In this episode, David Morel underscores a strong preference for hybrid work and a shift in career preferences across generations, with a notable inclination towards tech industries among younger employees. This trend reflects a broader desire for innovative, rapidly scaling companies and a work environment that values flexibility, collaboration, and social impact over traditional financial incentives.
Hey everyone, we are pleased to have you join us for yet another exciting installment of The Leader Show with Lou Carter. Our guest today is David Morel, Founder and CEO of Tiger Recruitment.
Tiger Recruitment is a boutique agency with a global reach. Headquartered in London with offices in Zurich, Dubai, and New York, it takes a fiercely distinctive approach to matching exceptional people with employers of choice. It recruits business support, HR, finance and accounting, hospitality, private households, and digital roles.
With that said, let’s find out what makes Tiger Recruitment a Most Loved Workplace®.
Lou starts the discussion by talking about the challenges of managing a workforce that operates across different time zones and the varying attitudes towards an “all in” work culture. He highlights the trend of “quiet quitting” and the increasing importance people place on work-life balance, with work often ranking lower in their priorities.
Lou then asks David about recruitment strategies for finding committed employees in today’s dynamic landscape.
David responds by acknowledging the pandemic’s role as a “great reset,” leading to the adoption of hybrid work models. He observes that while many people initially embraced remote work and moved away from cities, there’s a recent trend of them returning. This is possibly due to businesses requiring in-office presence or employees reevaluating their career goals and social needs.
Furthermore, David highlights the importance of balance and flexibility in the workplace. His company practices hybrid working, with a mix of in-office and remote work, and offers benefits like the ability to work abroad for extended periods.
Lou then argues that when employees rank work low on their priority list, it reflects a failure in leadership and management to create an engaging and collaborative culture.
David agrees, stressing the need for emotional intelligence among senior management and a flexible, sympathetic approach to meet workforce needs. He notes that companies failing to offer an attractive and supportive work environment risk losing talent to competitors and facing difficulties in recruitment.
Lou and David continue their discussion on leadership, management, and recruitment in the context of changing work cultures.
Lou highlights the complexity and daily effort required for effective management and leadership, especially in small to midsize companies. He shares insights from conversations with CEOs and entrepreneurs who find themselves spending more time on project management tasks (using tools like Trello and Slack) than on business development, which they believe detracts from their primary roles.
Lou notes that for smaller companies, it’s crucial for founders and CEOs to actively engage in shaping the company culture. In contrast, larger organizations have Chief People Officers (CPOs) and Chief Human Resources Officers (CHROs) to manage these aspects.
David discusses the challenges of assessing candidate fit during recruitment. He acknowledges that much of it is based on first impressions, such as eye contact and firmness of handshake, which can be difficult to gauge in online meetings. David prefers to see CVs that demonstrate a clear career trajectory and commitment. He stresses the importance of candidates being able to explain their decisions and experiences convincingly.
David also describes the culture at his own company, TIGER, and the qualities he looks for in candidates, which include positivity, integrity, gravitas, excellence, and dedication.
He explains that TIGER’s recruitment ideology differs from competitors in that there is no direct personal benefit for referring businesses or candidates internally. Instead, the focus is on helping the team and fostering a collaborative environment. He assesses whether potential hires will fit into this culture and whether they are likely to contribute positively to the team rather than being self-serving.
Moving on, Lou and David delve into candidate preferences and behaviors in the recruitment industry, with a specific focus on recent trends and generational shifts as perceived in 2024.
David is asked about key trends he’s observing in candidate preferences and behaviors, particularly any shifts among different generations. In response, he highlights that hybrid working remains a significant preference for candidates. David also notes that candidates are likely to switch jobs if their current employer insists on a full-time office presence while another offers a hybrid model.
Additionally, David observes that there isn’t a significant difference between what experienced candidates and newcomers to the job market seek, with both groups valuing a good working environment and flexibility. However, he points out a generational difference in the type of businesses candidates prefer.
Younger candidates tend to be more interested in tech companies, viewing them as exciting and cutting-edge, offering rapid growth and career opportunities. In contrast, more experienced candidates might prefer industries aligned with their past experiences.
Lou comments on the evolving definition of success, noting the growing importance of social impact and sustainability and how these factors contribute to life’s meaning. David agrees and shares an anecdote from a family office conference he attended, where philanthropy emerged as a key driver for the next generation within family offices. This marked a shift from a previous focus on wealth accumulation.
