Shownotes
Reinhold recommended three short articles to introduce people to conversational leadership:
Suchman, A. L. (2017) ‘Avoiding the most common and fatal pitfalls of organizational change’, on Relationship Centered Health Care website.
Part 1: Change how you think about change!
Part 2: Attend to the losses that are part of every change
Part 3: Hold the tension of change
A longer article:
Suchman, A. (2011) ‘Organizations as Machines, Organizations as Conversations: Two Core Metaphors and Their Consequences’, in Medical Care Vol 49, No 12 Suppl 1
And a book: Winters, M. F. (2020), Inclusive Conversations: Fostering Equity, Empathy and Belonging Across Differences.
Transcript
Nelis: I’m really pleased to introduce a guest into our podcast, Reinhold Titus. He has agreed to walk with us through his experience in his organisational context around conversational leadership and doing that cross-culturally. So, Reinhold, why don’t you introduce yourself a little bit?
Reinhold: Thanks so much Nelis, and Kate, for having me. Looking forward to the next few minutes together. My name is Reinhold Titus. I am from Namibia. That’s my primary passport country. I grew up in a cross-cultural context and in Namibia mostly, a few of my childhood years in South Africa. My first career was in the medical field in radiology, and then left and joined an international NGO and have been involved in that for over 20 years now. Lived in six different countries. Actually my family and I are currently living in Germany. So, this is the sixth country that we’re living in. Been involved with NGO work in leadership and strategy and leadership development, but also lived in South Africa for just over 10 years and during that time ran an intercultural consultancy, so working with profit and nonprofit sector around the whole issue of cultural intelligence, diversity and inclusion, coaching expats who were relocating around the world. And so some of the multinational companies were bringing me in to coach them, just as they were navigating their own sense of identity, transitions and leading in a very different context and so forth. But yeah, currently living in Germany involved in an organisation where I am responsible for our strategy alignment. And then also looking at what we just term inclusion, but the whole diversity and inclusion within the organisation.
Nelis: We’re looking forward to hearing from that incredibly rich background.
Kate: Yes, and I must add that Reinhold and I met in England during our Master studies. We both encountered conversational leadership there and were very interested in each other’s research topics so stayed in touch. And we recently invited Reinhold to speak at a leaders event on his research into the inclusion of majority world staff into Western-founded organisations. And for those of you who’ve listened to episode 4, you might have picked up that the group there was referring to the outsider who came and spoke, and that was Reinhold!
Reinhold: I actually still have to listen to that, Kate.
Kate: Yes, you should listen to that episode. They’re very complimentary about your input into our time together. But Reinhold’s also interested in conversational approaches to change in the intersection of that with inclusion and belonging. So I’m really looking forward to what he has to say today.
Nelis: Yes, I am too. Let’s start off. Kate just said you’re interested in conversational leadership as well. So, what interests you there?
Reinhold: I think there were three things for me that triggered my interest around conversational leadership. One was, just as I looked at the world, and then of course for me personally, faith is an integral aspect of my life. But even as I look at it from a faith perspective, I realised that conversations have so much potential in terms of helping us cross divides, overcome differences, political, whatever it might be. If we can get to healthy places of conversations, honest, vulnerable conversations, it has a potential for bringing so much healing and change and all of that. So that was certainly an aspect that interested me. But also from a cultural perspective. I’m an African and many of our cultures are oral cultures. Generally, knowledge is transferred, sense is made, in conversation rather than reading a book and sitting there by myself and reflecting, then writing another chapter about what I think. It’s in the conversation that we sense what’s happening, that we connect relationally with one another, at a heart, human fundamental needs level. And then, just what the future holds and sensing that together. So, in fact, in my father’s language, which is Xhosa, and Zulu, we have a word that we call, that is, indaba. And indaba is really a time and space where people come together to talk together as a community, or even as representatives of a community to solve issues or find ways forward and strengthen community. It just resonated with me from where I come from, culturally in the world.
Kate: That’s very much the case in other parts of the world as well, not just Africa. I experienced that in Papua New Guinea: everything is done through conversation, through storying, as they call it. “Let’s sit down and stori”. And for me coming from the West, when we were sitting by the fire and someone first said “Stori!”, I was like, do I have to tell a story, you know, thinking of fictitious… No, it’s just that conversational “let’s just sit here and talk things out”. I love that about the culture there.
