Liz Bothwell: [INTRO] Hi everyone, welcome to Waste360’s NothingWasted! Podcast. On every episode we invite the most interesting people in waste recycling and organics to sit down with us and chat candidly about their thoughts, their work, this unique industry and so much more. So thanks for listening and enjoy this episode.
Liz Bothwell: Hi everyone. This is Liz Bothwell from Waste360 with Anne Bahr Thompson, author and founder of the brand consultancy, Onesixtyfourth. Welcome Anne and thank you for being here.
Anne Bahr Thompson: Well thank you for having me.
Liz: We have so much to talk about but at first, we would love to hear a little bit about your background and how you've come to embrace sustainability and corporate responsibility.
Anne: So I would say it's more how I publicly come to embrace sustainability and corporate responsibility because I think it's been part of who I am forever. I lived in France in my early to mid 20s briefly and I was always intrigued that out of the supermarkets, they want to give them plastic bags or even paper bags to take their groceries home. They brought them home in the boxes that were left over from things that were unpacked and put on the shelves. And I love the idea of maybe I wanted to look more European of the little carry bags for you know your fruit and vegetables and that sort of things. And I used to go to the grocery store with one of those big L.L. Bean canvas bags. And after that was, I don't want to date myself but after that visit my I used to go with one of those L.L. Bean Tallis bags and people thought I was insane. And when my son was in his younger years like six, anywhere from four to eight when they could comment and when they're very conscious of being different from their friends, we would go to the local food emporium in New York City and I would take these L.L. Bean bags with me and he wouldn't want to be seen with me. So it is it's sort of just been something that for I can’t explain why I was attracted to from very early on and when it became a public thing I started talking about as a result of research I was doing.
So in 2011 I was conducting a trend study. We had been conducting informally a little bit more formally relocated from a decade in the UK to the year back to the US. And I wanted something to talk to clients. About we were conducting this annual trend study making it more formalized. We went out we were asking people about things they were hoping to accomplish in the next year, their hopes and dreams. We also spoke to them about their fears and concerns for themselves for their country. The study was done both in the U.S. and the U.K. and we asked them amongst a variety of other questions that were also included. We also asked which brands they thought were would exhibit leadership in the coming year and why. Which brands they thought were good citizens and why and which brands they thought were irresponsible or bad citizens in life.
And actually in that that corporate citizenship question we actually had a technical definition of corporate citizenship. Two things emerged out of this study. First relative to their hopes and dreams they were so much deeper than we expected. We thought people were going to tell us they wanted to lose weight and stop smoking but actually people spoke about really significant things not losing their house paying for education health care. And again, this was both the US and the UK. They also in their fears and concerns they had a lot of fears that government wasn't fixing problems, that politicians were not focused on actually resolving the issues in the world. They wanted to see resolved. So, on the one hand they started telling us that they thought business was better suited to fix the world's problems than government. So that's one finding and then almost an exact opposite to that, the brands they named as good corporate citizens were rather surprising. So, if I asked you in 2011 if you can think back what brand might you think would be the number one good corporate citizen.
Liz: Well 2011, let me think.
Anne: So, it was another election year
Liz: OK I might my head goes to Apple. But I think the the iPhone had just come out a few years prior.
Anne: So interesting you say that why would you say that it was a good corporate citizen?
Liz: Well I think that it was I think Apple at the time completely came up with a new way to streamline lives.
Anne: While you're in line with our audience. So, we were expecting very different brands we're expecting brands that you historically think of as being socially responsible and Apple was, we expected it to be the number one leadership brand, Apple was the number one good corporate citizen. And the reason why was because they changed the way I, and that I is important, communicate with people across the globe. They brought joy into my life by bringing music into it 24/7. Now Apple was in the middle of a Foxconn scandal at the time for chips and activists were really talking about how Apple was not socially responsible. So, it was fascinating to us that they were in. They were the number one brand that was labeled as a good corporate citizen. The other brands that came up were Wal-Mart in the US and Tesco in the UK as a parallel brand because of their pricing policy I'm afforded a better lifestyle. So, this whole me proposition was sitting under the notion of corporate citizenship. And that was not what we were expecting. Now 2,200 brands were named. So, most of the studies where you see the brands that are listed as number one good citizenship or leadership brand or something of that ill are chosen typically from a pool that's been preselected or from brands being asked about and you don't see this because of how it's reported but we actually had a completely open ended study and 2,220 brands were named. And the brands we were expecting to come up were more mentioned by only one or two people as you went down the line. So, the brands that rose to the top generally had a me proposition one or two of them had what I call a we proposition. But the majority of those that were in the especially the top five were all about how they better my life. So, this was intriguing to me. So, you have this finding that business is meant to step in and reform and progressed society because politicians aren't going to and governments can't.