According to him, this reflects a broader interest in using resources for positive societal impact.
Next, Lou and David discuss the challenges faced by Gen Z candidates in the job market, particularly regarding interpersonal skills.
Lou mentions an article about Gen Z candidates struggling to make eye contact during interviews and some even attending interviews with their parents. He asks David for his observations and advice for such candidates.
David acknowledges the issue and shares an anecdote about how dating patterns have changed, with fewer people approaching others in person due to the prevalence of dating apps. He draws a parallel to job interviews, suggesting that increased online interaction has led to a decline in essential interpersonal skills.
David’s advice for addressing these challenges is to actively seek experiences that push individuals out of their comfort zones and require face-to-face interaction. He suggests activities like joining a dance class to build confidence in social situations. David also compares this to public speaking, noting that repeated practice helps overcome nervousness and become more comfortable in such settings. His key message is that overcoming these barriers requires deliberately placing oneself in situations that demand direct, personal interaction.
Finally, Lou and David discuss the issue of passive aggression as a behavioral effect of hiding behind technology, leading to indirect communication rather than direct, respectful conversations. Lou asks David how new technologies and generational shifts are influencing recruitment practices, considering this behavioral shift.
David acknowledges the problem of passive aggression and its relation to poor communication skills. He then discusses the role of technology in recruitment, emphasizing the challenge of finding a balance between technological advancements and the necessity of human interaction.
David also mentions the rise of alumni networks and boomerang hires as positive technological and generational shifts. However, he argues that assessing cultural fit and personality remains difficult to automate and still requires face-to-face interactions.
David concludes that while certain aspects of recruitment can be improved by technology, especially in roles where technical expertise is paramount, the human element remains crucial in most hiring decisions. Lou agrees, highlighting the personal nature of hiring decisions and the need for human involvement.
Thank you for your time!
Lou Carter : We're talking about looking at this 24/7 culture, right? Because it's across time zones, of course, but it's also about what you do and what your staff does to be all in and what that means to be all in and still having fun along the way. And the kind of expectations that we have with virtual workforces, remote workforce, or even onsite, they're not really something that everyone wants. It's not for everyone, and that's okay.
How are you seeing in your recruitment capabilities as well and what you do to recruit as well as internally some of the success factors for finding the right people who are all in because it's different these days. Not everybody's all in. Quiet quitting is taking very different modalities, or there's differences in types of quiet quitting these days and there's people who just want a very, very balanced quality of life to the point where work is fifth, sometimes sixth, seventh, 10th, down the list of things that are important to them.
How are you working that, screening for that and understanding that as far as culture inside as well as those that you recruit?
David Morel : It's really interesting that, and I think when you say that work is seventh or 10th down the list, it'll be really interesting to see where that is in two or three years time and also where that was a year and a half ago. Because what I think is actually the pandemic was this sort of great reset. It introduced this hybrid way of working, which many businesses, me included, had never thought was kind of viable really. And I think that's, a lot of people have said, no, we're going to move out of town.
People moved out New York, people moved out of London, bought places in the countryside, et cetera, et cetera. But suddenly what we've seen certainly in the course of the last 12 months is steadily people moving back. Now is that because businesses are saying to people, right, we need you back in the office full time there in the US and New York.
I think it was that catchphrase saying, well, if you want to earn a New York salary, you need to be back in the office in New York. And that's kind of the same mentality in London as well. But was it driven by that or was it actually driven by the fact that the employees and workers just actually thought, well, hold on a second. We thought that we wanted something which is really balanced or actually a bit more on the lifestyle piece, but actually saying, aren’t we, is that really what we want? Are we forsaking our career? Are we not achieving what we wanted to do? Maybe we're not putting ourselves in a position where we can actually move up the rung, the career path that we wanted to, or that we would've thought about pre pandemic. Maybe we're not getting paid as much, maybe we're missing that collaboration with our colleagues in the office.
Maybe we actually need that social interaction, which perhaps during the pandemic people got used to and thought maybe they didn't need that so much. So I think in terms of what we do here, it's about balance is where I think the sweet spot is. So we have hybrid working here. We work three days in the office and two days from home. And we do that globally. On a Monday, everyone is in their respective offices because that sets the scene for the week. But we retain that flexibility so that people can work from home.
