At Providence Health & Services, retention isn’t just about keeping people happy. It’s a science. With more than 120,000 caregivers across 50 hospitals and 1,000 clinics, Greg Till, Chief People Officer at Providence, has built one of the most data-driven and mission-centered workforce strategies in healthcare.
In this episode, Greg explains:
Connect with Providence: https://www.providence.org
Connect with Greg: https://www.linkedin.com/in/greg-till-phr-85016b4
Connect with us:
💻 All Episodes: TalentAllStars.com
💼 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ziprecruiter/
💼 Dave’s LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davetravers/
📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ziprecruiter
🎵TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ziprecruiter
Enjoyed this episode? We’d be grateful for a rating or review on your favorite podcast app.
[00:00:00] Greg Till: Someone said to me, your ego is not your amigo. Meaning if it has to be your idea, then likely it's not gonna be very successful. In most cases, it's a lot better, even if it was your idea to have others thinking it was theirs in order to really get it across the goal line as effectively as possible.
[00:00:15] Dave Travers: So what does it really take for your business to attract world-class talent today? I'm Dave Travers, President of ZipRecruiter, and on Talent All Stars, we shine a light on the people and the day-to-day processes behind recruitment and retention at some of the world's most influential businesses.
Today's talent All-Star is Greg Till, Chief People Officer at Providence Health and Services, one of the largest not-for-profit health systems in the US. Greg shapes workforce strategy for more than 120,000 caregivers, serving patients across more than 50 hospitals and 1000 clinics. So in this conversation, Greg breaks down his five predictors of retention, how Providence is able to make 3000 Boomerang hires per year, and how he makes compelling data-driven arguments for investments in people and technology, and much more. Greg Till, welcome to Talent All Stars.
[00:01:07] Greg Till: Yeah, thanks so much. I'm glad to be here. Thanks for the invite.
[00:01:09] Dave Travers: Delighted to have you. Okay, so you're a big powerful chief people officer at a massive, more than a hundred thousand person organization at Providence, but take me back to when you were rising through the ranks or started to rise through the ranks and really feel like, Hey, this feels like something that could be a fit for me to be a leader and a leader of people on the people team specifically, what did that feel like? How did you start to realize this could be my thing? Did you know right away? Did it happen later on? Were you conscious of it? How did it work?
[00:01:43] Greg Till: I kind of lucked into it, you know, um, while I was going to school, I was getting a couple of soft science degrees, one in political science, one in organizational and individual communication, and I was having a hard time at that point really turning what I was learning into something that felt practical to me.
And so, just by kind of serendipity, I wasn't done going to school yet, and so I got admitted to a business program. And in the business program, in addition to finance and accounting and other business courses, I started to take courses that were more like in the IO psych realm and organizational behavior.
And it kind of let me put the social science interests that I had into a business framework. And that's kind of where I started thinking to myself, man, I would really like to do something that helps to create value with and for people, but also for the good of our communities. And I didn't even really know that much about HR at the time.
I started in consulting doing change management and things like that, but pretty quickly I joined Raytheon in an HR role and learn a lot more about how in HR we can create value with and for our people. I make that differentiation 'cause I think a lot of folks sometimes view employees as like cogs in a machine or a means in order to get to an end.
And for me, it's really important as a starting place that we're doing it with people and for people, and it also benefits our community. Uh, organization and our consumers. And so those are some of the things that have really motivated me ever since those early days. And for me, it's really exciting, and you can see it happening in big ways and in small ways.
You know, big ways are like when HR professionals are creating a five or 10-year workforce strategy and you're really thinking about learning how to build the skills and capability and capacity and structures you'll need for success. I also think in the same vein about how we're gonna maximize a sense of purpose and caring and belonging and growth for the people in order to enhance the results for the organization and our communities, but also for the people themselves.
And then the small ways, it's really impactful too, like when you're just doing individual development or one-on-one coaching or conversations. You know, the thing that really got me jazzed up. From a purpose perspective myself was when after I've been doing it for three or four years, someone would come back and say, Hey, you know, that piece of advice that you gave me, or that conversation we had that really helped me in my career, or it helped me get through this conflict I was managing or helped me have a better conversation with my boss.