And then you have this opposite finding that brands that are good corporate citizens are benefiting me. So, it's like hang on what's going on here. So, I invested and effectively sort of gave myself a research grant over the next three years to investigate the difference between brand leadership, good corporate citizenship and favorite brands which is a proxy for loyalty. So, I deconstructed how people were defining them. And from this unexpectedly unsolicited emerged a five step model of what I called Brand citizenship. That's how I became involved in this in a public manner.
Liz: Oh, that's amazing. What a story. And I can see why you dug into that. Well the difference between the me and the way and what you thought would come out of that that's really amazing. I mean aside from that I I've read your book Do Good: Embracing Brand Citizenship to fuel both purpose and profit. It's fantastic, by the way.
Anne: Oh, well thank you.
Liz: And I love how you tied everything to research and real data and results like you're talking about. Can you give our listeners an overview of your five step brand citizen citizenship model?
Anne: Yes. So, it runs across what as I mentioned I label the me to be continuum and what the idea is that what's now known as purpose, what we all are striving to figure out what's our whether to as an individual or you as a corporation. What's my more meaningful purpose? What am I meant to be doing? And for business their purpose should be tied to what their business is about. It shouldn't be something completely disconnected. And that purpose should lead to a social mission as well as a customer value proposition. And the five steps embrace that.
So, it begins with trust which is step one. And that's on the me side of the continuum. And trust is very much simply what it says. It's about doing what you say. it's about not making claims that you don't deliver on. It's about delivering first and foremost your promises to your stakeholders. And in the simplest way let's look at it as customers. But it's also other stakeholders especially employees. How do you cultivate trust with your audiences? How do you deliver what you say? And trust has five steps according to my research and it's not intended to be five within five. It just emerged this way again naturally. Which is why I think everything in this model does make so much sense. It wasn't developed in an incubator or a classroom or a boardroom. It was what people said. So, the five steps of trust our first have clarity because you can't benchmark if someone's doing what they say unless you know where they're coming from so clarity is very important.
Then you have to be reliable. You have to do what you say every time and deliver on that. You have to be sincere and people talk a lot about authenticity, but sincerity comes from the heart. And then in that era of social media, people understand that brands as much as they themselves as individuals contrive on, the slightly more negative side curate on the more positive side their own social media profiles. So, authenticity is the design today and how we communicate it to people. But if you speak sincerely from the heart that feels more real and I don't know if that makes sense that fine line in there, but people sort of always light up when I talk about that. It's like “yeah wow, I sort of post these pictures” then say the happy side of me which is a curated authentic profile. Sure, it's not necessarily sincere from the heart. So, I have clarity, reliability, sincerity give to give not to get. So, when you're doing things with loyalty programs or other initiatives it can't just be about what it's getting you. It has to be done freely without expecting something in return. So, clarity, reliability, sincerity, give to give, not to get and active listening. So we live in an era where companies have so much of our data and they understand so much about us, yet so much of this data is just used to cross-sell which sort of is related to give to give not to get, it's not used to actively listen to the things I need and understand about me and respond in that manner.
So it's not just about using data to cross-sell. It's about using data to understand and offer things to people to show that you empathize with them. So those are the five steps around trust.
So, we moved from trust. So, from doing what you say to step two which is enrichment. Make my life better and more inspired you make my everyday routines easier. And one of the brands that I talk about in the book that's always fun to talk about under this is Mrs. Myers and I don't know if you know Mrs. Myers. Do you know their household cleaning supplies?
Liz: Yes. Yes I use it.
Anne: OK. So maybe you'll relate very closely to the story. People in the research spoke about how Mrs. Myers inspires their cleaning by making them feel like they're in a French lavender field even though they've never been to France or you know that scent of geraniums as I clean the dishes and you hear men who really don't care very much about cleaning products, some of them and I'm not saying all men are like that but some of the men in our research are like “I'm so not engaged in cleaning products” but if I'm meant to do the dishes I want my wife to have Mrs. Meyers sitting on that counter and we heard things like that. So, it makes cleaning more inspired and more interesting. And when you think about enrichment as this inspiring and enhancing my daily life you start understanding why Apple was named as the number one good citizen because it really is a brand that enriches my life.