And we also have within our sort of I guess benefits package we have, people have the ability to work abroad if they want to add another week or two weeks onto their holiday, they're able to do that as long as they work the hours of the office that they're normally based in. So I think it's about balance. I think it's about flexibility and I think it's about bringing people together and really tapping into people's ambition, their drive and realizing that. And that is what succeeds, I guess, in bringing together a happy workforce that is motivated to work long hours and achieve and move forward in their careers.
LC : I always say that is that when you get that answer of works eight to nine on my list, or I value family much more life much more, please, I don't bother you as much. That is a failure of leadership, right? It's a failure of management to enable the culture that people require to stay in it, to want to be in it, to want to collaborate, to want to get into the kind of back and forth because it requires that people are excited about it and active in it to kind of bring us into this cool way of being and achieving together, right? If that doesn't exist, people are going to complain.
DM : I get that. I think what's really important is that CEOs or senior management teams, they've got to have show greater emotional intelligence now perhaps never before in realizing what the needs of their workforce are and having that balance, having that sympathetic approach, having that flexible approach. And I think when you start looking at things like retention and you start looking at attracting talent into your business, these are things that perspective employees or current employees want to see.
So the employers are not making it attractive or not making it easy or do not have a good workplace infrastructure. They're suffering because they're losing great talent to their competitors and they're finding it really difficult to bring good new people in.
LC : A hundred percent. And it is so difficult to do that management and leadership, that takes skill. It takes a daily effort. It takes a lot of time, a lot of time. And I talk to a lot of CEOs, entrepreneurs who are of small to midsize, and one of the things we talk about in our group, in our discussions is that they spend more time as a founder, CEO, doing project management on Trello and on Slack than they did doing biz dev. And they said that took away from it and pushes them to want to flip it even more.
Yet it's so necessary because it's up to the founder, CEO to enable the culture, not necessarily of the mids and the three billions and up, because that's a different structure, the smaller size companies up to the a hundred million type of range and different structure, 50, a hundred because now we have to jump in, we've got to do this work. Without this work, the culture will suffer. And when you get to the larger, now you're working with the CPOs, the CHROs who do that work and who enable that kind of structure with the managers. So there's always ways to have that happen. So good. So when you do your recruiting internally, externally as a client company, what are ways that they're appropriate for the cultures that you recruit in?
DM : Look, a lot of it is about fit and assessing fit and how do you assess fit? It's one of these very difficult questions, very difficult questions to answer. Does it come down to gut feel? I mean with someone like me, I've obviously been around for a fair while and I've interviewed many, many people over the years, both for the business here, but obviously for my clients. And so much of it is about what are my first impressions of an individual? What's the eye contact like how firm is the handshake? It's harder these days because so many of the meetings you do are online, so you don't have that opportunity to shake someone's hand like you used to. I think I like to see solid CVs, something my clients always talk about.
People want to see longevity, they want to see someone who's committed, they want to see people who've moved up with their career where there's a career sort of trajectory of moving on. So, they've started a junior position, grown into another position perhaps within that company, moved firm, gone into a more senior position, and so on and so on. So you want to see a clear path, a clear trajectory, and some clear thinking behind that.
When you're talking through people's CVs and people's experience, you want to see them to evidence good examples of why they've done what they've done that they think behind the decisions they've made. And if there are any sort of spots where any gray areas where they can sort of soundly talk through those. But I think a lot of it is, particularly if I look at bringing people into the business here, and I also look at bringing people into the companies I support, it's imagining what is that culture? What is our culture here and how is that individual going to fit into that culture?
And here again, going back to these things of these principles of positivity, integrity, gravitas and excellence, dedication of five sort of watchwords, can I see this individual? Is this person a TIGER fit? Is this person going to go the extra mile for their colleagues? And one of the things, TIGER, which I think is really important, is that in a lot of recruitment companies, if someone is recommending business internally or recommending a candidate internally, there's usually a sort of a cost benefit to that.
We don't have that at TIGER because the ideology here is that you make that recommendation because you want to help someone in the team and a wider team, even if it's in a different office and also in the back of your mind, well, if you are helping, the more people you help, the more people will help you. And so with quite unusual as recruitment consultancy in that effect, because we have that sort of ethos against many of our competitors, and I think that works really, really well. So when I'm bringing people into the business, I'm asking myself the question, can I see this person working in that way? Or is this individual going to be really grabby and say, no, well I'm giving you that. I want that in return, et cetera, et cetera. And that's not something would work well.
