Ex-SAP President Who Scaled SaaS to $2.5B: 3 Questions to Ask Before AI Replaces You

What do you see what's changing and how companies hire across borders that most US founders are not caught up to yet?

We live in a global world with a global workforce and so you may need workers in different jurisdictions. Some of that work will be done by agents and some of that work will be done by employees and some of that work will be done by contractors and that fluidity really matters. My hope for the future is that we think more flexibly about what is the work that needs to happen, who needs to do the work, and what kind of supporting systems do we need to put in place for that work to be done well and for the people to thrive.

What's one thing that the boardroom gets right about hiring that maybe the rest of the organization never learns?

Um, this is who we hire. I'm Luis Cent, your host, and today I'm joined by Meg Bear. Meg spent two decades building the software the rest of the world uses to hire and manage people. Oracle, then SAP, the Success Factors, where she ran product and engineering before taking over the entire business as president. Hundreds of millions of employees ran through systems she's built. Now she sits on the boards and advises the companies trying to reinvent all of Fitwood AI. She's seen hiring from the software, the operator chair, and the boardroom side. Meg, welcome to the show. Thanks so much for being here.

Thank you for inviting me. This is delightful.

So, let's jump in. You you ran success factors when it led the shift from human capital management to human experience management. So,

be honest with me. Real philosophical change or a rebrand to win the category fight?

Um, so definitely a philosophical change. um one that I think actually enticed me to go to Success Factors. So, Success Factors had um had a pretty storied history. It started out as an independent company, went public and then was acquired by SAP, a very large uh German company that uh does software for every part of the enterprise. and the heritage of success factors was really deep in the space of talent management of learning and development. So all of the pieces that have to do with people as they grow and develop within an organization. And it was very clear to me at the moment that I joined that the the market was ready and the customers were ready for a a really kind of a an extension of what we thought about what software could do and about what the needs were for customers in that moment. Now, of course, everything that we were seeing has gotten even more than I had anticipated at that time, but uh I think it was very clear that it wasn't going to work to think about serving your employees without a deeper connection relationship and understanding of them. So, you know, while while we're on, you know, human capital management to human experience management, it, you know, you promise to run this better experience, but a lot of times it ends up in, you know, workforce planning and calibration and, you know, layoffs and restructuring like how do you hold those two things together?

Yeah. So, that's the that's the part that is I think where we are right now. If you think about where HR has been measuring their success, you know, one of the biggest marquee measurements within the HR industry is retention, right? You want to make sure that you bring the right people in and that they can thrive in your organization. And that narrative and that focus becomes really confusing and has a lot of cognitive dissonance when you see these massive rounds of layoffs and we're just going to use agents, etc., etc. And so, um, this is a big part of where my head is today in my vision and intention to invent the future because I think at the rate we're going, we're kind of losing the plot a little bit about driving towards efficiency without clarity of strategy and without giving both purpose and meaning back to the business and back to the humans so that we can really harness that collect ive wisdom to navigate this moment. So I think there's there's a lot broken in this moment. I also think that there's tremendous opportunity in this moment because nobody really understands or knows what happens next. And so for me as an innovator and someone that likes to lean into disruption and change, this gives a lot of space for defining and creating a system that I think will serve us all better eventually, but in this messy middle, it it is very complicated for sure.

I love that. And you you know, you sound very excited about this transformation, but you just posted today on LinkedIn um 80% of CEOs are scared, right? They think they're going to lose their job. So how you know how do you coach them in through this uh you know now now that you're advising them?