And so those are some of the things that really got me jazzed up early on. Then you take that and like quadruple it when you get into healthcare because the sense of calling, even though it was significant in a defense contractor with Raytheon or as a consultant, when you get into healthcare, the line of sight between the work that we're doing in talent and the actual outcomes in our communities for the benefit of individuals and the entire community is really, really clear.
And especially in an organization like Providence, where our mission's about revealing love in communities, especially for those who are the most poor and vulnerable. Not including those who are poor and vulnerable, but especially for those who are the most poor and vulnerable. And it gets really inspiring so much there.
[00:04:51] Dave Travers: One of the things that comes out there a couple different times, as I listened to you talking about that, is aligning different constituencies, the people involved in not treating them like cogs, thinking about the purpose and the broader community and all those things. And as you think about not somebody that's at your position in stature in their career, but somebody who's just getting started, as you're tasked with something like, let's come up with a workforce strategy, or let's come up with a new process to incorporate a new technolog,y like the first time trying to get several different constituencies to align around a new path forward, and that's a new muscle.
How would you advise or mentor someone to start? How do you get a bunch of people to see the alignment around a strategy for different constituencies?
[00:05:40] Greg Till: I think first, and you almost framed it up in your question, is getting the right people involved.
Someone early to me used this phrase, people don't buy into what they don't help to create. And like every year, I relearn that, you know, when I'm at my best, I involve all the right people. And when I forget to, in an instance, I'm reminded of it quickly because people don't buy into it, and the change management or implementation's really hard.
And so, like get the right people on the bus, and it can't just be the subject matter experts or your closest partners. You also have to have some sponsors or decision makers, or influencers, because the more the folks who actually have. Access to resources, whether that's influence on decision-making or actual investment resources.
The more they feel like a part of the process, the better off you'll be longer term as well. And then the second thing would really be starting with the end in mind, or starting with the knowing what problem you're solving and understanding what outcome you're aiming to get. Line on the outcome you're, you wanna get with the right folks, you'll be able to get to.
What does that mean in terms of the timeline or the plan, or the process? I think where things go south, and it's true at the executive level, but it's also true in your first HR role, I think, or your first talent role is if you're not clear on the outcome you're trying to solve, you're gonna waste a lot of time trying to figure out what to do, and you just won't have the degree of alignment that you need when things get hard on resource management or prioritization, or time management.
So those are maybe two or three things that I think can help regardless of what level you're in at the organization.
[00:07:13] Dave Travers: So what I love that you said there was about how. People like to paraphrase what you're saying, people wanna be the co-author, not just the reader of the new thing. And one of the things I love saying to people who are at that phase of their career is that it's very hard to be successful in a big project where you need to get lots of constituencies aligned when you're trying to convince them of your point of view.
And you'll know you're on the right track when they say to you, well, I've thought a lot about it, Dave, but your idea is no good, but let me tell you what would work. And then they describe to you something that's somewhere between 80 and a hundred percent of what you were trying to convince them of.
That's the moment you've got momentum on a project and you're bringing them along. And now they're, you know, the co-inventor, co-author of the strategy.
[00:07:58] Greg Till: That's really important because, you know, it breeds two additional things that you're kind of hinting at, like. Number one, you'll actually have diversity of thought and probably create a better outcome, or a better solution, or a better path than you could have come up with on your own.
Like value the power of diverse thinking on your team. And then secondarily, you know, someone said to me, and this has also been one of those phrases that have stuck with me. They said to me at one point, your ego is not your amigo. Meaning if it has to be your idea, then likely it's not gonna be very successful.
And so you mentioned that, which is, in most cases, it's a lot better, even if it was your idea to have others thinking it was theirs in order to really get it across the goal line as effectively as possible.
[00:08:37] Dave Travers: Man, that feels so counterintuitive when you're trying to get the next big promotion or get the first time you've achieved some big milestone, but boy does it really work.
I couldn't agree more. Okay, so I know one of the things along your path that you've done is helping people with development and learning, and taking internal resources and making them smarter and grow. How did you get interested in that, and how did you conceptualize that to fellow business leaders as like, Hey, this is something we should really focus on.
There's so many things that people, you know, we could do more compliance, we could find better candidates, we could do, but learning and training has been something you've really focused on. How did you lean into that?
[00:09:17] Greg Till: I think it gets back to what I see, job number one in the talent space being, which is growing capability, whether that's individual capability or organizational capability.