LC : A kind of immediate economy of needing and wanting rather than giving as the standard for it. This is interesting. We have some people actually who are recruiting experts asking some questions. These people have been in the recruiting industry for a while. So you're saying with your, this is Scott, Scott Baxt, he's asking with your specific insights as CEO of a recruiting company, are there any key trends you're currently seeing in candidate preferences and behaviors, especially any recent shifts among different generations and how you'll be addressing those in 2024?
DM : Look, I think one of the big things is people still want that hybrid working. We're seeing that yes, there are a number of businesses that are pushing towards a model of getting people back in the office five days, but I think from a content preference perspective, candidates are still digging their feet into the ground. And if someone, their current company is saying, right, no, you need to be back in the office five days a week and there's something that's offering them three days but a similar business and paying a similar amount, then it's likely that person would move.
So, I think that's really, really important. I think that people exactly what this, I guess this interview is all about and what we're talking about is people want to work in nice businesses, people want to work in businesses where they're respected in a collaborative environment with people they feel comfortable working with.
And I think that's a really, really important thing. It's not all about the money, and I hear that or I've heard that quite a lot, particularly across different sectors of plants we recruit, we recruit into. You know, generationally, all people who are new to the market are looking for something different than people who've been in the market for a long time. It's difficult to say in terms from a recruitment perspective because ultimately I don't think there is a big difference between the two.
Someone who's been in the market for a very long time, they might want an extra day working from home or something like that. But again, they still want the same things. They want the nice company, they want the benefits as to someone who's a youngster coming through. I think there's more where there may be a generational difference, which we are seeing is the type of business that candidates want to go into.
So we will see younger people coming through and saying, look, we want to work for a tech company and we really just want to work for a tech company. We don't want to go down, we don't want to work in finance, we don't want to work in private equity or something like that. We want tech. Whereas people who've been in the market for much longer, they might not be so phased by that. In fact, they might say, well, actually no, we really want to stay in something that's more suited towards the experience we've previously had.
So I think there is definitely a drive towards tech. Is that because there is a feeling that those roles are more exciting? Is it because there's a feeling that the management structures within these companies are more forward-thinking? Is it the excitement of being something which is potentially cutting edge and being in a business that could scale rapidly globally and maybe that offers one more career opportunities and so on and so on? So it's interesting.
LC : I like that the definition of success that you've had now certainly is exciting, seeing what can scale rapidly, what's new and what is different, what will effectively change the world, right? Social impact is very important. What can we do for social responsibility for sustainability? Those things are exciting and give our life meaning, and I think that's critical, it’s a great insight.
DM : Yeah, I was down at a family office conference the other day. We do quite a lot of work with family offices. I can't remember the exact sort of the results of the poll that took place within that conference, but the question was what are the most important drivers for next gen people within family offices next gen sort of principles I guess.
The answer was philanthropy, not money. And in the past it would've been the other way around. So it is that as you say, that philanthropic, what good can we do out there? How can we use the money that we have within our family to make an impact? So, I think that's really, really interesting.
LC : It's a great example because family offices are people who don't have to do that work, right? They could make a choice to leave that generation, break the generational business and go into their own business essentially, or create their own. And that is about sustainability. It's about passing the torch about either existing businesses or new ones that might feed the family for and accelerate the family's success for years to come. This is an interesting one. This is very interesting because it speaks to some experiences that Kerry has seen and Kerry’s also been in this field for many years.
She's talking about interviewing new candidates. I saw an article yesterday about Gen Z candidates and how many cannot make eye contact and interview well. Also, the fact that some of them are showing up to interviews with their parents is for real. Is this consistent to what you've seen when interviewing candidates? And what coaching or feedback would you give to Gen Z candidates?
DM : Look, I totally get it. I think just an interesting anecdote on the side of that. I can't remember who I was talking to the other day, but I was talking to someone, I think probably a parent of a daughter or a son, and we were talking about dating and how everyone getting into these relationships these days are through the apps. So actually if you speak to the girls, the daughters who are sitting at a bar or in a restaurant, are they ever being approached in the old fashioned way by a guy who's got the confidence to go up and say, look, hi, I think you look amazing. Can I buy you a drink? That just doesn't happen anymore.