Such an important question and I think the first thing you know is the first rule of holes is when you find yourself in one and stop digging and I think that you know the the first step of fixing anything is to acknowledge that you have a problem. So, um, in a weird way, I think getting honest about how, you know, just how emotionally disturbing this is at every level of business right now. And I think people see the behaviors that they don't have control over, like the layoffs, etc., and they look at the leadership team or they look at the board or they look at the CEO and say, "Hey, you're failing." And what I really want to bring into the conversation is that CEOs are also feeling this pressure. So there really isn't anyone who isn't vulnerable to the reality that their job is changing and they're they're actually at risk of irrelevance. So step one, acknowledge you have a problem. Step two, start to think about what do you need? what are the components that you need to change that trajectory for yourself and for your teams. And so I think this is a a moment where you realize that no one's job will be the same, right? And that I think everybody needs to take a moment with that and say in the future my job will not be the same. That's number one. Number two, in knowing that your job won't be the same, you you really should take it upon yourself to figure out how to make your job obsolete before someone does it for you. And I think that's applies to CEOs as well. And so I think everybody needs to get way more curious to be really becoming comfortable with the need for intellectual humility to quit pretending like you have all the answers. The good news is nobody has all the answers. So you're in a very safe space with a lot of good friends when you can get yourself to the point you say that and to build the foundations that you need which is really a lot about learning agility about getting oriented in your components of your business. Who are your customers? How do you make money? What is your purpose? What is the reason that you are in the market today? And what is your unique competitive differentiation in the market in both your brand promise in your capabilities and in your vision? And once you understand that then you can start to assemble that with this idea of okay and what else do I need to add to my own capability? Do I need a different network to help me thrive? Do I need to do some personal learning and hands-on learning? Do I need to open up my um my perspective and my and my aperture to different ways of serving those customers or delivering that market value and do I need to challenge myself to not think incrementally but to think strategically about how can I make a big difference versus a incremental difference and so I think what's true for CEOs is true for every part of the organization. You get hired at a moment in time, you have a lot more opportunity than you often give yourself credit for to really assess what the needs of the organization and the business are and then to position yourself with that learning, agility, and curiosity into a way to expand the art of the possible to achieve much bigger things.

The art of the possible. I love it. Uh a couple things that you know you you you've said there passion right so that's something you know as for now like I I don't see my claude instance having passion um you know so so you you talk about finding passion and and purpose uh and like but I never thought about it from the CEO replacing um you know his or her job. So how how does a CEO go do that? What what are the steps they need to go take to go and figure out what components to replace?

Yeah. So it it's interesting. So um on our podcast, the Megan Amy Show, where the episode that launches tomorrow, um we had a CEO that modeled this beautifully where she started with just asking herself, am I the right CEO to lead us to the future? And that question obviously has a ton of vulnerability in it. Um and not everybody is super comfortable doing that, but I I definitely encourage us if we can to to start with that question. And then secondarily, if the answer isn't isn't a resounding yes or maybe if there's there's some, you know, soft spots to that, there there's some patterns that really work, which is ask yourself if if you were coming in just now as the CEO, not having been there all this time, and were asked to make a big impact, what are the three things you'd go after first? And then ask yourself what are the capabilities that are missing that are getting in your way from being able to go after those things. And I think what you'll find very clearly is that you either need some personal growth, you know, like some of your own learning agility or and probably an and you need to think about how you've structured your team and operationalized your business it so that you can really get yourself to that next level. And so this is a moment to step back and and say, do I have the right skills to meet the moment? Does my team have the right skills? Where do we have some gaps? And what is the right next step to look at those gaps with a builder mindset to say, how do I define what that new operating model and what that new org model needs to look like? And so maybe that means you need to bring some functions closer together. Maybe that means you need to bring some, you know, energy and capability into the team. And maybe that needs to be for some period of time like a contingent or maybe that needs to be a full-time role. But starting with not what organization do I have and what operating model do I have, starting with that clean sheet of paper. What what does the future need? What what kind of leader does that future need? If that's going to be me, what am I missing around the table to help me drive that to the next level?

Yeah, definitely makes you vulnerable. Uh, and just me thinking about like asking myself those questions, right? It's like, oh, wow. Like you're you're going deep and it's going to expose some areas that you need to work on, which is what you need to grow. So, it's um I I love that and I agree. Everybody should do that exercise. So, are you are you going to let us know or we have to go and watch the the episode to see what what this uh CE

