Get Reworked Podcast Guest Rachel Happe cofounder of The Community Roundtable

Get Reworked Podcast: Why Communities Are the Organizational Model of the Future

November 24, 2020 Leadership
Mike Prokopeak
By Mike Prokopeak, Siobhan Fagan

Get Reworked Podcast Episode 2 Guest Rachel Happe Cofounder of The Community Roundtable
Employee motivation traditionally took one form: You do X and I pay you Y. This kind of approach worked pretty well, up to a point. But as organizations grow in complexity so too does the work, and what is asked of the workforce. That makes such transactional incentives less effective.

“There needs to be … a reason why people participate in that work other than payment,” said Rachel Happe, co-founder of The Community Roundtable. Rachel believes communities create the kind of commitment that goes beyond the salary or the benefits package to inspire employees to “willingly engage rather than get forced to engage.”

In this podcast conversation, Rachel explains why communities are not only central to management but also the organizational operating model of the future. Plus, she makes the case that joy and work are not mutually exclusive. Podcast co-hosts Mike Prokopeak and Siobhan Fagan ask if this is blasphemy or a fresh approach to the 9-to-5. Listen to find out.

Have a suggestion, comment or topic? Drop us a line at [email protected]

Listen on Apple Podcasts badge
Listen on Spotify badge
Stitcher podcast badge



Show Notes

The Community Roundtable: The State of Community Management 2020 report
Twitter: Rachel Happe
TED Talk: "Poverty, money — and love" by Kiva Co-Founder Jessica Jackley

Episode Transcript

Note: This transcript has been edited for space and clarity.

Mike Prokopeak: Hello and welcome to Get Reworked. My name is Mike Prokopeak and I’m editor in chief at, your guide to the revolution of work. Get Reworked is our podcast where you're going to hear from industry pioneers who are leading the way into the future of work as we dive into the topics, trends and technologies that are reshaping not just how we work, but also why we work. So I'm especially excited to introduce my co-host. So welcome again to my co-host for this podcast, Siobhan Fagan. Welcome.

Siobhan Fagan: Hey, Mike. Glad to be back.

Mike: Yeah, we're back for episode two. We're old pros at this now.

Siobhan: Old hands.

Mike: So we've got a topic that I think is particularly interesting as it relates to this future of work. We're going to be talking about communities. So maybe you can queue it up for us, Siobhan, and tell us a little bit about what we're going to be talking about and who we will be interviewing today.

Siobhan: We're going to be talking to Rachel Happe, who is one of the foremost leaders in community. She co-founded The Community Roundtable back in 2009 with Jim Storer and has been working since then on this question. And I think with communities, a lot of us can get a clear picture of what we're talking about when we look at our neighborhoods and our neighbors, or even in the customer realm. But I think the topic of internal communities is a really interesting one that is not necessarily that understood. So at this point, I would love to bring you in here, Rachel. Thanks for joining us.

Rachel Happe: Great to kick off this podcast series with you.

Siobhan: So Rachel I wanted to start with a really basic question. What exactly do we mean by community when we're talking about the internal, inside the business context?

Rachel: Yeah, so it was interesting when we started The Community Roundtable, it took us a few years to decide how to define community because everything we found, every definition we found, was really rooted in the physical world. And obviously, that doesn't work by definition in the digital world.

And so I really was thinking a lot, I think, graphically, so I was thinking about social network analysis and how would you pinpoint a community and a huge network. And what we came up with is that communities, the definition of them is really about the structure of them. And it's a group of people that share unique artifacts, behaviors and values from the network around them.

They're people that are all doing the same thing, talking about the same thing. They share some quality in common that is unique to them.

Siobhan: That absolutely makes sense. Yeah.

Rachel: And so if you define community that way, any organization, country, town, school, what have you, that has some kind of purpose is a community. The better question is, is it a healthy and productive community?

Siobhan: Ah, now we get into the nitty gritty.