And this is exactly relatable to this question you are asking here. People are getting so used to doing things online to applying through a portal on a website that they're losing those absolutely key core, basic skills that are so important, not just in terms of how you present yourself an interview, but how you are going to present yourself in the workplace and how you're going to present yourself in your everyday life.
I think one of the biggest things I found in terms of what advice or coaching or feedback I would give, one of the things I think that the human brain as we know is a strange beast. And when people get used to hiding behind something, whether it's on an internet dating site, whether it's going through a jobs portal and actually they're getting used to speaking into cameras and stuff and so on and zoom and teams and what have you, the more you do that, the more you become nervous about having a proper conversation with someone and having a proper dialogue without maintaining eye contact and so on and so on. And I think it's about, so it's all about breaking down the barriers and the only way to break down the barriers is to make yourself get out there and start doing those things that you don't naturally want to do anymore.
And if the issue is about maintaining eye contact or having a proper conversation with someone, then you need to put yourself into those situations where you actually have to do that. Real life examples of that could be just signing yourself up to go and do some, I mean, this sounds a bit of a crazy example, but if you're into dancing down, go to a dancing class and that might be something that you think now is completely out of your comfort zone, but if you do that, that will actually give you so much confidence which you can then take back and that would deal with all those issues that you are having to deal with at any particular time.
So, it's about taking yourself out of the comfort zone, recognizing there's an issue there. But the more you do something, and it's again, classic example again, I guess is public speaking. If it's not something you do, a lot of you become very nervous. Even you've done it quite a few times, you've become very nervous about doing it. But if you put yourself in a position where you're doing it more and more, then suddenly it becomes second nature. So those are some of the tips I would give on that.
LC : I like those because it really is about building those neural bundles, those pathways to getting to your 10,000 hours of the back and forth between individuals and feeling comfortable talking with them and seeing their facial expressions, not thinking too much about what those facial expressions might mean, but still accepting that, hey, we are connecting in some way. There's a connection that's coming forth, which I think is just wonderful.
We're getting more questions, so I have to bring these up because they're really great ones because Lisa, also in the field, she's saying what sorts of programs are most effective for attracting candidates that you said before about family offices emphasizing philanthropy and community impact is important to them. Do you know of any that are particularly appropriate or things that people like in those family offices, paid volunteer time, donor donation matching? Are there things that people like more than others?
DM : It's a difficult one, Lisa, because I don't know, it's not my specialist subject there, so I'm just going to be honest with you on that. To start off with, I think that the best way to get involved in this type of stuff is to actually go and do it, is to put yourself out there as a business or as an individual to volunteer, find something or find a cause that is very relevant to you or to the business.
And through that, attract people to come through and do some good with the community as well. I think that's really, really important I think. But I think it's got to be, for me, it's got to be something that's personal, so personal to the individual, personal to the business, and something which is also relatable to what your business or what the business does, which you can have an impact.
So one of the things, to give you an example that we were doing last year is working with a charity which supports vulnerable young women. And what we were doing is saying, well, working with this charitable partner and saying, well, what we can do is come down and give career advice. We can go through CVs, we can help people, we can advise them how you would write your CV or prove that, et cetera, et cetera. And then on the back of that, we can see whether we can help you if you're looking for work. But if you're looking for something that's not in an area we cover, hopefully some of the advice we've given you can support you in that.
LC : That's great advice. That connection to the business strategy is very important. I think a lot of people overlook that. The United Nations global compact, we did some work with them, and what we are learning is that what companies invest in terms of sustainability and corporate responsibility, are often exactly what will pave the way for better business for them. For instance, KPMG would do business or create open offices in underserved populations.
Well, what happens to those underserved populations? 10 years, 15 years, they become served populations and are now available markets. So these are very important and these are not nefarious activities. These are planned, thoughtful strategic activities that actually develop markets and help people to achieve what they want to achieve. Like your example about supporting vulnerable women and helping them to achieve what they want to achieve, thereby helping you all create a culture that is loved for everybody in the workplace and create an ecosystem that supports clients and employees.
Brilliant. It is interesting too, the work you're talking about. I know we got to 12:31, I think about five or 10 more minutes. I know we are kind of over time. We do have a lot of questions. I'll field one more after this. I do want to speak about, go back to something you had mentioned because it stimulated my thinking, which is this kind of hiding behind technology in the younger generations or whatever generation it might be because it is hitting every generation at this point, is what the effect is of that, the behavioral effect.