I I would love it if you go watch the episode, but um but in in Maria's case, what she recognized was she needed some additional skill and strength in her leadership team to support her into that next phase of growth. And um I think again this is a really common um this is a common thing. I mean most new CEOs when they come into a position they do that. They look and they say what is what is standing in the way of us making a a big impact and for my role as CEO to make a big impact on the business as quickly and as effectively as possible. There's no reason as a sitting CEO you can't ask yourself that question with that level of intellectual humility to say, you know, of course it's going to identify things that are new. I think the key to give yourself a little bit more energy is to is to not look at this as a failing. look at this as what do I need to grow into to meet that next big milestone, that next big opportunity that's in front of us. The reason it's so urgent is of course if you don't figure that out, someone else is going to. So back to the 80%, either your board's going to say, "Well, we need to bring someone in to do that work." Or more likely, you're going to have a new competitor that comes in that says, "I'm going to show everybody how it works." And that's going to be disruptive for the entire business. So either one of those are not great outcomes for you and certainly don't give you the agency in your own path and your own future. So again, what I'm really pushing is we all have more agency than we realize, but we have to be willing to step back and say things are different. Not all of my skills apply in the future. How do I assemble what skills I have and how do I augment the skills I need to get me to that future? Brilliant advice. Um, everybody's running and racing to put AI in everything, right? Um, you know, human capital management, human experience. Is it is it actually delivering better experiences or is it pulling, you know, just everything back to headcount math and, you know, you talked about, hey, let's have agents run, you know, do do everything. Uh, what has been your experience there? So, we're very much in the whiplash FOMO moment of of any sort of big shift. And certainly here in the Bay Area, it's probably like extreme version of that. So, I think um I think I have an interesting line of sight to the good, the bad, and the ugly of where we are right now. I would say that um you know because it's so frothy there is both really great results and really terrible results allin one and I think this is actually the most dangerous place we can be because I think it'd be very easy for leaders to lean back and say well it's it's still so murky I'm going I'm I'm going to wait and I do believe that waiting is the worst of all uh posture you can take right now because nobody will be satisfied with that.

So um what what I will say is that most organizations that have really leaned into the sort of AI transformation have kind of uncovered a few things. Um number one they have gotten some efficiency and productivity gains. they've probably not gotten what they were expecting or what you know they had created in their mental model about what those would be on net and I think that's caused a little bit of the the hesitation. I think everybody now is realizing that they need to get smarter on the spend strategy side of how they implement AI and in what cases do you use the expensive models in what cases do you not? How much do you lean in on just go crazy and try things versus stay focused where I seeking

Yeah, exactly. Like the the overloading of token maxing and um blowing budgets in in weeks and months of years, etc. Um, so what I'm seeing the best companies do is to really recognize that we're past the stage of just hope for something great to come out of it by saying AI is there and instead really picking one or two strategic things that are that are part of your business strategy. Not just, oh, we're going to AI things. one or two strategic things in your business strategy that AI can give you a significant like material difference and go very focused and very um you know kind of allin on those areas. This needs to be done with a real clarity of the cost and the value that you're trying to drive. And you must at the beginning start with making that both transparent and clear. You have to set a massively big goal and you have to track how you're progressing to it, what you're learning in in service of getting to that, both the good and the bad. And then what is that costing you and be willing to kind of make some mistakes along that path, but to stay ruthlessly focused on driving very specific, very businessoriented outcomes. And again, I think that the companies that are doing that effectively are seeing massive results. And so if you if you step back and say, "Oh, well, it's too murky. It's it's it's too probabilistic. We can't use it in our business, etc." You're going to be in a lot of trouble when those companies that have leaned in in a very structured way start to show how wrong you were because you will be very very wrong in that moment. Do so I mean you you've seen you know you've led go to market uh four companies launching you've been in two billion dollar enterprises it's uh so what is like is it is it easier for a smaller company to really set this impossible goal and direction versus a bigger company that's looking at you know stock prices every quarter. Well, for sure. And it's it's there's multiple layers that make it harder in a big organization. One is obviously you've just got um much stronger and more resistant global inertia in your processes in your role configuration etc. So transformation is just materially harder. The other the other side of it that becomes difficult is typically when you're in a very large organization um different stakeholders and different parts of the organization can have conflicting readiness and conflicting goals and so this is like so it's not just the size that makes it problematic. I mean sure the numbers are bigger but the numbers are bigger for both sides the top line and the bottom line right so but the but the conflicting goals is the part that makes it really complicated. So the work you have to do in a big organization to get clarity of what those initiatives are and make sure that you have enough focus and alignment to to make something happen that's big. there's there's more there's extra work in that. And so smaller organizations do have an advantage because getting alignment with your people is easier. Getting focus is typically um easier and you know changing is sort of kind of inherent often in a in a smaller organization because it's either growing or it's evolving at a much more rapid pace. So you have you have some cultural things that you can lean on to that. But I will tell you sometimes small organizations struggle a lot because maybe they just don't have the expertise or the um you know the bench to kind of think through what is the most important thing how can I um reimagine what's happening here where you you have a very in a big company you have a very large bench and inside that large bench you're going to have some creative thinkers and some expertise etc. finding it might be hard, but you're going to have it in there if you look. So, in small companies, you you know, you may have the need to bring in some expertise because you just probably won't get there without it. So, I think I think it like the the tactics are different. I think the opportunities are clear on both fronts. And again, I think the resistance to change is really no matter where you are, the part you have to work on because you have to build not only the pathways to help people with the change, you know, getting them the tooling, getting them the the training, getting them, you know, clear on how they're going to do their work in the future. But you also have to deal with the emotional resilience of the organization. Because as much as it's easy for me to say, hey, you know, you need to transform yourself and make your job obsolete and all of that, that's not something that comes naturally to most people, it's very it's it's very uh unsettling and dysregulating in your nervous system to be, you know, faced with that. And when you're disregulated in your nervous system, you're not in a great place for learning new things. you're not building that optimism that you need to be creative and to be open to new ideas and all of that other stuff. So, there's a there's a really big leadership element in here.