Rachel: Is it an explicit community? Are they managing it as a community? Or are they just hoping it gels?

Mike: If I can ask a question here before we dig into some of the details of it, Rachel. How would you define the difference between a community and a business, because I think we look at business as a group of people who are coming together to achieve an objective, whatever that objective may be. And if you're a for-profit company it's to drive more revenue. If it is a nonprofit, there's usually a mission or purpose that the folks are there to achieve. How do you define the difference between what a community is and what a business is in the way they're set up and conceived?

Rachel: There's probably an overlap, a Venn diagram. Communities have a structure whereby they have no explicit control over anybody. People engage proactively. You're not controlling what they do. In business, and actually this gets at the heart of a lot of the questions you have, is by default our core management approach is extrinsic. It's some kind of force or pressure or coercion. I'll give you this money in exchange for this effort.

Mike: You earn your salary if you achieve X objective.

Rachel: It's very transactional. And because of that, you actually aren't maximizing contributions. While I was writing the book, I had this a-ha and I don't know why it's never occurred to me. But if you look at a business, historically speaking, and not all businesses are like this anymore, but they come at it from a profitability standpoint. I'm trying to maximize my profitability. Which means they're trying to minimize the profitability of their customers and employees. Right?

So your intrinsic motivations are not aligned at all. You're in a contentious relationship. And that is kind of problematic if you're trying to excite or inspire creativity and innovation and all these other things.

Siobhan: Rachel, that brings me to the point because you put out a report every year where you're looking at the health of community management. And it seems like over the years that I have read this report, there has been some progress but still not a very marked progress in growth of internal communities. Am I reading that wrong?

Rachel: No, you're reading that correctly. One thing you can't see in the research, and it's because we didn't have a big enough sample to cut it the way we did the external, is we didn't have an average and an advanced segment that we could compare. And the internal group, the organizations that are really investing in internal community, there's kind of a bi-modal curve there. So there are some internal communities that are doing fairly well. But the vast majority of them are doing really poorly.

Siobhan: You're talking about communities in the plural. So it's not saying, OK, you're a business, you automatically have this default community. There are multiple communities internally. So what kind of purposes or what form do these internal communities take?

Rachel: That is a really important thing to understand because you're not managing, necessarily, the organization as a whole. And that community.

Five years ago, I used to say community management is the future of all management and people would look at me kind of cross-eyed and be like I don't understand what you just said to me. Like, those two things don't make any sense together. And in the last couple of years, when I say that, I get a lot more nods and a lot more of our work, actually, interestingly, has been, at least on the advisory side, with internal communities.

And internal communities are ecosystems of communities. They're not one community. There are lots, there are hundreds, sometimes thousands of communities and they take different forms.

Some of them are internal communications, awareness, sort of like you'd see on the marketing side externally. They're just trying to get information out to their broad population. A whole another set is collaborative communities, meaning we're trying to get work done but we're doing it across a lot of functions within the organization and that's a huge project. And so communities work better than team chat, for example, to coordinate all of that.

The biggest opportunity for organizations is communities of practice, which is really tied to learning and development and change. And it's where there's the most potential for value but it's also a construct that is not particularly well understood in terms of integrating it into your work life, day to day for employees.

And what communities of practice are, is they're taking a discipline that's important to the organization, some type of engineering, leadership, management, whatever the discipline is or a role, and saying, we're trying to rapidly innovate on what we know and share that more quickly with people who need it.

And those communities of practice are also used as escalation points from project work. So if I'm on a project and I'm the only expert in some type of discipline and nobody on my project team can answer my question. The next best option for me is a community of practice, of people who share my expertise but not my context. Does that make sense?

Siobhan: That absolutely makes sense. So I want to go back to something that you said earlier, because can some of these communities be happening organically within the organization but nobody's managing it? And if so, what happens in those cases?