Ikea is an interesting brand to talk about in enrichment and in spanning from enrichment to responsibility. So as someone looking at these brands with it with a bit of an expert eye, I personally would have placed Ikea and responsibility. However, participants who spoke about Ikea as a good citizen and named them, put them in enrichment. And I'll talk about those things.
IKEA enriches their lives to comprehend founders vision was to make the things that were available to the few, available to the many, so to enhance the lives of the many in their homes. And there are many people who actually attribute some of Sweden's philosophy about democratizing things to him and saying he with Ikea actually helped transform some Sweden's culture which is an interesting bridge into responsibility which is about treating employees the environment, suppliers fairly. So, IKEA had a particle board, as did every other furniture manufacturer that had formaldehyde in the glue so the only way to make particle board, which is a cheaper way to create furniture, was to gluing wood chips into this particle board and the glue had formaldehyde in it. And I can't become the face of bad particle board and in part of Europe and they were being lambasted. I think it was Germany and the Netherlands potentially and definitely and in some of these Scandinavian countries for this particle board and they went out to try to find a new supplier and they couldn't. There was no supplier who did not make it make particle board Without formaldehyde. They could not find it.
So instead of accepting that and saying that well we're just going to either have to make more expensive furniture or people are just going to have to live with formaldehyde in their particle board, they decided to work with chemical manufacturers to form a new glue to make particle board better. So, they really behaved in a fair manner and responsibly and they own this problem and they changed an industry.
So really fascinating story. Also about the journey of how you know when you're doing good cultural expectations change and so you're going to have to review what you're doing.
So, we have trust enrichment and then responsibility which as I said is about behaving fairly to your employees to the environment to suppliers. But what's really important the responsibility and essential to understand, is that unless you're first and foremost viewed as treating your employees well, people will not give you credit for the good, you're doing in other aspects of your business. And Wal-Mart is the best example of this because Wal-Mart still has a cloud over itself for having treated employees in a way that people did not respect that people do not think fair and Wal-Mart however has some amazing sustainability initiatives.
What it's done with supply chain and everything is extraordinary, and they deserve so much credit for it. When they fix something, they can transform a country right fixing that supply chain. However, anytime I ever tweet anything good about Wal-Mart I still to this day have people you know giving me backlash tweets of “oh well my friend was fired from here or whatever” so this shadow hangs over them all the time and they're working very hard at trying to fix that. But if people perceive you as treating employees poorly, they will not give you credit so you won't benefit as a business from the good you are doing in other spaces.
So again, we now go from clarity, enrichment, responsibility, step for community and this about bringing people together through shared values and this can be a B2B community. The Forest Stewardship Council brings businesses together who all care about how they source paper and paper products and they help one another, and they learn from one another in an environment created by the Forest Stewardship Council.
You also have community mobile telephony company in the UK called Gift Gap, which came out of nowhere and is, I believe, they're still in the number three position. They were when I wrote the book, as a mobile telephony company in a very competitive market and they have a community of users who access customer service. They don't have a customer service department and their users through a series of gaming initiatives and things where they get points for answering questions and credits for this and that. Gift Gap has incented their users to become a community and answer each other's questions in lieu of having customer service and they answer their questions faster than other phone companies do in answering their customers questions.
And then contribution, step five is about bettering the world. And when I first started doing the research and the five steps were emerging, I thought every brand had to strategically end up to be a brand contribution and that's not true. Actually, a brand can be it any one of the five steps as long it's embodies the elements of all five.
So strategically Apple is positioned in enrichment and Apple can be considered a good citizen, a good brand citizen by people as it embodies all the other five steps and glides back and forth on how it operates. And contribution is very easy to think of in terms of social enterprise or businesses that have the one for one model, but actually a regular mainstream business can move into a space of contribution.
So Kenco Coffee, which is owned by Mondelez and is a brand of coffee in the UK, has an initiative called Coffee and Gang. And Honduras is every year ranked, as either the number one or the number two country in terms of murder capitals of the world. And Honduran teenagers come to a point where they face a decision, they have to leave the country, join a gang or be killed. And Kenco has given them a fourth option, fourth option is to apply for a scholarship and become a coffee grower. Now imagine if Kanco took this notion of contribution and brought in community and brought together other coffee brands who were in South America, let's say, or in Central America, side by side with Honduras, and used a wide range of NGOs and had everyone come together and expand Coffee and Gangs, you could transform continents you really could. So, that's how the five steps were.
