Global Talent Transformation Starts With Local Insight

Dimitri
Welcome to another episode of the Talent Transformation Podcast. Today, I’m delighted to be joined by Stephanie Edwards, Chief Digital Officer and Global Head of Enterprise Solutions at Hudson RPO, a leading global provider of flexible and scalable recruitment solutions. Stephanie, welcome.

Stephanie Edwards
Thank you, Dimitri, for having me.

Dimitri
It’s nice to have you here. So, Stephanie, I thought maybe we would start with you just giving me a maybe a little overview of Hudson RPO for our listeners. And, just, you know, the sort of the scope of your services, the regions where you work, that type of thing.

Stephanie Edwards
Sure. So, Hudson, RPO is a global talent solutions business, and we support all sizes of clients. So, enterprise clients with both talent acquisition and talent advisory services. I am five weeks into the role. So, I am early on in my journey there. I’ve spent the last ten years, with another firm, so mostly competing against Hudson and Hudson clients.

So, I think in the first five weeks, my impressions of the organization are that we have a really vast portfolio of global clients with operations all throughout Asia Pacific. Again, we’ve got a significant number of our clients that are global, so true EMEA, US and APAC clients. And then we’ve also got pockets where they’ve either segmented their talent acquisition into one region or another. So yeah, early days, but it’s…

Dimitri
Weeks. We have some things to talk about. That experience sounds interesting. And, also, I should say, while I know a fair amount about Hudson, it’s been around for a long time, I’ve always thought, particularly strong practice in Asia-Pacific. Is that is that the history of the company? Is that where it evolved from?

Stephanie Edwards
It is definitely. And I think the footprint today is around 40 to 50% of our global business is APAC-based, so that is far too weighted in Asia Pacific. It’s great for this region but in terms of the size and scale of what the US market commands, we should have a bigger presence in EMEA and also in the US.

So, certainly, part of our growth strategy is further penetration of the US and EMEA markets. But again, the tenure of some of our relationships here locally—we’re talking clients that have been with us for decades. So, the heart of Hudson—that’s something that I’m really trying to better understand because, I agree with you, the knowledge of Hudson as a player in this market—I think they’ve historically been quite conservative, quite humble. I had no idea of the size and scale of their portfolio of clients that we do have across life sciences, financial services, like really challenging, complex sectors.

Dimitri
Not to interrupt that, but I want to go to that point because, you know, from my perspective, looking across the globe Asia is perhaps the most dynamic region of the world right now. It’s certainly manufacturing most of what’s manufactured in the world. Yeah. And, it is probably going to remain that way.

And you have manufacturing that is, to some extent migrating out of China to the rest of Asia, which is sort of like a wave. And, in the Asian market, were you involved in the market in Asia before in your prior job?

Stephanie Edwards
I was, yes. So both leading the RPO and the digital business for Korn Ferry.

Dimitri
For Korn Ferry. Okay, great. Here in the Asia-Pacific?

Stephanie Edwards
That’s correct.

Dimitri
Okay. So you’ve been in this market for a while. It’s the most dynamic market in the world.

Stephanie Edwards
Yes.

Dimitri
And also the most multi-cultural. Really?

Stephanie Edwards
Absolutely.

Dimitri
So let’s talk about that and let’s, let’s talk about that ten years plus that you’ve been, you know, working in this market.

Stephanie Edwards
Australia is its own island and I do see that is highly aligned with the UK and pockets of the US. So even though we get wrapped up in an Asia-Pacific geographical kind of split, that market is more equivalent to the others.

The complexity comes in when you’re navigating China and when you’re navigating Japan. We’re seeing a lot more movement coming out of Malaysia and India and I think, again, the political changes and landscape in the US are going to be quite turbulent for the next 12 to 24 months in terms of manufacturing and investment in pockets in Asia.

But you’re right. It’s complex and nuanced. And even in my experience of dealing with clients in each of those pockets, it’s an entirely different buying and consumption cycle. But exciting; I love it. It is not one linear path that you may see in the other two big regions.

Dimitri
Are you working with some companies that, you know, they’re very well adjusted in their own market? A Japanese company is very well adjusted to Japan but is now going to do business in Indonesia. A Chinese company is very well-adjusted in China but is going to do business in the Philippines. You know, do you look at those scenarios and say, “Okay, this is who you are, but this is where you want to deliver your service, and you are you, but you can’t be you over there, so we’re going to figure out how you become not you?”