Rachel: Yes. And it's actually interesting because I had a global energy client a few years ago, and I did this whole training session with them. We worked on an internal community management playbook to help scale that discipline. And as we were working on the playbook, I was talking through how do communities get started, and I was trying to understand their context, and they couldn't figure out what I was talking about.

And it finally occurred to both of us sort of at the same time that they always mandated communities. And I was like, Oh, well, this is maybe why there's challenges in engaging people, because you're telling them to participate vs. inspiring them to participate. And if they're not core to my job and my performance, when does that happen? That never happens. So it can happen both ways. And you can engage both ways. But all too often because the culture of business is very controlling, meaning the default is control and organization from top down. The biggest thing that organizations are lacking is this ability to create a shared purpose, shared value strategy, that engages the intrinsic motivators of the employee so they willingly engage rather than get forced to engage.

Siobhan: So in your last report you brought up this point of community as operating model, which I'm guessing might be another one of those where when you say it, people go huh? But then you start outlining all of these different ways that it does touch on how an organization operates. And I'm hoping that you can discuss each of these in turn because all of these are ones that are very much on businesses minds before our current moment which yes, Mike, I am breaking the seal on COVID-19. I had to do it and at some point.

Mike: We made it almost 15 minutes without it. We gave it a good effort.

Siobhan: I was trying but I was like, I'm gonna bring it in. But it's become even more important during this. And so the first one that I'd like to hear your thoughts about is the relationship between community and innovation or organizational agility.

Rachel: So I used to work in new product development and innovation before I got into this community stuff, engagement stuff. And so I had a really good understanding of how do you manage innovation at very large organizations and how do you measure it. And the measurement is very similar to community because it's offset, you invest ahead of knowing what you're gonna get as a return.

But the other thing that's interesting about innovation is innovation requires humans. You can't algorithmically create at least meaningful innovation because innovation, by its definition, comes from whitespaces, meaning things that just don't exist yet. That's very hard for at least computers at this point, to identify and iterate on.

Siobhan: When the AI can start reading whitespaces, I think I might have to go to my cave.

Rachel: Yeah, I think humans are done, right. There's no need for us anymore. And so the problem with identifying whitespace is that is a completely different skill set than exists in most of corporate America. That's not what most people are doing in large organizations today.

It can't be forced. The metrics we have that are really looking to discreetly identify outcomes don't work because you can't tell somebody to sit at their desk, and damnit, come up with an innovation in two hours and then spend another two hours and come up with another one. Right? It doesn't work that way.

So the hourly idea that one unit of production is the same as another unit of production is awful. It just doesn't work in innovation. If you think about the periods of great innovation in the world, they all required communities, whether that's Silicon Valley, whether it was the salon culture in Paris that changed the art world. Any of those things required people to iterate a lot on ideas. Innovation doesn't happen in closets, right? Like you don't go away and shut yourself off for five years. Some people do. There's some brilliant people who can do that.

I give this example a lot. I don't like the words engagement, collaboration and innovation because employees don't come to work and sit down at their desk and say, “Damn, I'm going to collaborate today, right?” That's not how they self actualize what they're doing. Most innovations come because somebody is trying to solve a problem for somebody else. And most innovations die on the vine because nobody sees it.

What happens in online communities or any communities is that approach gets shared. And someone else looks at it and goes, “Oh my God, that's amazing.” And the person who did it is like, I guess, OK, I was just using what I had to solve a problem. So it requires that social piece. It also requires joy and fun in exploring ideas. And that's certainly not ... I don't think of most corporate cultures as joyous.

Mike: This is blasphemy, Rachel. This is truly blasphemy. Work is not fun, is that what you're trying to say, and corporations aren't known for their joy?

Rachel: It's anxiety filled. And it's actually the exact opposite of what you need to create new things and to generate energy that attracts other people and drives advocacy. And the interesting thing is if you can get that culture started, and you don't have to use control anymore because you've engaged people's intrinsic motivators, your operating costs drop through the floor because you don't have all these systems of control.