[You know, our job as workforce scientists is to ensure that we really understand what it's gonna take in order to achieve the outcome. Whether that's for the individual or the community or the organization, or customer you're trying to serve, and bring the capabilities necessary. And because there's so much change and there always has been, every year a new leader says to me, like the only thing constant, Greg is change.
Well, we were saying that 30 years ago when Fast Company was really popular, and we'll be saying it 30 years from now. And so I think really defining the capabilities the workforce needs today in order to deliver success, but even more importantly, what they'll need five or 10 years from now when you'll have different challenges is really important.
I think the second reason, in addition to being able to really help the organization thrive, is it also helps individuals thrive. I mean, individuals have almost unlimited potential, and in addition to helping them realize maybe some of their potential, we tell our caregivers, we see the potential in you.
Even if you feel like you're operating at the top of your license and healthcare language right now, you have more potential. Let me see that in you. It also is very motivating and rewarding to caregivers to see themselves grow. You know, we do a lot of research internally on the feedback we get on employee surveys and the relationship it has to outcome metrics and healthcare.
We measure engagement against clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction, and malpractice rates, and a whole bunch of other things. And what we've found is when we're looking at retention as one of those outcome metrics, is that there are five big predictors of actual retention, so we send our survey data off to an external body because we don't know who said what in our own organization, and we send 'em all, all the other quantitative data.
And what we see when people are about to leave the organization is number one, they tell us, you know, we ask a question in our survey, do you think you'll still be here in a year? That's the biggest predictor. They say no to that question, then they're, they're likely not gonna be here. Three of the four next biggest predictors of actual attrition are about growth and development.
I've had a good growth and development conversation with my leader. I see a career path for myself. I have tools and resources from a learning and development perspective. I need to be successful. And so in addition to helping the organization, in addition to helping you reach your goals and provide value for what you're trying to do for your community.
It really matters to the individual, and it not only provides a sense of reward for them, but it also helps to develop, to sharpen their tool and develop their own internal capabilities. So for me, it's that trifecta that we talked about earlier of benefiting the individual themselves, benefiting the organization, and doing some greater good.
[00:11:57] Dave Travers: Okay, so you talked there about how training, developing, showing people a path is one of the best ways to retain people, which couldn't be more unambiguously true. But you're in healthcare, as you've mentioned, and healthcare, unlike a lot of other parts of the economy, the labor market has remained very tight.
You really have to compete for talent. There hasn't been the relaxation of competitiveness nearly to the same extent there have been in other industries over the past few years when you still have to go out and get lots of new candidates and hire lots of new people each year. Obviously, you're competing against other organizations that are also in healthcare for very specific healthcare talent that also have a mission.
How do you compete to get great talent through the door and at the top of the funnel so you can build an even better team?
[00:12:45] Greg Till: Well, just to underscore the premise of your question, I mean, healthcare is gonna be growing for the next 20 years just based on population dynamics. The population, at least in the US, is aging, and we're producing, you know, not enough babies to replace ourselves in the workforce.
And so there's gonna be a much higher demand than supply workforce talent. We already have it, and every year it gets a couple hundred thousand nurses or doctors, or techs. Worse. And so your question is right on point. And so Job A for today is making sure that we can have the capacity we need in order to take care of our communities.
Someone said something early to me in my career that said, retention is the best hiring strategy. And so you hit the nail on the head with respect to let's make sure we're doing everything we can to retain and grow the incredible, especially clinical, but also administrative talent that we have. And so.
I have the benefit of working for a mission-focused, values-based organization. We have an incredibly powerful caregiver value proposition, and so we really put a lot of focus on four things. You know, in addition to fair pay and a safe working environment. Can we connect you to a broader, a bigger sense of purpose is the environment you're working in, caring and compassionate?
Do you have a sense of belonging in the broadest sense of the words? Do you feel like you belong here? And do you feel like we're committed to your growth? We believe that if we have those four things we can get above market, a retention for our caregivers, and also above market satisfaction and productivity.
And so that's how we're doing the retention piece, that the hiring piece. We're deploying a couple of things as well that have been really successful for us that probably a lot of your listeners are as well. The first one is a very impressive boomerang strategy. We're gonna rehire 3000 people this year that used to work for us at some point that are gonna come back.