Nelis: Yeah, so that’s interesting because often I hear that conversational leadership is difficult in a non-western context because it assumes a sort of egalitarian way of approaching things. You’re saying the opposite. You’re saying, actually, oral cultures are incredibly well suited for conversational leadership.
Reinhold: Well, now you’re talking about conversations and you’re bringing leadership into it. And those are two that we then bring together in terms of conversations and leadership. And of course, leadership is culturally constructed. What leadership looks like in context, you know, again, this is where I can critique some of our literature a little bit. But often, when we read books about leadership, there’s a prescribed way about how leadership works and what leadership looks like and all of that. But no, it comes out of a particular cultural paradigm that defines leadership and then we try and uncritically export it around the world and say this is the way you should lead and so on. And there are equally legitimate, perhaps different, but equally legitimate ways of leading in different contexts. And so when you put that together, yes, there’s often a bit more hierarchical ways of leadership in some of the majority world cultures, but you also have leaders who perhaps in a different way, will engage in conversation. And of course, for many of us from that part of the world Nelson Mandela would be an amazing example of an African leader who employed conversational styles of leadership and yet, understood the hierarchical issues. There is, of course, the cultural element to that and hierarchy that needs to be navigated, but there are many leaders who are employing this and just finding the culturally appropriate ways of doing it. So again, even with conversational leadership that we don’t try and uncritically export that to the rest of the world and say, this is the way it should be done. It’s to recognize what is in the culture, leverage that which is already in the culture that can actually help you to get there, but also be aware of those elements that may not be the same as where people come from the West, how they would do things. So for me, in a sense, is it again you cannot do this well in a global multicultural context without some level of cultural intelligence or savvy, to be able to do this well, in different contexts, or with diverse groups.
Nelis: Yeah, and I hope that this podcast will be sort of an encouragement for that research, for that exploration and actually the practice of leadership cross-culturally and conversational leadership bringing that together would be fascinating and I’m hoping for more of that.
…
Nelis: You said there are three things that sort of interested you. I’ve heard two, if I’m not mistaken.
Reinhold: Yeah. So the third one for me would be the opportunity that it presents to us to get input from the outside of the hierarchical spaces, where if you just had a certain group of people: just what it unleashes, you know, in terms of creativity, innovation, the engagement it creates when people are involved in that process. So it’s just what it unleashes is something that triggered me because I’ve seen it whenever we employ in culturally relevant ways, but it energises people. And so for me, that was the third one, that inspires me towards exploring this, that wisdom exists throughout organisations. Insights, perspectives, different ways of doing things, understanding of contexts, exist in places in our organisations that leadership have no idea of and no access to. And so how do we tap into that? I can give you examples… Just speaking to my teenage goddaughter, many years ago and asking her questions and she gave me an answer that I would never have thought about as an adult and it sort of guided my parenting just getting wisdom from an 11 year old at the time. So you know, just wisdom that exists within the organisation that you often do not tap into.
Kate: Absolutely–and we’ve discussed that in previous episodes–that actually when we stick to a small group of leaders with just one perspective or one set of experiences we limit ourselves and we limit the potential for change as well. And you need diversity in order to be able to discern the way forward often as a leader because you don’t have the perspective that others have. So yeah, that resonated with me as well that the wisdom of all is really needed.
Nelis: Just yesterday I was in a conversation where I was confronted again with the fact that we as leaders tend to look at just one layer of the organisation: the one hundred people that we always go to. And it is quite a challenge to try to really reach well beyond that. You’re right, conversational leadership opens those kinds of avenues if we employ it well.
…
Kate: Reinhold, would you share a little bit about, what are your experiences using conversational leadership in your organisational context, in your NGO?