Stephanie Edwards
Yes, yes. Right. I would say that every trip that I’ve taken to Japan and China in the last 24 months, that has been the number one topic. So we understand this market. But how do we globalize? And so not only just in terms of diversifying revenue, but how do we do business outside Japan. And I think it’s always quite confronting. The last event that I did in Japan had 25 senior executives from all the big automotive and big tech companies. Everyone was there 15 minutes early. No one looked at their phone for four hours, their engagement in those events, so in terms of comparison, just on that alone is vastly different, you know, so understanding those cultural nuances. But there’s a genuine curiosity to say, “We know how to do business here. We’re very profitable. But how do we apply this model to ensure that we are sustaining ourselves into the future?”

So, you know, we are HR; that’s obviously our game. But in terms of the actual topics that come up in those discussions, they are very much business-led. They help educate us on how we can globalize operations, and that covers so many topics.

Dimitri
Yeah, I guess, one of those topics is how do they define the leadership for the market. Obviously there’s that pattern of bringing people from your own market, your senior leadership, and moving some of them over into these other countries to manage the business. But that only goes so far. Right? So I guess you get involved in helping them to identify leadership that understands culturally what’s going on on the ground in a particular market.

How much do you talk about the way you’re going to deliver your services from a technical perspective when you go into these different markets?

Stephanie Edwards
I think maybe my answer to that two to three years ago was that I’m super excited about the shifts in our industry and the tools and what’s available to us now to automate, improve experience, to optimize processes and optimize outcomes. Right? But my excitement doesn’t necessarily translate when I’ve spoken to clients, depending on where they are in the maturity curve. Right?

So I think better understanding and just bringing it back to what is exactly the problem they’re trying to solve for. I know that the capability of the technical solution or whatever platform it is that is part of that solution can do a thousand other things, but just purely focusing on the application: what does it what problem are we trying to solve for here, and how does that solution solve for? It seems to be a much more digestible approach for clients, and it doesn’t ostracize them from… We’re moving into a really interesting space around AI agentic, and thousands of agents are being built, and we no longer need ATSs. You know, there’s so much floating around that it can create chaos.

Dimitri
Asia is very technically, advanced. But they spend less time talking about it, I think. Almost more like they just take it for granted that there’ll be a lot of new technology applied. And there’s no reason to talk about it. I mean, that’s been my observation. So, “Lots of that, but let’s get… We need to have five factories built in the next two months, so by all means…”

Whereas, I think in Europe, they spend a lot of time talking about technology because of concerns about regulation, particularly with artificial intelligence. I don’t think we’re going into too much of that here, well you are in Australia, but in the rest of Asia. They seem to be, less concerned with the nature of the AI in terms of bias and everything. And Asia is generally less regulated than Europe for sure.

Stephanie Edwards
Definitely. Yeah. I think it’s more like a fear of being left behind prompts a curiosity to understand it as well and be like, “I’m open to that. I’m eager to test, trial and adopt.! And so I agree that there’s more of an appetite. But also you’re right like that’s just that’s just part of doing business now. We appreciate that it’s fast-paced.

But again, I was in New York, a couple of weeks ago and a lot of the large enterprises were in the one room and we were talking about what that looks like. A completely different sentiment in the US when clients are talking about the adoption of that AI governance and frameworks and a genuine fear and conservative push, in comparison to maybe the sentiment in pockets like Australia and New Zealand.

So there is less risk aversion here and more just curiosity: “I really want to educate and understand myself.” But you’re right in EMEA—yes, regulation is another factor for them, too. But I think also the US is like these are organizations at scale hiring 25k – 35k odd individuals a year. This is not one that they can get wrong in terms of bias or all those sorts of elements.

Dimitri
Yeah, And they’re, of course, talking about what they have to do across the globe, how often do you find yourself in a place like New York or London trying to explain how Asia works and maybe not succeeding?

Stephanie Edwards
Often, I would say often. I think it’s challenging. One: It’s challenging being in a global role based in Australia. There are numerous individuals in the staffing and RPO acquisition space who have talent providing services to global businesses based in this region. Eventually, they end up moving to the States or into EMEA.

But I think, being here and having most of my experience within the Asia-Pacific region, that sharing that with, usually, it’s the US or it’s usually even US-based, headquartered organizations that may be applying a very cookie-cutter approach to a global solution that, really, being quite blunt, just will not work.