Liz: Okay. Oh well amazing. And how do you think technology has shaped our cultural narrative around brand responsibility and expectation?
Anne: Well for me, technology has changed the way we view putting things together. And I talk about this in the book and I think it's what's enabled us to more and more believed and enabled especially a generation who have only grown up in technology to believe that we don't. We no longer live-in either-or world, so we no longer live in a world of either profit or purpose. We live in a world of and how technology has changed our brains. M.I.T. and other higher order learning institutions have done lots of research into the reshaping of how we put information together and we live in a world of “and” now, not in a world of either, it's also.
So we're bringing things together and people don't believe they should be sacrificing anymore. They believe they should be able to bring you know, love and money together and purpose and profit.
Liz: I'd like that, the “and”. And then do you think some of what you're seeing is being driven by younger generations who want to do good and only want to buy from brands they align with?
Anne: I'm a little bit more skeptical that it's only being driven by younger generations In my research, baby boomers want to leave a better legacy. And you look at some of the loudest business leaders out there, who are promoting this and they are baby boomers. I think millennials and Gen Z, which is emerging now have a different viewpoint. They're not necessarily as willing to give up things as people think they are. In some ways, they want it all and they want other people to do it for them. Which is why aligning yourself with a business that's doing good has appeal to them, because where they may not be necessarily volunteering all their time or giving up things, but if they buy products from a business that's bettering the world by association, they're helping to better the world.
Liz: And are you seeing transition from companies that aren't just trying to look good but that are actually doing good? You spoke a lot about that in your book.
Anne: Yeah. So, I concerned that we're constantly outing companies that actually are trying, I think we need to out companies that are purposefully behaving incorrectly. That are purposefully doing things they know are wrong and hiding it.
When you have companies like Levi's, that are working really hard and I don't talk about Levi's in the book, but Levi's often becomes a victim. Levi's is working really hard and has an amazing sustainability plan. It will be interesting to see what happens as it goes public. If this still is retained as deeply as it's been in its culture. But then you have people that you know they have a proactive water plan, that they've been promoting and talking about because they've actually achieved a lot. Do you read their sustainability plan and their goals? They actually also have very high ambitions to save energy. Yet, who to activists go after about energy? Levi's. So, we sometimes need to reward companies more who are trying because you can't change a system that's been in place for decades overnight. You wouldn't survive as a company. You do have to earn a profit to pay your shareholders as a public company, but it doesn't mean you should sacrifice what you provide other stakeholders solely for the shareholder.
It's about balancing it's about creating a virtuous circle that feeds off itself and continually benefits others as you earn more profit. You invest more into your employees, you invest more into better R and D, which in turn allows you to sell more product because you're doing, you know, you're enhancing your products and the way your customers want and as you sell more product and you earn more, you can then pay your shareholders more and also invest more. So, we need to see it as a virtuous circle. And how companies that are working to change the system and doing their best to fix things one thing at a time, to still retain themselves and stay it still be sustainable as a business, not just help sustain the environment but still be sustainable and their responsibility as a business. We need to reward them a little bit more than constantly call them out. And again, I do need to emphasize that doesn't mean not calling out people who are reeling misbehaving because they need to be called out. But sometimes we go after the good people a little too much right now.
Liz: That's a good point. And so for our industry packaging is a huge issue in the waste stream right now.
Anne: It certainly is.
Liz: Do you think big retailers will feel even more responsible for what they're putting into the world as more attention is put on sustainability? and you know “ doing good in the world”?
Anne: Yeah. And to be honest I think from sustainability standpoint is as being a viable business. They have no choice. You know how many supermarkets now are looking at their packaging. It just amazes me, and I guess because I see things from this holistic consistent standpoint from working from a single purpose that aligns you across the me to we continuum.
It always amazes me that organic fruit and vegetables is often harder to buy in single serve items loosely package than the non-organic. Why is that? If I like organic, yes I want to put healthy things in my body. I don't want to pollute the earth, but I don't want to buy a plastic package either.