Reinhold: Yeah, and again, context is important and I’m glad to be using that word because it would look differently in different contexts. I wouldn’t say we are there not by any means at all. And in fact, what is “there”? It always depends. I’ve studied strategic management before and I’ve been involved in strategic management. And when I took on this particular role in the organisation, there was a level of complexity there that was just beyond anything that I’d experienced before. We have people from within the wider organisation, more than 100 different countries. In one of the units that we run, over 60 different countries. So that level of diversity and that’s just nationalities, you’re not even talking about the languages, the ethnicities, and the life experiences that everybody brings with them. So we were dealing with a very diverse staff, we were engaging with people in national and regional contexts who are very, very different from each other. And so our organisational strategy needs to be set up in such a way that we can have that flexibility and not just, “This is the Five-Year Plan and this is how we’re going to work”. And then, of course, the awareness of the fast and continuous changes in the world. And of course Covid over the last two years ago, that that has exponentially enhanced that sense of the VUCA world that we often talk about that we live in. So I just realised, even my skill set was not suited for what I needed to do. And so what do I do? Do I just go back to the toolbox I have and use the tools I have even though the job requires different tools, because that’s what I know. And quite, frankly that’s what people expect. That’s what makes people feel comfortable as well, the traditional change management approaches. When I got introduced to this and I think what was helpful is, it takes a lot of self worth for a leader because it takes you into a lot of uncertainty, insecurity, questioning, opening yourself up for questioning, the traditional change management leaders come and stand up, advisors would come in stand in front of you and say, “Okay. This is how we’re going to do things”. Now, this would say “We don’t know, you know, I don’t know. We need to sense this together”. “Well, what are we paying you for if you come and tell us you don’t know?”. So I think it took a lot of self-worth for me to be comfortable with what was required of me, comfortable with “I don’t know” and it’s okay if people know, I don’t know. That sense of humility and embrace of my own insecurities and all of that. So I think that that was one of the biggest things that I needed to work through, is to be comfortable with this.
I remember one of our earlier conversations. I wanted to get a much wider part of engagement, much wider groups and people involved. But as I was sensing the organisation, I realised perhaps I was trying to push too much too soon. If I could just get a sector or group of the organisation together, it would be more than what we’ve ever done before. And then even thinking about that group that we get together. Can we intentionally work diversity into that instead of, as you said, we go to the hundred people that we always go to. It’s “No, who are the other voices out there that would not automatically end up on that list of 100 people?” And how do we get them into the conversation?
…
Nelis: You say that you realised you needed to start with a subsection of the organisation because biting off everything at the same time was too much. Can you say a bit more on that, is that like an experiment? Or is that something that you see as gradually expanding outward? How does that work from your perspective?
Reinhold: I think it comes back to leadership again. What I realised that will provide the greatest leverage is not for me to try and push that we do this throughout the organisation, but to take leaders on a journey to help them see the value of it because they lead in spaces that I will never get to, to help them see the value to help give them some kind of language and tools on how to do that. And some leaders have caught on to this more so than others. Particularly one of our leaders I just found incredibly encouraging to see, as he started working with me and there was even a period during the Covid time in lockdown, that I couldn’t travel to get to a significant group of our people. And he travelled, and we talked about it beforehand, how to engage. And then hearing him afterwards talking about how he facilitated, constantly just using the conversational language that he used. And even a few days ago we had a conversation and he just goes back again to the conversational way of engaging and leading. And so for me, that was a win, that some of the leaders really caught on to it then and then started doing that wherever they found themselves.
Kate: Yes, that was very much something we were trying to do with the event a couple of weeks ago that you joined us at, that is pass on the vision for using a conversational approach in the organisation. And I do think that people got that in a new way from having spent a couple of days working with a different approach to how to do a meeting, for example. But also to continue the conversation after they leave with others and use a conversational approach with their staff. One question I have is that, I guess, you like us have globally scattered staff and you can’t possibly be with everyone all at once. You can’t gather everyone into one room. And I envy people who work in organisations, where everyone’s in the same building or on the same site, or maybe they have three sites. And they think that’s difficult! We have, you know, over 4,000 staff scattered around the world and we can never get everyone in one room, or even on one Zoom call. So I’m interested to hear how other people engage and create these conversations, whether virtually or by travelling around?
Reinhold: I think it’s about leaders, and taking leaders on a journey, and equipping them to do that and they need to discern their own contexts as well. You know, because the global context is also different from what people experience in regions, or on a national level.[21:13] One of the things that I realised as I reflected back on those earlier days and even that initial intervention, debriefing the intervention, reflecting on the intervention myself and also with others. And you always ask yourself “How could you have done this better?”. And one of the things that I realised was I could have given people who are coming to this for the first time… because there was quite a bit of tension because people didn’t know what to expect, it wasn’t the normal way of doing things. And sometimes the tension is good because it brings out things. And I later on came across just a few short articles that describe this a little bit more. And I realised even if I had access to that and just had given that to them beforehand to start framing what conversational leadership, conversational organisations, are all about, that may have helped a little bit. When we debriefed afterwards, people then said, “Okay, I understand now to a degree”. And then, even the ones that I spoke to, they still pushed back and had questions. I then sent them these articles, and then we had conversations, again and they said, “Now some of these things make sense to me”. So I realised, leadership and some of the equipping resources, language, that we give to leaders as they do this is critical for them to do that and make sure that it actually goes throughout the organisation.
