The Right Kind of Wrong with Amy Edmondson
In this episode of the HR Leaders Podcast, I was joined by acclaimed Harvard Business School Professor Amy C. Edmondson. Amy's latest research and book, "The Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well," examines a topic most business leaders shy away from - how to productively learn from our failures and mistakes.
As Amy shared, human nature makes us avoid failure out of fear of humiliation or rejection. Yet, the world is too complex and fast-changing to expect perfection. The most innovative organizations don't make fewer mistakes - they make more small, "intelligent" failures in pursuit of innovation.
Where most companies go wrong is in how they respond. As Amy outlined, leaders must frame efforts as opportunities to learn and improve, not just rigid succeed/fail binaries. This promotes a growth mindset across teams. Psychologically safe cultures where people feel safe surfacing issues enable collective learning critical for agility.
Amy advocates investing in three core competencies:
🧠 Self-awareness - Understanding our own tendencies and contributions
👁️ Situation awareness - Continuously evaluating context and risks
⚙️ System awareness - Seeing how different parts interact and influence outcomes
Combined, these help identify "complex failures" with multiple intersecting causes to prevent future occurrences through addressing root issues, not just symptoms. They also empower "intelligent experimentation" to fuel innovation.
The key insight is that failure itself isn't inherently good or bad - it's all about mindset and response. Will we get defensive about and hide our failures? Or have the courage to openly analyse them and rapidly adapt? As one child’s hospital Amy studied says, the goal is not to be perfect - it’s to become the best at getting better.
What opportunities could a shift in mindset around failures unlock in your organization?
As Amy said, the quicker we identify and correct breakdowns, the better off we ultimately are. The most successful already embrace failure - it's time the rest of us catch up!
Episode Highlights:
How to reframe failures as learning opportunities
How to build failure competence through training self-awareness, situation awareness, and system awareness
How to encourage analysis over blame via blameless post-mortems focused on root causes
Recommended Resources
Connect with Amy on LinkedIn
Grab a copy of The Right Kind of Wrong
Learn more about her services
See Greatness Everywhere
Powered by deep-learning AI, Eightfold’s unrivalled Talent Intelligence Platform shows you what you need, when you need it. Whether you’re finding or developing talent, their skills-driven approach backed by unparalleled talent insights enables the outcomes you need to stay ahead.
🎙️ Automatically generated Podcast Transcript
Amy 0:00
It doesn't take long to realise that mistakes and failures are a really essential part of that journey and that we have to learn from our failures. We have to learn from our mistakes. Not all organisations, spoiler alert, do this well.
Chris Rainey 0:19
Hi, everyone, welcome back to the HR leaders Podcast. Today I'm joined by the pioneering researcher of psychological safety and award winning Harvard Business School Professor Amy Edmondson. We're going to be talking about her new book right kind of wrong, the science of failing Well, which was voted the 2020 free financial times and Schroeder's business book of the year during the podcast, Amy shares, specifically tailored practices, skills, and mindsets to help us replace shame and blame. We have curiosity, vulnerability and personal growth. Trust me after this podcast, we'll never look at failure the same way again. With that being said, enjoy the episode. Amy, welcome back to the show. How are you?
Amy 1:00
I'm great. Thank you.
Chris Rainey 1:02
Let's tell them what we've been up to. I think last time we spoke, you just released the book, the right kind of wrong, the science of failing well, has it been received, how things going?
Amy 1:11
Well, it's been I think, well received, it's gotten a lot of attention for which I am grateful. And I'm hearing from people in incredibly diverse industries and and roll groups, you know, from, from healthcare to retired military officers to, you know, parents, it's been, it's been quite fun. I can't keep up with all of the emails that I that I get sent in the social media as well as pretty impossible, but But it's been fun.
Chris Rainey 1:42
The topic itself, it goes beyond industry business. It's every one and everything, right? Yeah, talk about failure. Why did you go down this route? What was the inspiration behind this book?