Mike: The one question I want to ask you has to do with the control and protection that companies are in. We see this in the automotive industry, for example, which is being disrupted by companies like Tesla, which are, you know, basically turning cars into computers. And you've got these large manufacturers, Ford, General Motors, who are really trying to turn themselves into an innovation factory but at the same time they have this huge business that they have to protect.

Do you have any advice ideas for companies who may be in that protection or maturity mode, who are then trying to also turn themselves into innovation engines? Are there ways that they can start to do that, that they can accelerate that?

Rachel: Yeah, so I'll give two examples. Both are mature companies, neither of whom I work with at the moment but I thought both were brilliant. Mary Barra was the CEO of GM. A few years ago, I read this article, and to really change your culture, you need less governance, not more. And different governance, meaning you have to engage different motivators and you need less governance, and less of that control. She basically was like, we have like a 6-10 page workwear guidelines. And she just distilled that to dress appropriately. She was like, “What is this? Why do we not trust them to dress appropriately? That's problematic to me.

I was listening to her, she said she got a lot of flack back from managers, because they were like, “Well, you know, I had employees come in in sneakers and shorts when we had a supplier partner visiting and whatever.” And she's like, “Well, part of management is leadership, you need to go have a conversation with them. They need staff development, they need to understand why that's not appropriate, if you think it's inappropriate, right?”

And so she's taking away the codependency is what she's doing, and saying we expect you all to be mature adults. We're not going to tell you how to dress. You should be able to do that. So I love that example because it really illustrated the problem.

The other one I ran across recently, which I've never seen anything like it in the large corporate world. Susan Lyon is an HR leader at Procter and Gamble and she's developed something called the employee value equation. And it has six factors in it. These are the six things that employees need to feel fully engaged. And what was fascinating to me is five of the six things were intrinsic motivators.

There was only one, the fair package, that was the extrinsic, here's your pay, benefits, etc. So the other five were meaningful work, continual learning, terrific managers, career ownership, and a life - meaning work-life balance. And I just haven't seen any models like that.

Now P&G also has a really interesting model whereby they try and hire for people's entire career. And so they don't have a lot of people moving in and out of the organization and there's not that same kind of layoff threat hanging over people's heads the way some organizations restructure every couple of years and get rid of hundreds of people at any one time. And I think that's related.

Siobhan: So, Rachel, that's interesting because one of the other points that I wanted to ask you about was developing trust and psychological safety in the workplace. And the idea of allowing employees to bring in their authentic selves. Too often, the traditional business structures don't allow us to participate and act as our authentic selves. Can you go a little bit deeper into that?

Rachel: I think the way you deeply engage with people and connect with people is by being authentic. And I think it's really hard to be authentic in workplaces that are judging you by the hour, that you're afraid you could get laid off for saying the wrong thing, that have these discrete KPIs and metrics that you don't share with anyone else but yet other people influence.

You know if you're the head of customer support, you know, marketing and other customers and product and everybody influences that support number, and yet you're the one responsible for it. That is a tense place to be. And if I physically can't relax there's no way I can be authentic, and then I can't connect and then I can't really lead and I'm not going to really engage. I'm not going to stick my neck out at all, I'm not going to come up with a crazy idea that might have a kernel of brilliance in it. I'm just gonna put my head down. I'm going to do exactly what I'm expected to do and I'm going to leave at 5.

Siobhan: And so this would be a case where establishing the community, it would probably be a hard hill to climb in that particular business, but had that business had some kind of community that would have created more of a space where the employee is feeling the motivation, or it just can't exist in that?

Rachel: So this is where I get into communities as an operating model. So you've got to change how you think about strategy, from the very top all the way down. It needs to be a shared value, shared purpose, strategy. You need to compel people that it needs to be a reason that you would participate in that work other than payment.