Kate: It’s very much a process, a journey of learning, of adjusting, to seeing things differently.
…
Nelis: I find it fascinating, what you are saying Reinhold, that it’s got to be done sort of in dialogue with people with whom we actually have contact. You can’t you can’t just mandate this across the organisation from a distance. It requires a sense of proximity and that’s of course immediately the challenge because the topic you’re dealing with, of inclusion and diversity, these are deeply personal topics that you can’t just mandate. Can you share some of your practical stories of some of how that works in your organisation?
Reinhold: At the moment I say a lot of that revolves around interventions. For me, the whole diversity is important, who do we have in the room? Even looking at it from a hierarchical point of view, to make sure that it’s not just your executive or middle-level leaders. That actually, I’m inviting some of the people who just joined a few months ago, younger people, into this conversation. Even with this intervention, one of the key things that we will be working on is leadership, leadership styles, how do we see leadership? Just the whole transactional versus relational leadership. And, again, if you grow in terms of relational leadership, then it opens up spaces for conversation. Then you do this more, more and more. So for me a big part of that is just looking at how we model this, but also in tension with our leadership development, to help expand their understanding of what leadership is and how to make sense as leaders and how to navigate things as leaders] So right now it’s around these interventions and then, and trusting, we’re always talking about capacity building, we’re talk about multiplication. How can we multiply people who can do this throughout the organisation rather than, again, being dependent on a few experts that can facilitate more conversational approaches to organisational life.
Kate: Can you share something with us about your experience, your organisation’s experience, of change processes, the positives and the negatives, whether traditional or conversational, how have you seen that working out?
Reinhold: Yeah, and that’s an important question Kate. Because again if we study this, there are proponents of conversational leadership and then there are those who are more traditional change management approaches, and then there are people who are perhaps more in the middle between those two. And I think, you know, the traditional approaches – whether that’s a reality or an assumption– but the predictability that it provides the people know, how we are going to do this process, you know, there’s a research phase, and then you come up with a strategic plan and a rollout and measurement and all of that. And so it gives people that sense of, they know what to expect, the predictability. And then there’s often for some humans a need for them.
Nelis: For safety?
Reinhold: For safety, yes. I realised with our organisations that some of our structures and systems and processes are so deeply embedded, that to just have a conversational approach it will always raise questions about, “Okay, what does this mean in terms of our structures or processes? How do we measure these things, particularly, how do we evaluate this?” You know, which is a little bit more difficult with conversational approaches. So I think it gives people that sense of predictability. Whereas the conversational approach, some of the benefits, is that it enables wider participation, it enables creativity, greater creativity within an organisation, innovation, novelty, new ways of things coming up. I think it must be Suchman who wrote about this, that one person makes a suggestion, somebody else, person B, hears the suggestion and then they add to that, and it takes on a new form. And person C takes that suggestion, it takes on a whole new form. None of them on their own would have come up with this, but because the conversation takes place there’s novelty that emerges, that you couldn’t even say one person would have come up with this genius idea. Just the fact that it allows space for that. But I think there’s also challenges with a conversational approach. It takes a lot of time. It can provoke resistance because, you know, time is money. People want to plan. People want to know exactly. And so the uncertainty can provoke resistance, and how to navigate that. And just a willingness to sit with the unknown. I think those are some of the challenges for me with the conversational approaches.
Kate: I’m interested that you mentioned speed there. Clare raised an issue in our last episode about what do you do when things are urgent? A conversational approach takes time. And sometimes you just can’t take the time to do that, and you have to make decisions urgently. I just wanted to ask for your perspective on that.