Amy 1:54
Well, the inspiration behind this book is really my interest in learning and more specifically, organisational learning. And for decades, I've been noodling around the question of how do we help organisations learn in a world that keeps changing, it doesn't take long to realise that mistakes and failures are a really essential part of that journey, and that we have to learn from our failures, we have to learn from our mistakes, yet, that's one of the most, you know, organizationally fraught things that can happen. So not all organisations spoiler alert, do this. Well, I've been trying to figure out how do we help this psychologically? interpersonally? How do we help this go? Well, for a great deal longer than I care to admit,
Chris Rainey 2:38
why is it Why is that so important? For organisations, it's important because
Amy 2:42
organisations are operating, you know, by definition in a volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous world, VUCA world. And in that kind of environment, it's simply not possible to assume or hope that you can get all your plans right, the first time that execution will always unfold perfectly, that you have a clear line of sight on what the future will bring, like, none of that is really true anymore, if it ever was, we need people, leaders in organisations, leaders of teams, leaders of entire organisations to think more like scientists to to understand that their plans are at best a hypothesis, hopefully a very good hypothesis. But like all hypotheses you are testing, you're testing them constantly. And you're alert to the data that your experiences are bringing back. It's like in sales, for example, which which you have a lot of experience with, you're always you have a hypothesis about approaching this customer, you give it a whirl, but if it doesn't seem to be working, you pivot a little bit and you try to understand where they're coming from and what their needs are, and what undiscovered needs, you might not have realised in the first place. So you're, you're you're you're adjusting, and in that process, you'll encounter successes, and you'll also encounter failures. The crucial question is do you learn from those failures? And not just Okay, that didn't work out? I'll try harder next time. But why didn't it work out what really happened? And what was my contribution to it? What was just part and parcel of the of the external environment? What was bad luck, you know, and get get serious about answering those questions. Yeah.
Chris Rainey 4:23
Before we go into how you say so many interesting things. And one of the things that I wrote down was, what is the difference between good failure and bad failure? So if you could share that I thought that was really interesting. Failure
Amy 4:33
is failure in new territory, where there just truly isn't a recipe yet, it's there isn't a playbook for how to get the results you want. A good failure is one that's in pursuit of a goal. You see an opportunity to advance toward that goal. You've done your homework and meaning you have good reason to believe this might work while being fully aware that it also might not work and importantly, a good failure is as small as possible. All right, it doesn't waste resources or time or put people in harm's way unnecessarily. And so those are good failures. Correspondingly not good failures are those that are that are caused by our mailing it in by sloppy work in familiar territory, you know, we've got a recipe but we just can't be bothered to pull it off the shelf and use it and then the food tastes lousy. It's where we had the wherewithal to get it right, for whatever reason, or reasons we didn't, those should not be celebrated.
Chris Rainey 5:33
Let's see what's happening as we was doing our first sort of beginning of the year kickoffs, one of the things I wrote down with the team is we need to stop making the same values over and over again. Exactly. Because when I was looking back on the year, I was like, Guys, I'm like noticing that we're making the same mistakes over and over again, and we're not learning from them. We right. So to your point, that
Amy 5:52
failure is one that we already have that one last week. Yeah, right. So it might have been intelligent and good last week, but this week, not so much.
Chris Rainey 6:01
Yeah. You also speak about the archetypes of failure, can you touch on that?
Amy 6:06
Conceptually, failures can be categorised into three buckets. And one bucket is the one we were just talking about, which is the intelligent failure, new territory in pursuit of a goal with a hypothesis as smallest possible. A second archetype is basic failure. And those are the failures with a single cause, usually human error. And they can be big, they can be small, or they can be, you know, a spoiled batch of cookies, or they can be an airline crash, but they are caused by a single mistake in familiar territory, the complex failures, the third type is our multi causal failures, they are the things that go wrong, because of a handful of factors that come together and just the wrong way. And importantly, any one of the factors individually, would not be sufficient to cause the failure, because then it would just be basic, you know, you leave the house slightly late. Oh, you forgot your cell phone, you know, and it all kind of piles up, that you're late for an important meeting and you don't get the sale. It but but it isn't one thing, it's kind of a handful of things.
Chris Rainey 7:16
I've never really thought about that. So a failure can actually be a group of steps that went wrong, as opposed to one Yes, sir. Yeah, thing that led.
