable assets, there are all sorts of new competencies and capabilities that people need to hone right now. And we’ve got this really effective way to get learning with people. So that would be the why we’re changing. The second question we ask is who has to do their job differently, and when this system comes to life. And we will take you through 10 aspects of somebody’s job that may or may not be impacted by the change. And what we do is we say, does it and how does it impact there, I’m going to go through them kind of quickly, their processes, their systems, their tools, their job role, their critical behaviors, mindsets, attitudes, and beliefs, compensation, performance, review, reporting, structure, location? So those are 10 aspects of my job that may or may not be impacted by this learning management system. So I would take different audiences of the organization and say: if they really are going to be successful in getting the value out of this new LMS, how is it going to impact their processes, their systems, their tools, their job roles, and so forth? Because it’s not just turning it on. It’s not just that the buttons work. It’s that the person shows up in a new way, and makes learning part of what it is they want to do and how they contribute to the organization. And the third question we would ask is, what’s it gonna take to help our people adopt and use this change when we bring it forward? And so we would look at risks, we look at the different roles that are involved, we’d realize that from the research, the employees do not care what the head of learning has to say about this at all. No, all the rest of the employees in the organization care zero what the head of learning has to say about this. They’re out on the floor building stuff, they want to know what their manager and what the person who’s running the floor has to say. And so good change management is about thinking through what’s it going to take as we prepare our approach. We look at the risks, we look at the rules, we look at the resources, we would do some roadmapping. So it’s okay if here’s the day we want them to start using the new LMS. That’s when they have the ability to use it. When am I going to provide them with the knowledge? How am I going to build the desire before that and when am I going to start building the awareness of the need that they need to start using this new system? So that’s how we would kind of put it up upfront and then out of that, we would come up with a whole set of these plans ad activities to help people be able to say, I understand why we have this LMS, I decided to use this on us. I know how to use it, I’m able to use it. And I’m going to keep using it.
Neelie Verlinden: While I heard you talking to, Tim I do see a lot of opportunities here, I think, for HR to jump in and facilitate this process. What does this look like then, in practice?
Tim Creasey: HR is an interesting place for change management to sometimes live and sometimes not live. I’ve watched many of my clients where there’s a bit of a turf battle that emerges because change management, we know at its core is about how do we help this project capital, the people dependent on the project ROI. So, in a lot of my clients, I’ll see the project management office IT strategy, transformation, pick up change management. As a discipline, we aligned to those most important projects. HR sometimes struggled again, because they have struggled to think about the change they do as projects and then has had sometimes struggled with this notion of aligning the structure and intent to those initiatives. We have some clients, though, where the HR business partner is probably the most celebrated important change agent in the organization because they really set at that intersection of strategy and direction of the organization and the pulse of the people in a specific part of the organization. So we’ll see HR business partners often become these allies, these change agents. The other place I see HR starting to show up is this realization that change management, it’s both a structured process we applied to the new LMS to build the strategies and plans to drive adoption of the LMS. But it’s also a mindset and skill set. It’s viewing changes unlockable, it’s seeing the moving parts that make up a change. If I’m a senior leader, it’s internalizing my role as a sponsor of change. And the research has told us abundantly clear that that means you need to actively, invisibly participate, build coalitions to support and communicate directly. So that senior leader has to internalize and build the skills of being a great sponsor in times of change. I think HR is a great partner in terms of organizations starting to build up that capability in that skill set.
Neelie Verlinden: I’m not trying to play the devil’s advocate here. But I have the sense that a lot of people tend to be quite risk- and/or change-averse. Often, as soon as there’s a change, people want to be like, whoa, whoa, no, no, no. What is this? What is this? I’m not sure if I want to change, etc. So I was wondering, where do you feel then, this shift has come from?
Tim Creasey: This shift toward?
Neelie Verlinden: To adapt that mindset of like, okay, so we go from how do I jump to why do I jump?
Tim Creasey: I do think there’s this economic history about evolving from an agricultural through an industrial through knowledge through service to an interaction economy, which I think is the next wave of the economy. But I think what also is happening is there’s this tailwind of revaluing the human beings that make up the organization. I think it’s actually a bi-directional relationship between the organization, the employee, and the employee in the organization. Both directions of that relationship have shifted over the last two, three decades. But in 2014, one of my best friends and I were starting to put together a podcast that we never got off the ground called the Re-humanization of the workplace. But what we were identifying was our, and it wasn’t one of these rah rah like change, you know, rah, rah rehumanize the workplace, it was observational. We were watching a bunch of trends in organizations, where the similar thread of those trends was revaluing the human being that makes up the organization. I’m placing a higher value on each of the people that are part of this organization. So things like wellness, inclusion, mindfulness, meditation. Even all of our design thinking practices are symptomatic of revaluing the human being that makes up the organization. Because there was a time when this was the value I provided was just physical motion. But now each of the people are, I think we’re valuing them more if their unique contribution as a person to our goal as a collective organization is in a really neat way. We never got the webinar off, or the podcast off the ground, but I think we’re seeing even more of it in the face of the pandemic. All of us are human beings navigating our own journeys, and we’re working together as part of this organization.