Reinhold: Of course, there are times that, you know, an urgent issue can mean life or death and you need to make those decisions. But sometimes, whose “urgent” is it, you know, how urgent is it, really? Can we take a few more days? Or is it just because we’re used to this is the way it should be done? So who assesses, who determines how urgent something is? So one of the things that I’ve done in this includes just coming to terms with who I am in leadership and working in a context where there’s a certain defined way of leadership that I’m not comfortable with, but I’ve assimilated and done it that way many times, or for a long time. I remember having to facilitate a conversation with our leadership team. And I know what our expectations at the end of those discussions are: “Okay. Now, we need to summarise it. What are the key points? What are the action points? What is the timeline? When is this going to happen?” That’s the expectation. And I said to the team, you know, I’m grateful for all of the input. I’ve heard that, but I also want to be transparent that I’m not ready to actually come to that point of saying, okay summarise this and next steps and all of that. Because even as I sat there, I recognized that there were voices in the meeting that I have not heard on this issue that I believe have something to say. And maybe it’s because of the fact that we speak in English sometimes. Sometimes, it’s a personality issue, that some of us need a little bit more time to process and then we just feel we need to make this rushed decision. So I said, “Well for one, I feel there’s a few people, other people I want to engage with and get their input, before I can actually make this decision”. But at the same time I can’t keep them waiting indefinitely. So my arrangement with them was, “I will come back to you in a week and have it summarised and give some kind of way forward, rather than doing it now. And we leave it where it is right now.” And once they heard me explain this to them, it was “Okay, no, we can live with that”.
Kate: And even if something is urgent we need to make sure we have the right people speaking into this. You know, we can often default to just getting into a little huddle of leaders when we have an urgent decision to be made quickly. And actually, we would benefit from taking a few more hours, maybe a few more days to reach out and ask people at different levels in the organisation for their input on the decision and then it will be a better decision as a result.
Reinhold: It helps people to at least have some time frame, that is what I find. You can say to them, “Okay. We will come back to you in a certain period of time”. Then, at least for those who are more linear, they have some marker. And then you can do the work that needs to be done and then get to that particular space. And even if it requires more conversation because sometimes it’s not that urgent anymore, but at least they have some kind of idea as to when we get feedback, or take a look at next steps.
Nelis: I like your balance there, maintaining forward movement, but also framing the time, but also creating space for the right voices to speak into that. And I was fascinated by your comment about language being an issue there, or people who need more time to think. I think there’s a huge cultural component, actually. I constantly see that. You’ve got, often, the loud dominant Western voices who speak up first. And if you don’t give it more time, those will be the only voices.
Reinhold: Conversational approaches have inherent biases built into them. And sometimes they are unconscious and we need to surface them in order to help us. So one of them would be the language bias that we talked about, the fact that we speak in English, you know, even for somebody like me English is my third language. I can express myself reasonably well in English. But English speakers don’t see the mental energy that it takes, you know, to be able to engage with them on a conversation around the table and having to quickly make a decision. You’re global leaders, you are aware of this. And, Nelis, English is not your first language, either.
Nelis: So, Kate is the only one who doesn’t have to think right now!
Kate: I’ve lived in other countries and I’m aware of the strain and the tiredness of speaking in another language that’s not your own. One thing we’ve done is when we’ve had global staff conversations where we haven’t all been in the same space and we’ve asked people to group in their organisational units having conversations. Some of those have taken place in French, or Spanish or Korean, and then we ask for the feedback, and feedback is usually in English. We ask for all the groups to feed back to the leadership. So that is one way around it, having language specific groupings.
…
Nelis: Are there other aspects than language that you would like to bring out when you look at those cultural dynamics?
Reinhold: Yes, so language would be one. And I like what you said Kate, and I think, you know, just the issue of affinity group conversations. So, even if you have a larger group, larger conversation, can you have affinity group conversations? And how that is fed back, whether that affinity group being a language group, but it could be a gender issue as well. And so, the other issue at play here is the power issue. Particularly in multicultural, diverse contexts, we come in with an assumption of a very egalitarian worldview that everybody’s equal because we’re in the room, but that’s not true. We need to discern when we are together in these rooms, what are the power factors at play in this room that would affect how well we engage in this conversation. And I just mentioned gender. In some places being a man, it implicitly carries a certain weight, what I say. And so what does it mean for women in that room? Well, how do we create space for them perhaps to have a conversation around their own table? And say, this is how we feel, but one woman cannot necessarily speak up on behalf of all, you know, so… Or, generationally as well, you know, one of the things that I’ve learned even in these diverse conversations is, there would be younger people there who feel that they can speak up because perhaps they even come from an egalitarian worldview. So they’ve always been encouraged in their families with their parents and so on. And this is just how it’s nurtured over the years. But then there are young people who are in that room, that just because of how they grew up, that they would not speak up. So for me, just during those coffee breaks or lunch breaks to go and sit with them or take them aside or go for a walk and say, “What do you make of this meeting? What do you sense in all of that?”. And I always get incredible insights from them. And I may challenge and encourage them and say I will create space and safety for you in the room to actually come and say what you just said, depending on where the person is at. But you know, just between a leader, when they feel affirmed, “Oh, this matters, this is important. Oh, I can say it in the meeting”. So we build people up. So to be aware of the power dynamics in the room, and again, power dynamics can be diverse. Race is a power, and I speak to many people in the majority world… Being from a particular ethnic group, can mean you have power in a group. So whether you’re white or whether you’re, black African, but from a particular ethnic background in a certain group, you know. So the issue of racism can be a power issue. The issue of socio-economic background and where we come from, and money can be a power issue. So, it’s important to be aware of what are the power dynamics at play that determines who speaks up. This is the work that I’m really leaning into, that as we create these inclusive conversations, I believe that certain conditions need to be in place for truly inclusive conversations to take place, because merely having diversity in the room doesn’t mean it’s inclusive.