Amy 7:26
And I've been interested in those kinds of failures for 30 years, because in my very early research, as a PhD student, I had the chance to study medical adverse events, which is what happens when you know, a patient is harmed by something in their treatment that should not have happened usually, usually error based, I would go every time one of these would happen, I'd hop on my bicycle, go downtown to the hospital and sort of, you know, get get everybody's perspective on what happened. And nine times out of 10, literally, it was not one small thing wasn't one thing. It was multiple things. It was sort of the, you know, the drugs were were mis marked in a confusing way. And there was a new nurse on duty, and it was a change of shift like it was any one of those things on their own would be no problem. But the fact that they all happened at once, let the failure just flow through.
Chris Rainey 8:22
What what can we learn from that, you know, think
Amy 8:24
about our complex world, or our interdependent, uncertain world. So we need to be very aware that things can go wrong. And then complex failures are the kind of failure that because it's multiple factors, and any one of them on their own would not be enough. That means it gives you a handful of opportunities to catch incorrect. It's true. So all you had to do usually in most of these failures, all you have to do is notice one of the deviations from best practice, and, and speak up about it say we're just a month is labelled doesn't look right, right, and then all the rest, you know, the changes shift, all the rest of the stuff doesn't matter anymore. Because once we caught that one, we slow down, and we make double double sure to do this. Right. So they're pernicious. They're on the rise complex failures, but they also give us multiple handholds for prevention. How do
Chris Rainey 9:21
you advise people to make sure you can capture those moments in the flow of work? When, when and how should you be? It should just be in every one of you meetings, you're dealing with a team like what what does that look like for practical sense? Like
Amy 9:35
the complex failures that are multi causal? I think prevention is multifactorial, too. So you are you begin every meeting with a reminder of the complexity and uncertainty of what we do. You do everything in your power to make sure people feel safe to speak up things that they're not quite sure about. With no fear of humiliation. Create systems in place like if you know Maybe Maybe checklists, when when those are appropriate you, you have if you're the Toyota Production System, you have an end on cord, which any associate can pull it anytime, if they're just not quite sure about something doesn't instantly stop the line, it just instantly starts Aquarii that most of the time ends up with confidence that everything's fine. I don't know if you're familiar with the research on high reliability organisations, it essentially answers the question, how is it that really risky operations like nuclear power or air traffic control? How is it that they managed to operate safely, like nearly all the time, given the inherent risk and complexity of their operations? And the answer isn't one thing, the answer is a sort of a handful of things that include an attitude of vigilance, that include practices of what they call heedful interrelating. Like, if you and I are having a conversation or doing a handoff, we do it absolutely thoughtfully. I give you something you respond with what you heard, right? So they they have a heightened vigilance to risk, an ease of listening to anyone independent of hierarchy or status. And that's how they do it. So it's similar in I think, you don't have to be in a high risk operation, to want to adopt some of those HR practices for sure.
Chris Rainey 11:30
Yeah. Last year, I was interviewing, Novartis is CHRO. And they're clo. And I'm not sure if you don't work about Novartis associated to talk about the culture of curiosity, highly regulated pharma environment, yet, they really focus on, you know, they even have an award every year for the biggest failure. Great.