Yeah, we got to start studying the cortisol levels on uh these CEOs who are doing these changes everywhere.

I really I know I joke but like I am really seeing everything about this as an energy management regulation uh need right now. And I think the more that we have the conversation that includes that, I think the better we're going to be because I I don't think it's not a touchyfey thing. Again,

there is both brain science and real evidence that you know at the end of the day whether you're experiencing grief for the loss of your old job or your expertise or whether you're experiencing fear for the risk and the vulnerability of an unknown future. None of those things are again things that help you be open to change. And if change is what we need, then it makes creating the right energy and the right support and the right psychological safety really the core componentry to getting any of the rest of it done.

So, what's your hack to staying curious? uh something I also don't think AI can can really do and and be really great at. Um maybe we can program it to do this, but uh you know, you've said curiosity a couple times throughout here. Um how you know what what is your hack to stay excited about this and and curious rather than uh you know, how do you regulate yourself? So if it doesn't come naturally to you, it's a really good idea to try to surround yourself with people who are going to like push it towards you a little bit. And whether you do that in the physical world or you do that through listening to podcasts like this one or whether you do that through reading or whatever, putting yourself in places where you're you're being invited to be curious more often, I think will help build up that capability. I think we have more control of our own neuroplasticity than we realize and we can hack it. So for me, hacking curiosity is not hard. What's hard for me is putting it all into um structures that I can make it useful for others. And so I've been leaning on AI to help me with that, help me organize all the different topics of interest and all the different things I read and all the different podcasts I listen to so that it's easier for me to find it when I want to recommend it to someone else in their world, in their context. So again, I think there's there's ways that each of us can look at what comes naturally to us and what doesn't and how do we think about hacking some of these algorithms and some of our our habits to put us in a situation where we can be best leveraged to that future self.

I love it. I love how, you know, you give the example where you don't need to go and do this in person, right? if you're out in, you know, remote America, like you can still go, you have the internet, you can still surround yourself and hang out with curious people online. So, um, that's amazing. So, after, you know, software, you started sitting on on on boards, you sat in Hydrickch and and struggles, which recruits, you know, top of the house board members, CEOs, the executive suite. Um, you know, what's one thing that the boardroom gets right about hiring that maybe the rest of the organization never learns? I think one of the things that a board has focus and visibility to. So a board is responsible for strategy and a board is responsible for hiring and firing the CEO. So sort of definitionally the role requires to think both big picture long-term and how to connect the dots between the two on an execution um side. The running of the business is the responsibility of the CEO and the executive team of course. So what's hard about a board job is versus an operator job is that you can't do the work yourself and you can't even make the work happen. You you really have to ask the right questions and you really have to um lean into supporting the CEO and the executive team to delivering on that strategy etc. So I think because of that seat, one of the things I'm noticing when I talk to other board members is it's very clear to board members that there is an expectation of transformation for any business. Honestly, it really doesn't matter what your business is doing. There's pressure from your board to think about transforming. There's also a lot of pressure for what boards will talk about as capital allocation, but you know regular people we think about that as budgets. Where are you putting um budget against what types of initiatives and why? And this is more important now than it has been in the past because interest rates are higher. So a access to capital is different than it might have been in the past. And there's a lot of pressure on a lot of companies on share price because there's a fair bit of volatility there. There's also a lot of pressure on often the bigger components of business, whether that's because of tariffs or oil prices or you name it, whatever the macros are that are sort of impacting. And so when you're sitting in a board and you're thinking about what is the what does the business need? What does the leadership bench need to look like? What um you know is this business focused in the right direction and doing the right things to deliver on the strategy? What you see is just a a little bit more clarity of well of course the change is going to be massive. It's going to be massive for the way that the workforce is organized. It's going to be massive for the way that the opportunity that exists in the market and how you're going to fund that with an expectation of a mix of value from automation versus value from um humans. And so I think it feels to a worker as maybe callous or or lacking, you know, um empathy or appreciation for humans. It feels to a board member like the only way to protect jobs for humans is to be competitive in the business. And so it it is it's a it's a different lens. And I think it's good for me anyway to understand all of those perspectives.