Jessica Jackley did a TED Talk. She founded Kiva. And she was like, money plus love is always going to be more than money. So if you can give employees money plus something that intrinsically makes them feel great, they're always going to take that over money. And now that the workplace is so transparent and I can take jobs wherever, employers can't rely on a local economy to pay employees just enough to have them work there. It's not enough for innovation. It's not enough for really anything.

And so you have to rethink how you think about strategy. You have to rethink how you think about leadership. You have to rethink how you think about culture, management, governance, metrics, all of those things. And your entire organization looks more like a community from its business model on down than a traditional organization.

And we're seeing that with things like B Corps or Patagonia, they're really engaged in a mission bigger than themselves. And actually, ironically, they get higher margins for that from consumers because consumers want meaning in their lives, too.

Siobhan: I was going to ask you for an example. And Patagonia is a great one, because it also goes back to what you speak of with authenticity, in that it feels authentic. It's been what they've done from the get-go, as opposed to sort of washing it on after the fact when everybody realizes, “Oh, wait, we need to care about the outside world.”

Rachel: Yeah. And when the shared value initiative came out, if you look at all of their stuff, it's all corporate social responsibility stuff. And I'm like, no, no, your core business model has to wrap this up into it. It's not this thing you do on the side as charity. If it's not part of who you are, it's disingenuous.

Mike: I heard a term, just a couple of weeks ago actually, from Stacia Garr, who is a human capital researcher at Red Thread Research, and she used the term “purpose washing” about how when companies are doing what you're describing Rachel, after the fact, what they're doing is they're washing this corporate, whatever this particular purpose may be that they have, they're washing that with purpose as if that makes it cleaner or better, when in fact, fundamentally they need to get deeper into it in order to really think about this issue that you're raising.

Rachel: Yeah. And to me, it just makes them look more disingenuous. I'm like, What is this thing that you do off to the side? And why are you feeling guilty?

Mike: So we've got some questions that we asked our audience to pose. Siobhan, this seems like a good spot to bring in one of those.

Siobhan: I'm going to start with this one. Since I already broke the COVID bubble earlier, I might as well continue. This one ...

Mike: Acknowledge the reality that we're all living in, Siobhan, is that what you’re trying to say?

Siobhan: Something like that, something like that. So this was from Manuel Toscano. And he asked, how do we make our community stronger in times of great inequalities, inequalities that are now more tangible inside organizations, like for example, between employees that have children or elderly to take care of and single or younger employees that are more available? How do we build positivity within differences?

Rachel: One of the things that I say about communities as opposed to traditional organizational structures is they make diversity a feature, not a bug. And our traditional operations try and fit all individuals into a box. And any diversity is kind of like tried to smooth out the edges or seen as the exception.

Well, what if we assume that everyone is an exception because everyone has some kind of unique need, whether that's taking care of a parent, whether it's a weird proclivity to wear snorkel gear and the office, like, I don't know what it is but everybody's got something that makes them unique, which is actually great. But in our corporate environments, we're taught to be ashamed of that or it's seen as problematic. But it's also what will make us stronger in the end.

So it's a complicated question he's asking but it's learning to have compassion for ourselves, compassion for others, lower expectations. And, again, that word jo - bringing some joy into our work. Joy and work are not mutually exclusive.

And I'll give you an example. I'm on a volunteer committee, something I do in my spare time, and I had a meeting last week and there had been a lot of stress and contentious stuff going on. And a couple of the people on the call were employees of the organization. And I happened to forget the time of the call, and I happened to have a cocktail because it was like election night or the night after whatever. I don't know, it's all a blur.

But what I did on the phone, and it wasn't just me, but you could tell they were so stressed and hunched and closed. And I was like, let's lower the stress. Let's lower the judgment. And by the end, we were all relaxed and laughing. Sometimes when you get on a phone call - I do this with employees too - some of the time I'm expecting to have one conversation but I get them and emotionally they're really not in a place where we're going to get anywhere.