One, we know data onshore/offshore: there are a thousand things that you can encounter. But I think helping a client be aware of what that means on the ground. Especially from an enterprise perspective, global heads of TA, many of them are based in the US. So understanding the application of this Asia-Pacific region is really important. But being considerate about how you roll that out too, because the cookie-cutter approach does not. It doesn’t.

Dimitri
I know we went through this trying to explain to our customers, our global customers, the value of WeChat. And it had to start with, “Let me explain to you what WeChat is and let me explain to you why our users in your company really want this and why it should be a higher priority because of course, we want our users everywhere in the world to succeed.”

We don’t want to pocket users who can’t succeed in their market because economically, it becomes, “Well, why have a system in a place where somebody is not succeeding.” Right?

So we look at that and say, well, you know, we need to make sure that they can advertise on WeChat otherwise, they won’t get any candidates and if they don’t get any candidates, they won’t use the system. And then the customer will come back to us and say, “The adoption is low over here”. Okay? So, you know, we have to go and make that case.

But it seems that to some extent—and correct me if I’m wrong—the global organizations are holding back the regional groups in Asia from doing what they need to do on the ground. True or false?

Stephanie Edwards
When you say holding back, holding back, they’re not regionally deploying it into some of these pockets?

Dimitri
They are deploying, but I feel like, sometimes they’re afraid to allow that solution to be more customized to the market.

Stephanie Edwards
Yes.

Dimitri
Because I think, you know, there was an idea in technology that it could be used to make everything the same. And that was so that you could eke out another 2 or 3% efficiency around the world and that era is gone. That’s, I call that the technology-as-defense era. Your technology defends your organization. It defends your primacy with slightly more efficiency every year.

We’re in a technology-as-offense market now where technology is an offensive weapon. It allows you to break into new markets. It allows you to take down competitors. And so, because it’s more sophisticated it doesn’t have to be the same for everybody. That one system can be different things to different people. And that’s really important when you go into, you know, a market like Vietnam or Indonesia or Japan, that, you know, that you need to configure differently for those people because it just, you know, what works in Munich, what works in London doesn’t work well in Shanghai.

So, you’re working with large multinationals, right? And you know, there’s nothing wrong with standards by all means; I’m not saying not to have some standards. But the local market—and you have so many different local markets—right? I mean, do you have experts in each local market?

Stephanie Edwards
We do, we absolutely do. You just made a great point, though, in terms of better understanding exactly the application for the market and needing to amend what you’re trying to achieve there. And I think that comes back to a really deep analysis of actually the application for that particular workforce. And I’ll give you an example, a telco organization really looking to drive internal mobility, but a lack of recognition that that particular workforce may not have access to their phone, I’m talking logistical challenges.

Dimitri
Challenges. Absolutely.

Stephanie Edwards
And like you mentioned, the one about WeChat in China, there are thousands of those examples that really only through a significant diagnostic, understanding and discovery process of what your candidates are facing. Okay, great. They only want to apply for jobs between 11:00 and 12:00 at night. Really understanding the persona of the candidates you’re looking to attract, but taking them through a process that’s fit for them, not 800 pages.

And sometimes, that’s a constant push-and-pull with clients to challenge them on why you need to ask 800 questions at the front end, why you need a resume, and why you are putting them through an eight-hour assessment. So we’re not even using that as a prescreening tool.

So, just constantly pushing them on, “That’s not applicable to the Chinese market. Well, that’s not applicable.” Even in India, at the moment, we’re finding psychometrics. There are a lot of other people taking a psychometric test that isn’t the individual applying for the job.

Dimitri
Yes, that was brought up by a client of mine recently. Actually last week.

Stephanie Edwards
Yes. So there are elements of validation that okay, for a particular market you need to ensure that your solution has the capability to address that. That might be something specific to India but something else in China in terms of language and access to things. So I think you’re absolutely right. The blueprint of whatever solutions are designed for a global client needs to be highly customized to the region, but even more hyper-personalized to the candidates you’re trying to engage and your existing workforce.

Otherwise, you’re absolutely right. The adoption after year one, after the big change management program, it’s just not going to do what it had initially intended to.