If you just start at an organization, you don't have access to understanding what else is out there. Sometimes you feel like the grass is greener. Well, what our caregivers tell us when they come back is, Hey, you know what? The grass wasn't greener. We really love the sense of purpose, caring, belonging, and growth that you have here.
And so we wanna come back. And so we lost a lot of folks with the pandemic, like a lot of others did. We still have a really strong boomerang strategy. Uh, the second one is predictive staffing discipline. So we're not. Waiting until someone says, see you later in order to post that wreck and then wait four months to fill the wreck and experience some kind of a vacancy.
And healthcare vacancy costs a lot of money because it's not like we can't fill the vacancy, we just fill it with more expensive temporary talent, whether that's an agency worker or overtime, 'cause we need to take care of our communities. And so we deploy predictive staffing discipline, whether that's using analytics to predict demand over the next six months, which we can do with above 90% fidelity, or using better, more proactive schedule optimization strategies.
That's a lot of big words to basically say that there's, there's no leakage in this strategy. We know where all of our caregivers are 24/7, and we get 'em to the right place at the right time to care for the right folks and the way that they want to.
And so, we deploy a lot of that. And then last but not least, we're dipping our toe into the water of AI or technology-enabled identification and selection. I have this crazy idea that some probably won't love the sound of, which is I really believe that we could more effectively hire about 50% of our workforce, probably more, without a human touch, if we could really get critically concise at the skills and capabilities that our roles take and measure those effectively.
We could, I mean it, you know, the candidates and hiring managers wouldn't love it. We'd still want some human in the process, but we could do a lot better job with technology, sourcing better talent, decreasing biases that we don't know exist, but really do, expanding the source sourcing pools to a broader set of talent, and getting talent in a lot more quickly.
And so those are some of the areas that we're focused on today. I'd say longer term, very quickly, the best retention, development, and hiring strategies are only gonna account for a very small percent of the solution that we need. All you're doing is like trying harder and harder to keep a smaller and smaller segment of the workforce.
While that's applying demand gap grows, and so we absolutely need to deploy technology more effectively in order to either increase human potential and capacity or otherwise decrease some of the work that currently exists.
[00:16:54] Dave Travers: Yes. Okay. So, so much to unpack. There's a whole course on retention and hiring there that could be taught.
I loved it. But a couple things I would highlight there that struck out, as you said, all that one is just because you're in healthcare and you're competing with other healthcare employers, where purpose may seem innate. You have actually a uniquely defined purpose. You talked about earlier about revealing love that is not the way every healthcare employer.
And so just assuming, oh, we're all in it for healthcare 'cause you know, we like to help people or something, leading with purpose, I think is so smart. Two. You talked about boomerangs. What better for retention and employee morale? What better natural internal billboard for working at Providence?
Could there be than 3000 fresh people who've, like, guys, I've seen what it's like out there and I'm coming straight back here. You have no idea. Nothing could be better than that, but you hit the big, my bingo card these days has only one word on it, which is AI. You hit the word. So let's dig into technology, which I think is so interesting in a healthcare-specific context because the stakes are high.
So sometimes technology moves slower in healthcare in certain ways, but at the same time, the payoff is potentially bigger for a bunch of the reasons you laid out. So, how do you approach where and when? So, you talked about your secret that more than 50% of people could be hired, maybe without a human touch.
But how do you conceptualize? Where do I push to insert technology into a process, and where do I let compliance concerns or regulatory concerns or just people change management, which you have some expertise in when do I push on inserting AI and technology into a process, and when do I let a more human-centered approach sort of rule the day?
[00:18:44] Greg Till: I think a couple things. First, I think we. Have a false continuum if we think that technology is on an opposite side of that continuum of the humanness of work. In fact, one of our guiding principles, and I think it's important to start out with guiding principles, so you're not just employing a lot of technology for technology's sake, is that AI and healthcare should actually make the work more human.
That's like a starting foundational principle today, our doctors and nurses tell us that over 50% of the time they spend is on administrative tasks that are getting in their way of the incredible and compassionate clinical care they wanna provide. And an even higher percentage of the work they're doing is below license, meaning they feel like they were educated for something they're not able to do in the workforce setting.