Businesses more and more have less of a choice to sustain themselves as a business. And I guess I don't think there's anything wrong if that's what the customer is motivating them. Why is that wrong? To me that's fine. That's good. As long as it's happening, I don't care what the motivating forces. I just want to see it happen and I want to see it's progressed. Yeah, I mean truly through my rose-colored glasses, I want business executives all to be doing it because they believe it's the right thing to do. But if it's only being driven in some businesses because of the customer that's OK because it's still fostering change. Each time as one company does something better, the bar gets raised and what's considered the norm and what's considered better, shifts. So, each time one company does something better. Other people have to align with that. And then guess what. They all have to do even better than that. So that's how you that's how we progressed.
That's how we innovate that's how we continue to fulfill increasingly demanding customer needs. So, you know, I believe retail businesses are going to have no choice but to look at packaging, you know, there's a lot of startup cosmetic companies that are about just add water. We're experimenting right now.
I posted today on social media that marine plastic pollution is costing the world up to $2.5 trillion dollars a year in economic and social damage. That figure is enough to make people pause and start thinking, “hang on, we have to really think about this plastic issue” mor.
Liz: Definitely. I mean that's alarming and it is enough like you said it's a concrete number and it will make people think.
Anne: Absolutely and I hope more people see my tweet.
Liz: I hope so too. And I know you've also tweeted in the past because plastics is another big challenge right now. And we're all dealing with that especially in the waste recycling stream. And you tweeted about the Alliance to end plastic an how 30+ companies have joined. So I was going to ask, do you think progress will be made as more companies join? But you've really answered that by saying, the bar does get raised every time someone else joins and then there's that community aspect in that pulling together and pushing everybody to the next level.
Anne: And yeah. And I think it's exciting that more and more businesses are starting to look at supply chain, starting to look at so many aspects of their business relative to the SDGs. I know there are some activists that think that may actually cause an issue where the human rights elements of the SDGs may get lost. But I think we're becoming more mindful and more intentional about all of this and as more and more business leaders become more and more familiar and take up different SDGs, I think it will enhance all of them over time. Although we don't have a lot of time actually and we need to get our act together really quickly and you know there are many, even investment management firms that are looking at how we can transfer. I think it's that $12.5 trillion dollars a year into ways to sustain the planet.
Liz: And you're right. Time is of the essence and all of us have to work together.
Anne: And it's less about pointing fingers than about forming collaborations and seeing how it benefits all of us.
Liz: And so, in the waste recycling industry, we see more companies gain B Corp status. Do you see this growing overall?
Anne: I think it's growing. I think getting B Corp status is very difficult. So, the actual B Corp status in and of itself while is an amazing thing, it is less important than actually looking at the B Corp assessment and using the B Corp assessment as a means to evaluate how you're conducting your business, your operations on multi levels. And clearly supply chain and waste is part of it. I think it's very difficult especially for a public company, although we have had public companies get B Corp status it is a difficult thing to do. But the B Corp assessment in and of itself is extremely useful and some people think “oh, if I talked to be corp I have to have that whole thing done and I'll never get that status”, but just using that assessment makes you better.
Liz: That's a great idea and I've heard you say that this is a top down and bottom up issue.
Liz: And that it's an ethos that defines the company. How important do you think communication is in rallying a company around this mission?
Anne: I think it's really important. And you know, you can have a lot of people in the bottom up aspects and I do think it is important to have that grassroots aspect coming up with solutions, doing things day to day when added to the other small acts creates a big change. But unless a CEO becomes the internal spokesman for it and promotes equating human resource systems, meaning evaluation systems and things of that, and ensuring all managers buy into this operationally, you won't that the ethos won't take hold across every aspect of an organization. So, this in the same way the CEO owns the brand, the CEO owns purpose, the CEO owns doing good. It's why I believe more in operating principles and values because so many people eyes glaze over when they see corporate values, they say “oh we don't really embody them” and so many consulting assignments, you know, you talk to people what is the company value. And you hear people say “oh the CEO's job or whatever.” It's not actually what we write on these pieces of paper. So, people have to believe the CEO believes sanitization that embrace their purpose which has a side of a social mission to it and a side of doing good.
Liz: So what else should we be paying attention around sustainability & social good?
Anne: I would just say I would go back to that comment I just made, that every small act doesn't make a difference. If everyone does one small change, all those changes add up to a big change and we can’t assume someone else is doing it. We have to each take ownership for our own actions and our own role we play in that and creating a new value chain.