Dimitri
Right the good thing is technology can do that. I mean, we see it as layers of configuration. I mean, you can configure a system to fit your business. But then you can give people that are in your business the ability to configure to fit their region. Okay? As long as your core technology platform is large and flexible, and then you can actually give the individual users a certain degree of configuration to fit their actual task. And if you have all three layers of configuration and you still have it all in one platform where all the data is in one place and you have the ability to roll up the reporting, then you’re actually in a pretty good situation.

I think it’s interesting for us, that a lot of the challenges at a platform level actually are spanned across the globe. So it was interesting because last week I was talking to a customer of ours, which is an Indian company, and we were talking about AI and they brought up this issue of, “Well, who is the candidate really? We would like the AI to help us figure out if the candidate who started the process is the candidate who finished the process.” And it was an interesting challenge.

And I was thinking about it saying, “Well, I hadn’t thought about that yet, but I’m glad you brought it up.” And then I was on, talking to another client in the United States and, believe it or not, for a different reason, they had the same fundamental ask, which was really around security and the fact that some employees were actually going to be malicious employees.

That could have been all from the same organization. So, that really boils down, we abstract that more to that dimension of, on the platform, how do you know who is who? And you know, it’s not just asking somebody how many years of job experience they have anymore. I mean, it’s got to become much more sophisticated than…

Stephanie Edwards
I agree. So much more validation is required. And there are other tools that are available to candidates now that the market is evolving so quickly. I love the one I had last week from one of the big banks in the US where they were sharing the increase in number of applications through the roof from that particular, like post-school/university leaver because they have an understanding of how to reverse engineer the technology to now not only just go through and manually apply for ten jobs, apply for 100,000 jobs.

So what that then ends up doing for the technology or the recruitment function. It’s a completely new game and the technology has to work differently in terms of sourcing and screening. And exactly. So, to your point, these types of validation for an assessment or, you know, the way in which sourcing teams are completely overwhelmed now with the application. It will be interesting to see how, as candidates become better educated and better equipped, we’re just going to continue to face some of those needs and pivot the solution to them.

Dimitri
And that’s what we talk about when we talk about a continuously improving platform. It’s actually a requirement because if you were running on a platform that really was the code of three years ago, you’re going to be at a disadvantage because the candidates have more code available to them. The state actors have more code available to them. And everybody has a different standard anyway. Now I mean users standard keeps jumping up as well. So technology has to really keep pace for you to be effective on the ground.

I do agree with you, though, that ultimately, when you’re talking to a customer about a strategic objective, the technology should not be a big part of the conversation because, I think that sometimes good technology becomes invisible to users, ideally. And if you’re on the right platform, you really don’t want to constantly think about the technology when I think about the business objective, right? And you want all the people that are involved to think about the business objective.

When you go and do business in different parts of Asia, and I’m still focusing on Asia kind of you because I’m here in Asia, and I feel like doing that right. Are there patterns that you’re seeing now, in terms of, that are being affected by the trade policy? Do you feel that customers now are talking about trade and trade policy and the way they have to move factories, they have to join up workforces in different places? And, you know, is that an imperative now or are you seeing that in the market?

Stephanie Edwards
It’s definitely part of the conversation, no doubt. A lot of that is blended with their own personal interest in the political landscape and the tariffs and whatnot. But I think particular sectors… Again, I hosted a lunch of clients today, and one of those was a big logistics and shipping company. And yeah, it’s quite a significant impact for some of those organizations that are trying to get ahead of what this could look like and seven or eight different scenarios.

But we haven’t seen that necessarily translate other than really sort of specific bespoke pieces of work like Malaysia and data centers. Boom. Like that shift out of China, Japan and India. Boom. So you start to see those more so with clients looking to diversify what some of that already looks like with their workforce and where they’re going to allocate it.

But I think more topical at the moment is again, if I put outside my non-recruitment hat on in Asia, what’s interesting is to see the CFO, the heads of customer service, heads of sales and marketing embracing efficiency automation, use of technology to do activities that previously they would have maybe relied heavily on an offshoring center to do.

So, I think Asia-Pacific was heavily relied on for a Manila team and an India team, like large offshoring. That was three years ago, I think now the conversation is shifting to whether there is a hub and an ambition to really push the dial: “Well, actually, no, we don’t need to hire 400 customer service representatives in Manila. We will utilize a local partner that effectively can automate that entire process.”