Amy 11:48
It's perfect. So what Novartis and most, you know, good organisations will do is, you, you are very clear about the context. So if you're in the science, if you're a scientist at Novartis, and you're in the laboratory, your day should be full of failures, in pursuit of that next great treatment. If you are on the manufacturing line, your day should be essentially failure free, right? You should be aspiring to Six Sigma manufacturing. And in order to do that, you need that vigilance, you need people speaking up, if there's something not quite right, you know what, during the pandemic, there was a mixup at bio, they called Bio Entech, which was a contract manufacturer, where a million doses of vaccine at a time when we desperately needed them and needed them quickly, were ruined by a simple chemical screw up in in the plant a basic failure, right? And that's, that's a context where a little vigilance goes a long way. Because then once you've done that, you know that, then you're, then you have that all has to go into waste. That's very expensive. And in that time, also life, you know, it has had life and death consequences, you know, back to Novartis, you aren't asking people to be failure free in the lab? Of course not. But you are asking people to be crystal clear about their context, their goals? And then what's it going to take to be excellent at that? And
Chris Rainey 13:19
then to your previous work, then also, how do you create the environment? Right? How do you create a psychological safety, that people feel that they can do that? Right? Yes,
Amy 13:28
and you know, and it's a combination of, of leadership actions, that doesn't mean actions done by leaders, but actions done by people who want to influence others in positive ways, leadership actions that include calling attention to context, you know, if you're a pilot, flying between New York and Chicago, you are making sure your team knows that things can go wrong, I need to hear from you. Or you say that, even though it's kind of obvious, if you don't say it, people are reluctant to speak up in the hierarchy. So you come out ahead and you say, I need to hear from you. Do you see anything? Right? And then you better respond productively, by which I mean, thank you. Thank you for that clear line of sight. Thanks for letting me know. Even if it's wrong, you say up all as well. And I really appreciate your bringing it up. That's
Chris Rainey 14:19
tough, right? I guess so far. When I first started my career. It was so far away from the culture that many of us experienced. It's true. So like, a lot of times, if I wasn't innovating, and I was trying new things. I was doing it in a silo in silence, because I didn't want to tell anyone, I was in sales, and we had these targets where it was like 150 phone calls a day, two hours on the phone and seven pitches and one deal these are our KPIs or metrics. I got pulled in a meeting with my manager and I hate this doesn't make sense. You're doing half of everyone else's KPIs, but you're getting quadruple the deals. So date Dan MAFF was if you do double that you do double deals, what he didn't know is in the background, I'd built my own marketing platform and system that was automating a lot of that those tasks. So it was reaching out to clients, it was scheduling calls for automation. I was using LinkedIn to connect with leaders and sales pitches, because I was like, wait a minute, we have these tools that exist outside of a phone. And I did that, because I didn't want to tell anyone.
Amy 15:24
What a story Chris, it's in so many ways at odds with the optimal not you were you were doing was optimal. You were experimenting, you were integrating you were discovering new ways to do the work even better. But the organisation had created the conditions whereby you didn't feel safe sharing all that. And that's, that's holding others back and holding the organisation back. So it's just it's, it's crazy.
Chris Rainey 15:49
I'm sure he did a lot of research around this. Why do you think people are such a negative when people think of failure, it's such a negative for I
Amy 15:54
think there's two, two big sort of forces at work. And one is just human nature and human nature has evolved from early days, to care very much about what other people think of you. And so we, I think we make a bit of a mistake, because we think people will like us better if we're perfect, you know, are successful all the
Chris Rainey 16:15
social media, right is a reflection of that, oh, my gosh, vulnerability,
Amy 16:19
and you know, we're the first perfect person who ever lived, you know, because we're very worried about being kicked out of the tribe. The crazy thing about that part is that, in fact, we like people better or we build more meaningful and true relationships with them. As soon as we start acknowledging our, our truths or vulnerabilities, it's like, gosh, I'm a little anxious about this. How about you suddenly, you know, we're suddenly we're friends, not just, you know, acquaintances. And then the other major forces are the social forces in society, but also in organisations that reinforce that idea that you're supposed to look good, not bad. You know, only success counts around here. Failures aren't to be spoken of your your story speaks to that set of forces perfectly. So those combine and reinforce each other, to lead us to be very averse to failure emotionally, and then very unwilling to talk about it. interpersonally and socially,
Chris Rainey 17:20
for the longest time, that's how I felt and it was only to your point, how quickly did you get straight away? Hey, did you Chris, did you play sports? You said that straight away, right? Yeah. And that's normally, I started hiring based on that, I would actually I would hire people who had been in environments where they would inevitably fail. And it was, it was probably one of the best hiring strategies. I had, like full boat full of people from military backgrounds, athletes, anyone that had basically been in an environment where failure was just part of, of, and all of a sudden, I had a very great sales team. more
Amy 17:55
honest, more robust, more, more, you know, more resilient. Yeah.