Neelie Verlinden: I think, what I also like to ask you is, I mean, you’re not an HR person. So it’s actually kind of exciting that I get to ask you as an outsider about things that have to do with HR and one of the things I wanted to ask you is, what, in your opinion, is the biggest cliche that exists about HR?
Tim Creasey: The biggest cliche about HR. I think the biggest cliche I often hear is, and I think both change managers and HR get a bit of this, the soft side of change. We’ve got all these processes, operations, equipment, that’s the hard side of the organization. But then we’ve got the soft side of the organization. I’ll tell you what, you try to do a big merger. There’s technical complexity, getting the systems to work together, the hard side of change is getting people to step into it and show up in a new way. And so I think that’s the biggest cliche that I think both HR and change management run into is this misconception that because we are squishy, the people side of change is the soft side of change. But oh, no, it’s by far the much harder side.
Neelie Verlinden: Now, on to my favorite part of the episode where I get to ask my lovely guests about an epic win an epic fail. So, Tim, I’m not sure which one you want to start, but please.
Tim Creasey: Alright, so I’m going to start with you my epic fail. My epic fail this week was saying yes to something I should have said no to. And I’ve been working really hard over the years to get better at saying no to stuff. And we were introduced this year to some language at our executive team about what we call the hidden cost of saying yes, and too often we say yes to stuff and ends up on our calendar, without ever having calculated the hidden costs, not only to ourselves but maybe to our family, maybe to other teams, maybe to other departments that we have to end up collaborating with. And so I’ve been working really hard to be more thoughtful of the hidden costs of saying yes. And last week, I said yes to something I shouldn’t have said yes to. So that was my epic fail was letting them know what I should have said, slip by,
Neelie Verlinden: Can we go on to your epic win then?
Tim Creasey: Yeah, so my epic win. At the beginning of each year, as an organization, we have an all-hands company-wide meeting where we pull everybody together. And we always try to get a client to come to speak at that. This year at Prosci, we refreshed our values. And we put out our six values, and each of them has a neat we statement behind it. And one of those values, the very top one, is impact. And our statement is we are proud of the people we are the work we do and the difference we make. So in my support of this meeting, I was finding the client or customer to come to speak to our employees about the impact that we’ve had. So I had a call with a gentleman and he’s luckily going to be the one that comes and speaks to us. And he said: Tim, this is how (the way he introduced the call) ADKAR has changed how we grant wishes to kids. That’s an epic win right there. I mean, it’s a five-letter model that we’ve been teaching for years, that just gives people a way to see change as unlockable. And yet they were able to bring it to life in a nonprofit organization that provides kids hope about this was as epic a win as it gets. And then he’s gonna come tell his story to our company as part of our yearly kickoff meeting. So that was my big epic win was not only getting to hear his story but having the honor to get to bring his story to all the rest of the company.
Neelie Verlinden: That is a pretty epic win indeed, Tim, I would say. What a great way to open up the call that you had with him. Well, on his side, then, of course, a great opening from his site. So yeah, that’s a beautiful one. And congratulations on that one.
Tim Creasey: Oh, well, thank you. Yeah, it’s one that still makes the hair stand up on the back of your neck, right?
Neelie Verlinden: Yeah, definitely. Even me and I’m not even involved directly, but I can definitely imagine how it must have felt for you. So that’s a very nice one. Tim, I want to give you a huge thank you for joining me today on this episode of All About HR. I’ve really enjoyed it. So thank you very much for joining us.
Tim Creasey: It’s absolutely my pleasure. And yeah, if we were able to offer any listeners one key to help unlock the challenges of change in front of them then I think we did our job. So it’s my pleasure and thank you for the opportunity.
Neelie Verlinden: And thank you everybody for tuning in to this episode of All About HR. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. If you haven’t done so yet, subscribe to our channel, hit the notification bell, and share this episode. See you again soon for a new one.
Are you ready for the future of HR?
Learn modern and relevant HR skills, online