So, we’re starting to see this blended discussion around, yes, we need we know we need to invest here, invest our time and also our energies. But we also better want to understand that, no, we don’t want to just go and hire a significant-sized workforce. We already know we can share with clients today in terms of software engineers, what that workforce is likely going to look like in 3 to 4 years’ time. It’s highly likely that 80 to 90% of that activity will be automated. They don’t exist. And so helping to educate clients on what that is.

Dimitri
Okay.

Stephanie Edwards
The strategic workforce planning and clients will also say, oh, “I’ve got to talk to them about their business requirements.” And I’m like, “No, you have to re-engineer how work is done.” Yeah. And not talk about how many heads you need in Japan, in China but really just unbundle the nature of the role, the skills, the tasks and start from there.

So, yeah, Asia is primed for that because there’s been a heavy reliance on offshoring. But I’m seeing a significant move away from some of that and a push for more transformative AI-enabled-type solutions for their workforce.

Dimitri
Yeah, I agree that that’s something that I’ve seen people talking about too. I think the era of just loading up people somewhere far away and having them deliver a lot of services has sort of run its course and gets less appealing as you need less people and as you need less people, you can pull that closer to your business, it becomes more agile and flexible because the people are more integrated into your business, right?

The people in these service centers were not integrated into the business. As long as the business was very static, that was okay. But now that business is really changing so quickly, it’s looking difficult to get those types of places to respond because they don’t really feel the input from the business. Right. It’s it’s difficult.

Stephanie Edwards
Agree

Dimitri
And so I think, that presents some challenges, of course. Because, you know, they were set up to load up those service centers with people, and you’re talking about something that’s a little more nuanced, a little more specific to the business. Do you think that, is it something that you’re seeing, like a sort of a spectrum where there are certain types of companies that you see moving to this newer model and others that are clinging to the older model?

Stephanie Edwards
Absolutely. Yeah. And I think it’s much better, much further progressed in other functional areas of the organization. And so that… HR’s adoption of this is usually challenged a little a little bit more challenging.

Dimitri
More challenging okay. A little slower.

Stephanie Edwards
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it’s the same as the adoption of electric cars. You know, you can apply some of that adoption of technology, which may be available, but what that adoption looks like throughout an organization shows up in different ways. So I think, in pockets like customer service where there’s such a significantly sized organization footprint workforce, there’s a lot of challenges around engagement and retention. The cost of that is really significant.

So it’s something for a company, a CFO, to look at and say there are other ways of doing this activity. We absolutely have to look at this. So there’s a business imperative, one for the bottom line but to better customers’ experiences. I think we’ve seen other pockets of organizations really sort of jump ahead in sales, marketing and customer service. And HR is sort of lagging behind.

In terms of those sectors though. Absolutely. Tech is pushing ahead on this, I am seeing more interesting lateral moves of late coming out of different sectors, moving into financial services and government across the globe that are bringing with them a much more entrepreneurial, a better understanding of that sort of risk environment to help and support some of those larger companies to transform, which is good because I think previously it’s just been, well, it’s going to take too long, you know. A lot of tenured people that maybe have not been in different sectors to understand you can navigate this if you understand what that looks like. So that is really exciting to see some of those, especially some of the financial services companies in EMEA really embracing what that looks like. And I think that comes down to these lateral leadership moves from other sectors, leaders coming in with that skill set to really drive the change.

Dimitri
Interesting.

Stephanie Edwards
Yeah, which I think is kind of essential to disrupt some of those sectors from maybe a previous way of working.

Dimitri
Plenty of disruption to go around.

Stephanie Edwards
There’s more than we need.

Dimitri
Yes. But the art of business success today is how to navigate disruption, right? It’s really the game that we’re playing. Let’s, let’s just talk about you a little bit. So, new job.

Stephanie Edwards
New job, Five weeks in.

Dimitri
Five weeks in. So how are you feeling?

Stephanie Edwards
I am feeling good. I had three months off over summer – gardening leave, which was… I’ve never had three months off in my life, so!

Dimitri
I don’t know what I’d do with three months.

Stephanie Edwards
It’s a lot.

Dimitri
How many books did you read?