So for us, principle number one is it has to make the work more human. Uh, principle number two, which gets back to my people, don't buy into, what they don't have to create is that our team has to help us to identify what parts of their work can be automated, augmented, or get an assist from technology.
They actually help us by deconstructing, that's probably a big word. Basically, deconstructing their job into component parts to say it's almost like back of the Frederick Taylor. How many minutes am I spending on each activity? But instead of doing it for the purpose of getting more efficient and squeezing the last drop of sweat out of everyone we can, which I think was Frederick Taylor's approach in the early 1900.
This is about how can we squeeze out every ounce of non-value-added, joy-depleting, non-caretaking, tiring, dull, dangerous work from our caregivers so that we can increase their joy, increase their capacity, increase the humanness of work, and provide a better experience to everybody involved, including the caregivers themselves, but also our patients.
And so those are some of the very high-level principles that we're utilizing when we're approaching the utilization of all technology. Not just AI, but AI is, to your point, the big buzzword today. And I think we have some pretty good initial proof points. I will say we have a hill to climb with respect to technology and credibility in the healthcare space.
You mentioned it a little bit, but if you look all the way back to the 1990s and you look at other industries and the implementation of technology and the impact on workforce productivity and burnout in every other industry except for healthcare, technology is aided the workforce helped it to get more effective and efficient, and also helped to reduce burnout in healthcare.
I don't wanna name any electronic medical record companies, but what we've seen is an inverse, meaning that there's been more burnout, less productivity, and a lot of that is because of the efficient interaction and interface that we currently have with technology. And so the other thing I would just add is that if we're gonna promise people that the technology's gonna make work more human, it really has to do that.
And there are some current examples, and then also a lot of dreams on the horizon about how we could actually do that.
[00:21:36] Dave Travers: I love the idea of using technology to make your teams work more human and the service they deliver more human. Because I think that my experience in healthcare a little bit and more generally is that it is very easy for technology providers and a new customer of a technology provider to come in and say, okay, well, you know, this technology can do a lot of things.
Like we could drive compliance from 97% to 99% by implementing this technology. But while that's valuable and important, it also doesn't lead you to make more human decisions that ultimately drive toward, you know, revealing love or whatever your mission is for your organization. So I love that framework, but nonetheless.
Like, it comes down sometimes to lots of different stakeholders, internally disagreeing about something. What gives you the instinct and the confidence to advocate, to say, Hey, we're gonna automate this, you know, we're gonna automate. You know, the first part of interviewing, but we're not gonna automate the decisioning process yet in hiring or whatever the case may be.
We, you have those principles. Now, how do you make a real, you know, hard decision about what we're gonna do now and what we're gonna hold off on from a technology standpoint?
[00:22:52] Greg Till: I think. It really boils down to building an effective business case based on actual data. I think, you know, some in our industry really focus on some of the really important qualitative aspects of our work.
Those are absolutely important. And as leaders in our field, I mean, we're also business leaders, and we need to be able to put effective business cases together that commit to outcomes that we are willing to hold ourselves accountable for achieving for the organization.
Whether that's more improved retention or better culture, which maybe are on the softer side or improve capacity or cost on the harder side, and for me, I've been successful blending those two things together in a way that utilizes language that other business leaders can really get their heads wrapped around and get inspired by, which frankly, typically are some of the cost productivity metrics, while also helping to convince leaders that some of the softer science, the cultural aspects, the human contact aspects are also really important to a mission-focused based organization.
And so, you know, for me, I always remind my team, let's start with the science. Let's start with the outcome that we wanna achieve, and then understand the science about how we think best we can achieve that. Let's get different business leaders involved.
So we have the nursing team saying, yes, this is, these are the right three priorities. The finance team saying, yes, these are the right three priorities, the HR teams and our operators. Let's go try it out. And then we have deployed something that. I think Amazon's famous for creating, which is fail fast.
And so we also have a pretty robust culture around, like, let's set really tight milestones for ourselves around what we're hoping to achieve. And then if we're not achieving those things, let's really quickly assess the. Whether it's a process issue, a technology issue, a plan or philosophy issue, and we're pretty good at stopping things when they're not meeting our expectations, which I think has also been kind of like a flywheel for credibility, so that the next time we go to our business leaders and say, Hey, we need $5 million for this investment in technology, we really think it's gonna help improve retention or make this segment of the workforce more efficient.