And most of the time in our corporate environments, we just ignore that and plow ahead anyway. It's not gonna work to do that. And if I can, lower the pressure, lower the anxiety, help them relax, help them just enjoy some time, that's going to pay dividends for years.

And so I think part of this is just at an individual level being human. In organizations, there's power differentials that make some of that hard. And where communities come in is community members can do that for each other, where sometimes a manager or a leader can't do that because of either legal constraints, regulatory constraints they have or this power differential that makes that just a little bit harder to do. I think a lot of it is just trying to get people to relax in whatever way you can.

Siobhan: You've already spoken a little bit to this question, and I think it's actually something that you cover in all of your reports, Lorraine Chandler wanted to know how do we build, nourish and maintain a sense of community that is both authentic and durable.

Rachel: This gets back to my intrinsic/extrinsic thing. Communities have advocacy or member leadership programs a lot of the time, so the big sophisticated ones do. And a lot of people approach those leadership programs with extrinsic rewards. I'm going to give you a badge. I'm going to gamify this. I'm going to give you tchotchkes. I'm going to give you know, notebooks, whatever it is. That is like the quick-hit, endorphin unsustainable approach to building authentic and durable communities.

The more sustainable durable approach is to really engage intrinsic motivators. And that takes a lot of investment. You've got to figure out what motivates people which takes a while. And then it takes a while to build relationships and trust and culture. And this is the thing that organizations can't get over. They want to build it and have it come and ignore the confluence of other intrinsic and extrinsic motivators that are flying around and conflicting for their employees.

And they think their employees are just going to engage. And they don't because they're confused. They're confused and anxious and so that just shuts people down. And so if you don't really think through what inspires people to act and volunteer, you're never going to get it right. If you do get it right, there’s still a lot of work to make sure that that community is operating that way and proving by doing that they're authentic.

That's an investment cycle that is hard for organizations to understand. But it's actually compounding. And it's a compounding growth curve. So it takes a lot of investment early and then it grows geometrically as it hits inflection points because behavior is contagious. And so the more of a behavior you get, the more behavior you get. And so that's kind of how you build community.

Mike: So, Rachel, I'm trying to crystallize this for folks who might be listening. When you talk about some actions that companies need to take, they expect the community is built and that it should just start to deliver. And then they're surprised when it doesn't necessarily. What are some of the actions that they should be taking to get past that? What are some specific things that you have seen work for people to once they build continue to see the residual values or lasting and durable values coming out of a community?

Rachel: So when we take people through this process, the first thing we do is profile. Who they're targeting for a community and we do their social network. And we say, who are all the people they interact with today? And who influences them? And what exchange or engagement are they having with each of these individuals in their social network?

And then we look at all of them and say, which ones are the ones that we can get the most bang for the buck by putting in a community in a transparent setting? So we're really prioritizing what will get value for the participant the fastest. And usually, that translates into a couple of workflows. And then we go and we look at the workflows and how it happens today, and we kind of say, OK, well, if you're trying to respond to an RFP, you get it, what happens from there?

Who do you engage with? How do you engage with them? How many people? How long does it take? We identify all the behaviors that are happening. And then we look at all those workflows and usually there's some similar behaviors across them. And then we say, we're going target two or three behaviors that really address 70% of the core workflows we want to. And we're gonna just enable those three behaviors in the community. And we focus in on that, so that we're guaranteeing the fastest time to value for the participant that's possible. So we're really looking at that workflow and saying, “How can we make that a better workflow for both organization and the individual involved immediately?”

Mike: Yeah, it makes sense in the sense that you're not necessarily looking at the outcome as a profit figure or a productivity figure. You're looking at the output as the process is the output that you're looking for.