Liz: And then you talk about in the book how beyond just profit. I mean, there are so many other benefits of implementing this employee retention and things like that. Could you talk a little bit about those side effects that maybe companies aren't aware of?
Anne: Well I actually think so much of what's happened with some of the movement around doing good has actually been instigated by millennials turning to companies. So the rate of people leaving jobs and switching jobs has grown phenomenally because so many millennials who went through this whole education, especially in the West and especially in places like the US, you know, you're told if you take this activity, you build your resumé in high school to this you get into the right college and then you get into the right job and you're going to earn a lot of money and you're going to feel great satisfaction and blah blah blah blah. And people end up in this first job and they're not feeling that sense of fulfillment, they've been over programmed and they're looking for a sense of self and a sense of purpose. So, they quit their job because they don't agree with the corporate values and they find a new job.
And the figures of what retraining people in this churn of employees, costs are phenomenal. You know you read anything from 3 billion to over 30 billion that Gallup has once calculated a year. So actually, in some ways the human resource aspect of it has what caused the rest of it and some companies have purely latched on to the notion of having purpose to doing good to creating volunteer programs to reviewing their own recycling and their supply chains to retain employees. So, in some ways actually doing good aspect is the side benefit of employees quitting jobs right.
Liz: True. Good point. And then what advice would you give to professionals who want to do more better and effect change?
Anne: So, I would say again from your desk, figure out the small ways you can do things. Don't be shy about putting a proposal for to your manager, don't just complain about something actually create a solution that you propose. Propose a way to fix it and change it.
Liz: I like that, be solutions oriented right.
Anne: And then you might get people's attention more than saying oh we're not recycling we're not doing this. Show them how you could go do it. Be creative in your own way and actually being creative in that and innovating in that small way will bring you greater job satisfaction because you'll be impacting your company in a way that might be outside your job. But that brings you personal satisfaction.
Liz: So, we'll keep you busy outside of work. If you have any time for anything else, I know you've been quite busy lately.
Anne: What keeps me busy outside of work. Oh, I don't know. I love my family. I sail and do all sorts travel and all sorts of things. I exercise. It's about you know at any given moment what what energizes me and what, you know, sometimes what keeps me busy outside of work is pausing and just reflecting more because I think we all need to reflect and be more mindful in our lives.
Liz: And so, what's next for you. I see that you've aligned yourself with a new organization.
Anne: I have. So, I'm moving into I'm working with an organization called snare Ghost which is a nonprofit. And social enterprise that has actual programs that brings together people in collaboration to solve complex problems, most often related to poverty. And I'm now in charge of the philanthropy team which works both with very active engaged philanthropists, who want to personally be involved in how their money's creating impact on issues they care about. As well as I see a vision and the shift in philanthropy. Impact investing is becoming big and I think the lines that divide individual philanthropy and corporate philanthropy are going to fade over time because the collaborative aspect of solving problems is going to grow. And so, I'm really excited about getting more involved in bringing together individuals and organizations in ways they haven't been brought together before to collaborate, to solve problems because as you all said we're all in this together.
Liz: Oh that's fantastic. Oh, that's exciting and they're lucky to have you. Now how can listeners hear more from you and where can they buy your book.
Anne: My book is called is on readily available on Amazon and other places but it's still online and Barnes and Noble, now that it's more than a year old, it's less available necessarily in Barnes and Noble shops. But it's still available on someone's shelf. And I just I would say, you know, if you're not either an Amazon or a Barnes and Noble fan just stick it in the Internet. Target has had it. It's been in a variety of indie bound, all sorts of places have it. It's just a matter of putting in the Internet and finding where it's the most convenient place for you to purchase it. And if you can't find it give me a holler and I'll make sure. Harper Collins who purchased an icon. He was my publisher. Get you a copy.
Liz: Oh great. Excellent. Well thank you so much, Anne. This has been wonderful. And we really appreciate you being so generous with your time.
Anne: Oh I enjoy this. And the more people who I think understand that it's about you know solving individual problems for me as well as bettering the world not giving up that me side. It's about bringing, you know, aligning the two sides together the more we'll be able to solve the big problems that face the world, the more businesses will be able to embrace doing good.
Liz: I agree. That's well said. Well thank you so much. Well we'll talk you soon. All right. Take care.