And what I've seen, and a lot of people are hypothesizing, is that it creates passive aggression and that's the predominant behavior. And what that basically means is that instead of direct communication saying what we mean, what we feel being respectful with direct communication, we'll often say it indirectly.
A lot of research talks about this is that when we have too many layers between us, right? This time it's been technology, other times it's been hierarchies. So, there it's manifested organizationally in different ways for the past a hundred years since industrialization just now technology is the layer. So I wanted to mention that this is really what this next question comes in. It says, with new technologies from Zachary and generational shifts, what changes in recruiting, right? Since we're talking about this generational shift, are there recruiting changes that you're seeing with those new technologies and even taking into consideration this behavioral shift that's occurring? So tell me more.
DM : The passive aggression piece is really, really interesting. And I think that goes back to the question from one of the participants earlier in terms of talking about that importance of eye contact and the advice around that and really getting back to that communication because whether it goes to passive aggression or to another place, it's not a good place.
If we start not being able to communicate with each other in a sensible and proper way, then that is not a good place to be and it's a very scary place to be. It signals a scary future in many respects. And I think leading on to Zachary's question, the new technology and generational shifts, it's a really interesting question.
It's actually one of the things that I'm really focused on as CEO at the minute is actually looking at saying, look, there is so much stuff out there now, recruitment industries, as many, many industries having to solve, say, well, what does the future of this industry look like?
I get a lot of emails every day saying, look, we've invented this software which does this. This can sort of simplify and your time saving money, et cetera, et cetera. But there are so many. How do you disseminate between what is actually good and what's bad? What really is going to improve the business and what is actually, well, it's not really going to do much, and there's someone who's trying to make a quick pound here and there.
One of the things which I'm seeing a lot more of is alumni networks. So big global businesses tap into alumni networks, which are created on really solid platforms that there's a lot of money being invested into, where they can actually use to not just bring in business from people who've worked for a particular company, but also through tapping into the people that worked there. Boomerang hires bring people back in, particularly in 2022 when you had a real, people were really struggling for workers.
That's when people were resorting to say, right, can we get a boomerang for our alumni network? Or saying, well, have you got a friend who you're working with who might come and work for us? So that whole idea of making sure that everyone who leaves your business is a good leaver and there are no bad leavers. I think it's a really interesting thing, and I actually think that's a really positive technological shift and a generational one that has occurred. And that has happened. One of the things that I find very interesting is we go back to a point, we've already talked about it. Basically, how do you assess personality fit? How do you assess that someone who's right for our culture here as a business or for a culture of a client we might be recruiting for? And that is very, very difficult to technify, very difficult to come up with.
Yes, there are programs out there, there are a number of programs that say that they can assess someone's personality. There are lots of different questions. There’s gamification. It’s one of these things that's come in to assess personality types, but do they really work? In my view, they don't. I personally think you can only assess true cultural fit through having a conversation, the interview process and through really getting to know someone face-to-face. Maybe you might call me old school on that.
So, I think in terms of plenty of new technologies and generational shifts happening, but there are elements of which I still don't think there are technological answers, and that is one of them. I do think that there are aspects of everyone's job, certainly a recruitment consultant's job that can be made more efficient through the technology we employ internally. But I still think there is absolutely a human interface which is very, very necessary in recruiting. The one caveat I would say is if we were recruiting into a sector, which is the importance of the individual and the individual's personality is very slight because actually it's their technical expertise, which is so important. And perhaps there's a particular program, there are programs, particular programs they need to be an expert in, then actually that is something that could become automated. But I think in terms of what a lot of recruiting companies, you need human intervention.
LC : There's no doubt when you make something so personal as a hiring decision, which is very personal to bring somebody into your life, your work, your office, this is not something to be taken lightly. You need that human touch. It's a great reminder. So I think Elon Musk and his optimist is going to have some competition, which is us, when it comes to recruiting, not possible.
David, you're awesome. I love what you're doing and how you're changing the field of recruiting and also doing it within, which makes a big difference in the field. And you bringing this philosophy of connectedness, of humanity to the recruiting world changes everything for us all.
And being a Most Loved Workplace says a lot about you and your company and how you do business.
So I thank you very much for being on the Most Loved Workplace Leaders Show today, and we look forward to having and seeing more of you in the future.
DM : Great. Thanks so much, Lou, for having me, and I thank you everyone for the questions. Really appreciate it.