Kate: No, not at all. In fact, one of the things we’re doing in our organisation right now is wanting to have a conversation around inclusion and belonging. But knowing if we open that up, we would probably mostly hear the Western voices. So we’re starting out with what we’re calling a Listening Project, deliberately going to our majority world colleagues, and interviewing around 50 actually, and making sure we create space to hear their voices, before we start the conversation. And I hope that that will give people the confidence to speak up when we have the whole staff conversation. But also we will then be able to bring those voices to the whole and sort of amplify them, because of those power issues that you mentioned.
Nelis: I realise often how invisible power is to the person who actually has it, because it’s sort of the air you breathe, and to be aware of that takes time and effort. I was just at an elders’ meeting of our church, and we talked about a very sensitive issue about a younger female person. It’s like well, do you realise that you go as the pastor, as the man, as the older person… It’s that sense of you don’t even know, you’re not even aware of how power plays into this conversation. I think it’s really important to bring that out and often across races, as you said…
Kate: …and genders. I’ve definitely experienced that.
Nelis: And genders. Exactly, we’ve got to learn to see that, as the ones who have it, and I think every leader has to wrestle with that.
Reinhold: Absolutely. And de-centre power, acknowledge it, recognize it, and power is not a bad thing in itself, it’s how power is used. Somebody once said, “Power needs to turn up trustworthy”. Can we trust power for the good of all? So, it’s a recognising it exists, but then de-centre it. And there’s a number of other conditions that are critical for us to consider if we are to have really inclusive conversations.
Nelis: We need to start closing off. Is there any final piece that you would like to mention, an insight, you would like to share with our listeners, that you’re like, wow, if only they retain that we’re good?
Reinhold: Conversational leadership, it opens up space for so much change in ourselves, in interpersonal relationships, in communities. We are in a very unhealthy space, virtual space, that we are in, where we see a lot of toxicity in terms of how we engage with one another. We need to foster this. And maybe just to the story, Nelis, when I’m in these international diverse meetings that we talk about certain issues. And yet when I walk out of the room and I find people from my affinity group, whatever that might be, then we talk about the meeting in the room. And we say, “Did you hear this? Did you notice this? This should have been talked about”. And somehow we don’t feel the freedom to have these conversations in the room. And really, those are the things that are generative, that will take us forward, get us to grow. And so, really to ask ourselves, “Why don’t we feel we can have these conversations?”. And it goes back to these issues around power in the room, around psychological safety. How do we create psychological safe spaces for us to have these conversations? But being brave to speak up. I love the work of Mary Frances Winters. If there’s one resource that I’d recommend it’s a book that she wrote around inclusive conversations. She talks about grace and forgiveness, that we are going to make mistakes, we are going to step on each other’s toes. How do we extend that to each other? Facing our fear, our fragility. So, we need to work on those things in order to really have interpersonal relationships and team and organisational conversations that really take us forward. It’s focus on that but recognise that there need to be certain things in place to really generate inclusive generative conversations.
Kate: Thank you Reinhold. I think we could talk for several more hours, but we’ll stop for now. We really appreciate you coming and sharing with us today, particularly on this intersection between conversational processes and inclusivity, which is so critical.
Thank you for listening, everyone. We will be adding more resources and links to the show notes. So do check that out. And as always the transcript will be there as well. Thank you, Reinhold. Nelis, until next time! Thank you.