And oh, by the way, if we don't meet our. First and second step milestones. We're not gonna spend any more of that resource, or we'll come back and make a different kind of a case. So, I think those are some of the ways that we've been able to build credibility and get investment for the most important things.
[00:25:14] Dave Travers: I love that. I love thinking about both the hard ROI data-driven type benefits of doing something. And the more humanizing, warm, and fuzzy reasons to do something. You mentioned Amazon. It reminds me of a Jeff Bezos story that I love, which is he said, when the data and the customer anecdotes conflict, trust the anecdotes, and he gave this example of, you know, they had some technology problem where wait times were too long for a call center.
And the data on the dashboard said, we've driven all, 99% of calls only hold for 30 seconds, but customers were still complaining about the hold times. And so we had a big executive meeting about it, and they were debating the anecdotes versus the data. And he said, well, let's just call the number. And they waited on hold for 10 minutes, and it turned out there's a problem with the data.
And sometimes balancing both isn't just about being the warm and fuzzy thing, but often those individual stories tell a broader picture that sometimes data can mismeasure or whatever the case may be. So I love that.
[00:26:15] Greg Till: I think that's right. And you know, the negative stories carry a lot more. Um, than the positive stories.
And so even if it was 1% of those calls, but you had 20 million calls, that 1% of the folks, the ones on the social platforms, contributing to a negative brand, which probably has an outsized impact. I'll also say there are quantitative ways to measure qualitative. And not discounting the things that you can't measure.
But I mentioned earlier the study that we did internally with our engagement data. So engagement's kind of a soft concept, but we were able to tie that engagement data to literally higher units, we're able to produce higher clinical outcomes, more productivity, lower malpractice suits, more patient referral rates, less caregivers who thought they needed a third party to help them manage their discussions on paying benefits and a lot of other positive benefits. And so I think that's the other thing that I'd advise folks to do is where you can quantify the value of some of those qualitative things. I think it also doesn't hurt.
[00:27:15] Dave Travers: Okay, we always end these episodes with a rapid-fire round at the end. So for the lightning round here, I would like you to imagine that the CEO of Providence, you know, gets in the elevator with you at headquarters or at a medical center or, and you have 30 seconds together. And so you know, you, there you are, with a chance to off the cuff, give a quick answer, and the CEO says, Hey Greg.
Good to see you. You know, I was just thinking, I spend a ton of my time. Thinking about and interviewing people, and thinking about who the right next person is for an internal promotion or a new board member. Or a new member of the executive team from the outside, you're the people person. Give me your one best tip to be a better interviewer. What would you say?
[00:27:57] Greg Till: Man, to be a better interviewer, or my best one tip is going to be to. Ensure the job description accurately defines what success looks like. That doesn't necessarily get at the interview question, but that would be my one starting place. If you start with the wrong job description and you prioritize education and experience over capabilities and capacity, you've already limited the pool and lost the game
Number two on the actual interview, if you're willing CEO to hear one more, come prepared, structured behavioral interviews are the best type of interviews. They're still not the best predictor of success on the job. There are lots of other better predictors than interviews, but if you, like my old colleague used to say, evaluate your talent like a dog does with what he used to call a lick and sniff test versus a structured behavioral interview based on real job qualifications.
You'll never get what you want in that candidate. And then last but not least, this isn't about the best selection, but it is about the best result, which is don't forget to sell. If you're clear that the job description match is what you want and you do your best job interviewing, it is a buyer's market, especially in healthcare.
And so don't forget to sell what makes your organization special, give a realistic job preview. But the interview for me is just as much about attracting the candidate, is about making sure you're making the best selection as an organization.
[00:29:17] Dave Travers: Greg Till, it is so clear. You're a Talent All-Star. Thank you so much for taking the time with us today.
[00:29:22] Greg Till: Thank you so much. It was a great conversation. I appreciate the opportunity.
[00:29:29] Dave Travers: That's Greg Till, Chief People Officer at Providence Health and Services. We'll put his LinkedIn profile in the episode description, and just a reminder. You can also watch video versions of these conversations on YouTube on the official ZipRecruiter channel. If you have feedback for us or ideas for future guests, send us an email at talentallstars@ziprecruiter.com.
I'm Dave Travers. Thanks for listening to Talent All Stars. See you next week.