So, you know, is is a board really focused on revenue per employee, right?

Oh, absolutely.

Yeah.

Absolutely. And that's what I mean about like the expectation of getting higher um velocity as well as higher efficiency towards the business. The revenue for per employee is one of the big ones. I mean obviously we start out with you know growth revenue IBIDA right but revenue per employee is a is a way to look at what does it cost you to grow so that's part of the the framing of how we think about capital allocation where it's getting interesting now is it's people are starting to realize that AI isn't free and so you need to think about like what's the tokens cost and what's the so I think we're going engineer, it's you're spending the same amount.

Yeah. Like engineers are asking for token budgets that equal their salary. So in fact, a single engineer cost you twice, right? So yeah,

but they're doing the math that it produces a a 10x code. We um you know,

right? And so the question is does 10x code generate 10x revenue?

Yeah. And that's I think again a part where maybe maybe not, but there's a lot of things you got to build into that value chain for that to be true. And that's that's the business. That's the job right now.

Love it. We had um you know, Ann Marie um she was a CPO at Zundesk, helped take them uh private, which was the first time I I talked to anybody that did you know that. And you know she talked about leading some AI transformations around the org as well and it's um you know it you you got to get excited about it is is really really what it is. You got to get curious and excited about it and um what you know what you said right there where like the board is what needs to make sure that the business survives so you can you know you can actually have a place where the employees can grow and the customers can be served and I think that's that's paramount right now.

That's right. That's right. Yeah.

So, you're you're also, you know, we we met at Zaster. Uh, and you were I never expected to be a board member of Papaya at the booth handing out t-shirts. So, that was an incredible experience. And, uh, but you get to see, you know, hiring across every jurisdiction um, at once. So, like what do you see what what's changing and how companies hire across borders that most, you know, US founders are are not caught up to yet? So in the past we thought very very focused like and separate hiring contractors you know etc. But Papaya recognized that you need it like the future if you're thinking in the next couple years it's really going to be getting work done and some of that work will be done by agents and some of that work will be done by employees and some of that work will be done by contractors and that fluidity really matters. In addition, we live in a global world with a global workforce. And so, you may need workers in different jurisdictions. You might need them in different locations. And depending on where you come from, one of the things about hiring in other countries is there's there's a lot more to it than just a few simple things like you've got to find the people, right? You need to understand what compliance looks like in those countries. You also need to understand more about the working norms. Be forget like just the vacation calendars and what are the important holidays and and what are the things that seem normal in this context versus that context. And so for a lot of businesses, this is really complicated and you can it can lead to a lot of like merry and haste and uh you know re repent in leisure kind of uh problems where people do not fully understand what they're taking on when they hire in another jurisdiction or when they are um looking for talent in a global way. And so Papaya is not only helping to automate the payment and the payroll for people. So making sure people get paid is uh kind of a big part of the employee experience if you will. Most of us are doing it

for uh for a reason, right? Um but also being able to build up the expertise and remove the friction for organizations so that they can make really good decisions about what what do they need to do to be able to hire. they can um you know do the work of that without the friction and then really have better visibility and and one of the things that's really differentiated in Papaya is because they have the payments capability that last mile sometimes both for currency fluctuation and in some um some locations it's a lot harder for people to to get their payments all the way delivered and it costs a lot but there's also a lot of things that go wrong. So making sure that you can really, you know, meet the value promise that you used to have to be a really big company to be able to do. Now you can do it as a much smaller company and you can do it with a lot more fluidity, which is really where the future requires us all to go to have the ability to think about work as a much more adaptable thing.