Stephanie Edwards
You think that you’re going to set out with all of these big, grand plans. And really… I did tick off one bucket list item. Went to Switzerland, went to Zermatt and went skiing, which was super fun. But outside that, I think just great to have knowledge of obviously finishing with one firm for a decade, it’s a long time. To sort of then, wash that off and have a new view of where you’re going next. So the three months to decompress and really sort of build out what my strategy was going to be coming into the new role. Blank sheet of paper. Just also that opportunity to really immerse myself in where is the market today. Where are our buyers? Where is the opportunity for us to carve out a really clear way forward that absolutely disrupts the way that it’s currently being done? The traditional model.

So that’s probably my mandate—not BAU, not traditional RPOs, not traditional recruitment. It is: let’s start from scratch and rewrite the script here on enterprise talent acquisition and talent management practices and leapfrog that. So far, so good.

Dimitri
It sounds like you’ve got a mandate to do some interesting things now that are new and a little different, which is good. I think that’s exciting. You seem excited about it. There’s certainly plenty of opportunity in the market, right? I mean, this market in terms of HR and talent has never been more fluid and changing. Now, we talk about artificial intelligence and how it’s going to change the skill sets of everybody in the company, the number of people that you need in an organization and what they actually spend their time doing.

I don’t think anybody thought after Covid that there’d be another thing that would actually be even more drive more transition than what we had just gone through until, boom, the ChatGPT came out and everybody realized that we’re just, you know, the roller coaster keeps going.

Stephanie Edwards
It does. And I think you and I can get super excited about the functionality of our own product or our own solution, but it’s also trying to find the right timing and narrative to a client to not ostracize them from that. So, sure, I got super excited about where we can go and I can see what that looks like in two to 3 to 4 years’ time. But is that actually digestible for a client today? Probably not.

You know, the majority of them. So I think it is, again, trying to sort of chunk that down into bite-sized pockets of transformation, keeping in mind that our buyer, a CPO, CIO, this is just one piece of a thousand other pieces in the puzzle that they are being confronted with on a daily basis.

So I think it’s trying to make sure that, yes, we are keeping pace with what it could and should look like. But for me, I look at this and say, if I had an agenda as a CPO, this is one really big ticket item that is going to put a really exceptional stamp on your CV in terms of how you transformed the talent acquisition function to be swift, efficient, you’re hiring people in 24 hours.

Like, you know, that’s something that again, to a CFO, that’s a really compelling narrative that I across the other aspects of talent management. Sure. Comp. Sure. the org strategy of the business is other really big ticket items, but this is one that I think from a cost perspective and vast impact to the whole organization, this affects every single person, every hiring manager in the business and everyone coming into your organization. What does that experience look like?

I may be biased, but I definitely think we should be at the top of their priority list in terms of better understanding what this could and should do for their HR team.

Dimitri
Yeah, I think you’re right. I mean, I think with us we look at it and we say, “Our customers’ day job is not evaluating us.” It’s finding the formula that succeeds inside their organization. And then there, you know, in that extra hour beyond work. They’re sort of like, “What’s the technology that I need in order to do this?”

From our perspective, we try to make that message not too complicated but sophisticated enough that they know they can solve something. But I think it’s much easier for us to deliver solutions to our existing customers than it is to new companies because they already have a baseline understanding and we don’t have to explain ourselves, we don’t have to explain what the company is. We just explain the new thing. And we lay it out.

I describe it as laying it out on a buffet board and saying, “You know, I don’t know exactly what your immediate challenge is, but I want to make sure that there’s technology there if that’s your challenge.” Then, to help the customers understand how we’re in an industry of software. They’re trying to understand what’s going on in software, so we try and give a little bit of that to them because there’s a lot going on in software.

But I think, you know, I agree with you that you have to respect the idea that the customer has a lot going on and that the buyer has to understand, compartmentalize and prioritize. But you want to be there when it’s their time to strike, when they say, “Okay, now’s the time to do this.”

You want to be able to get it done with no risk. Execution risk has to be that if you go in and advise them on something, you want it to be the right advice, timely advice, and, you know, help them get it done because it’s a very competitive environment now.

So, you’re, you’re five weeks in. I’d love to, I’d love to have you back in a year. Okay. And talk about how this goes.

Stephanie Edwards
What happened. Yes.

Dimitri
It’s, it’s interesting to see how people create an offering and bring it to market. And I think you’re kind of crafting that right now. So, it’d be nice to see what that turns out to be and how the customers respond to that.

Stephanie Edwards
Absolutely would love that.

Dimitri
Fantastic. Thank you so much for being here.

Stephanie Edwards
Thanks for having me.