Rachel: Yes. And that is a productivity figure. So I have a slide that I call my self-evidence slide that I present to executives all the time. It's really a diagrammed workflow - the diagram workflow of how it happens in the community which usually creates marginal value. There's some value there but it's not transformational.

And then there's a third workflow, which really represents the second person going through that process and how they benefit from having that workflow done in a transparent way. Which is, you can take a workflow that takes two weeks and squeeze it down to hours because the second or third person along can come and just search for four, five, six different things and find it immediately and then run off and they've just saved hours and hours of time.

And so it makes it really obvious what communities are doing to the process of work. Does that make sense?

Mike: Absolutely.

Rachel: So really, that's it. The transformation of work is the transformation of work and there has to be something that compels the user to do their work differently, meaning they already have habits of doing their work. Unless it's giving them something more, they're not going to do it in the community. And then how having that captured in a community really accelerates efficiency and innovation by allowing that to compound and become iterative in a community rather than in somebody's email inbox or some SharePoint drive or what have you.

Siobhan: Rachel, what's next? What should we be looking for in the community space?

Rachel: So what I'm seeing now, and it's related to COVID, which is the internal community spaces petered along for years like you mentioned, and there's some people really digging in, and there's some that really don't know what to do about it. And the adoption of things like Slack and Teams have taken off and people and organizations do not understand the difference between what should be done in a Team and what should be done in a community. And so that ecosystem design is very much on my mind.

And it's very much on my mind not only because of the team community, one-to-one communications design but also because companies are starting to think about hybrid work environments. They're looking at COVID, and saying I'm not ever going to get 100% of my employees back to the office 100% of the time. And so what work should be done in the office and what work is more effective to be done virtually.

And that's a really interesting idea because you're treating the office infrastructure as another channel, and saying which environments suit which behaviors the most. And the challenge for most large organizations is they don't have the experience design and UX architects and business analysts to really explore and define that the way they need to.

And so what they tend to do is they buy a lot of the software, a lot of these platforms, and they deploy them. And then they leave entire organizations to sort it out themselves. And everyone's already overwhelmed. The last thing they want to do is figure out some new complicated way to work.

And so what we're seeing, and there's a lot of interest from our customers and our members in this, is creating centers of excellence and or communities of practice for community management. How do we scale this? How do we train people how to do this? How do we provide centralized services and support so that we can really transform the organization and help them understand how to work better.

Siobhan: And bring joy.

Rachel: And bring joy. Get out of the middle of it. Stop telling people what to do. Nobody likes being told what to do. I guarantee it.

Mike: So Rachel, we definitely appreciate you being a part of our podcast today. Where would you suggest people go to learn a little bit more about your work and about communities in general?

Rachel: We have a ton of free resources at The Community Roundtable site which is just And as Siobhan knows, I'm on Twitter a lot and I'm @RHappe and that's probably the best place to engage with me initially but people can also certainly email me. It's just [email protected]

Mike: Well, thank you again, Rachel, and we appreciate you being a part of this. And I want to let you know in the audience if you have a suggestion or a topic or an idea for us to talk about here at the Get Reworked podcast be sure to drop us a line at [email protected].

Please also consider, if you like what you hear, to post a review on Apple Podcasts or wherever you may be listening to your podcasts. And be sure to share it with your network. We definitely would appreciate you sharing that with the group of folks who you think might be able to benefit from these type of conversations.

Finally, be sure to follow us @GetReworked on Twitter as well. So thank you, Siobhan, and thank you, Rachel, once again.

Rachel: Thank you so much for having me.

Siobhan: Thanks, Rachel. It was great having you on this.


Featured Research

Related Stories

Heart drawn on a cardboard and hung to a rope


Working With Emotional Awareness

still karate instructor surrounded by students in motion


With Decision-Making, You Have to Go Slow to Go Fast

Runner bent over on running track


How Work Leaders Can Harness Pressure in the Digital Workplace

Digital Workplace Experience Q4: October 12-13, 2022

DWX22 - Q4