I love that. And you know, are everybody's talking about, you know, return to office mandates. Um, but we're still seeing a ton of companies hire, you know, internationally, some in a hybrid, some in a fully remote. Um, which organization performs better, Meg? Is it remote one? Is it the hybrid one? Uh,

oh, you know, human connection really matters for most people, human connection is best facilitated in person. Does that in person require every day at the office, whatever? No. But does it require intentionality? Yes. And so I come to the point of you're going to get your best work out of humans when you have real alignment. If part of that alignment is is nervous system regulation, you get much more data about nervous system dysregulation in in person than you do in a virtual um scenario. You can feel when people don't understand in a way that you cannot when you need them to raise their hand and say they don't understand or the way you might see in just the uh face that you might get on a a virtual interaction. And so there is there is a need and a time and a and a place. And there are certain both personality types and role types that really need that human connection either to build expertise or to drive their own energy. And then there's definitely personality types that prefer less human connection and to to thrive. And so my hope for the future is that we think more flexibly about what is the work that needs to happen, who needs to do the work, and what kind of supporting systems do we need to put in place for that work to be done well and for the people to thrive. And I think if we start asking those questions, we're going to come to some potentially more creative solutions and different solutions for which offices have a a role to play, but maybe an entirely different role than we have imagined in the past.

And uh I I I love that take. And you know, I I think you also got to ask how many agents can you talk to at once? I still can't get that visual out of my head.

Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Or even like for forget if you're keyboarding or talking to them. It it's also like just keeping straight the velocity and dealing with the the the volume. I mean the volume of work for people that are really AI pilled it's actually gone up a lot and so

I have 18 tabs open right now that you know with Claude working on I'm just

exactly and trying to remember where you left off and what you know and what it's what it's trying to ask you etc. like it there's a lot of retraining in that and then there's a lot of cognitive work in that and so figuring out what that balance is it's far too soon to know and I think it's a little bit too individualized to have a single answer but it's it definitely shouldn't be something we leave and pretend isn't happening it is absolutely happening that all of us are being taxed in new ways maybe you know not less taxed in other ways and that shift we haven't fully figured out how to make that work for us.

So, what what does that look like in 5 10 years from now? Um, you know, are we all just hanging out by the by the river while our agents are working or what what does this ideal strategy future look like?

Yeah. So, again, because my intention is to invent the future, I will tell you the future that I am, you know, hoping to will into place. Um, I believe a future that helps create more agency in humans, that teaches all of us that um, flexibility is available to us in the world of work, but also teaches all of us to up our game. um such that we are doing hard things because they help us feel good and confident and um like we're contributing. I'm not willing to give up the idea that um we will be working with other humans and I'm not willing to give up the idea that we will, you know, be relevant to the future. We I think both of those things have to be true. Um, and I don't even think it's going to be like, oh, well, we give agents the busy work and we keep the creative work. Yeah, maybe that's like a a reductive way to look at it. I think we are going to still have, you know, some busy work and some creative work. Um, but I think the way that we do that will look similarly different than the way that uh work used to look when you had inner office memos. um you know and only in-person office meetings, right? Um like we can't really even imagine what that's like anymore. Most of us started work when there was email and therefore it feels completely weird to try to think about that. Um but I've been around long enough, you know, I I traveled internationally before I had cell phones or GPS. I've you know I've I've worked in an office where not everybody had an email address. I mean, you know, like things have changed a lot and we have adapted and evolved and I believe the same is true for us in in the forward-looking approach and it will we will figure out how to make it feel natural and we will figure out how to make it work for us. But it will be messy in the middle. And in that middle space, it's incumbent on all of us to step into that gap and to find, you know, to help direct that future to where it needs to go.

Let's build this future. I love this future.

Yay. Yes, that's uh my intention is to invent the future together.

So, you know, as as we're we're wrapping up here, Meg, thank you so much. which um I learned a ton here and I'm sure our audience um will too. So, you know, in addition to uh the Megan Amy Show, where do you want people to find you? And you know, for let's say a founder that is looking at hiring his first chief people officer, listening to this podcast, trying to figure out, you know, the future, what's one piece of advice you want to leave them with? Yeah, I think the the piece of advice is for any hiring, hire somebody smarter than you and hire for flexibility, adaptability, and learning agility. And um if you do that, you're going to be fine.

I love it. And in addition to the the Megan Show,

the Megan Amy Show is definitely something. Please like and subscribe, but also um you can find me on LinkedIn, just Meg Bear. And um yeah, I'm pretty much everywhere. I'm on Twitter as Me Bear. I'm on Instagram as real Meg Bear because uh somebody else had Meg Bear. Uh I need to talk to them about that. Uh yeah, so I'm in all the places.

Amazing. Meg, thank you so much for being on Who We Hire.

Thanks for having me.