Chris Rainey 17:59
And I knew also what comes with that is also they understand the power of being coached. Yes. So they immediately come in and say, Hey, like, how do I like do the same thing, I did the data, I joined a sales team, I was like, who's the best salesperson, and where's the sales shroud. And I was I need to sit next to the top salesperson because I was like, clearly don't know something other people don't know. And also, where's the where's where's the opportunity to develop and grow because also I did the same in sports, right? You got coached by your ice hockey coach or your tennis coach or, and and you also learn from the best players on the team. So smart.
Amy 18:35
And so unusual. Because a lot of times people you join the company, you don't want to sit next to the best person because you think you'll look bad relative to them. So it's kind of emotional logic versus logic logic. And you went for the logic logic,
Chris Rainey 18:50
how do we change that? And it's always like, it's hard to change people, but it's many people that I kind of grew up with, and I have sort of a victim mentality. Yeah, that they blame everything and everyone for it, as opposed to understanding that it's okay. Every single person feels the differences that you failed once and gave up. Rather than carry on because people always say to Shane, like, are you really good older sports? I'm like, No, we're not. There was as you tried it, once you said I'm no longer good at that. And we tried it 100 times before and got good and got good. I was terrible at those things.
Amy 19:24
I think that concept and the skill is really framing here and we help people change that. And it's really a matter of reframing the situation. The goal or the goal is to get better. For example, I studied a children's hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio, and I loved them because they said Our goal is to become the best at getting better, which is you know, instead of you know all those US News and World Report's you know the ranking everybody. We know we're not the you know, number one top in the world, but we're going to be The best at getting better. That meant, and that just kept spreading that frame for everybody. So that meant if you're not actively engaged in improvement work, you know, in your day, you're not doing the job. So you've reframed the task as one of learning and improvement, the example you just gave I, you know, I tried it once it didn't work. So I'm not good at that. That needs to be reframed as you're not good at it yet, right? You know, no beginner, ever was a master at something important, right? I mean, we're not, we're not talking about just a game of of luck. But any activity that involves skill, and knowledge is one in which you are going to get better. As you work harder at it.
Chris Rainey 20:49
One of the things that I love that, by the way, and I think one of the things for me, which I will just struggled with, as this, maybe this is random, you tell me if it makes any sense, as a kid in school, you're either right or wrong. You get a test, you have answered the question correctly. Or you're wrong. Right? It was no, in between of getting binary, it was minor. And so it's almost training you to say, You ever get it right, or you get it wrong. And that's it. It's binary, as opposed to as a grown. Yeah. And
Amy 21:16
if you get it wrong, you're discouraged. Or you're not good at that. And how many kids get, you know, very early, way too early. To be healthy. Say, I'm not good at math, or math. That
Chris Rainey 21:28
was me. I was that kid, right? That's just
Amy 21:30
you know, that's just crazy. It's like math is hard. And you can learn it, anyone can learn it. And the harder you work at it, the the better you'll be Now, certainly some people have more intuitive facility with it. I used to teach for a while and I just was my pet peeve to hear, you know, a young kid, especially a girl say, I'm not good at math. Like, no, no, no, no, no, no. Let's get to work here. Let's roll up our sleeves and get good at math. Because it's a lot of fun. One
Chris Rainey 22:02
thing I love and I took away from the book is like not all failures are alike. And I think that's something people will have you say that no, like, What do you mean?
Amy 22:11
If you have a failure, because you mailed it in, you didn't even try, you know, you knocked on one door, that customer didn't buy, and then you went home. You know, that's, that's not a good failure. Right. But if you you tried, it didn't work, you tweaked and you try it again. And you know, the time goes on, you get better and better at it. Those failures were input to your future success. Often
Chris Rainey 22:34
people struggle to differentiate between mistakes and failures. They see the same thing. That's that makes sense.
Amy 22:43
Yes. In fact, I hear the words used interchangeably all the time. Like they'll, you'll have a, you know, an inventor or a scientist talking about, oh, that didn't work out. And then they say, Well, we learned from our mistakes. I'm like, no, no, no, no, that's not a mistake. A mistake is a deviation from known practices and familiar territory. Mistakes only can exist when there's already a recipe and or a playbook and you didn't follow it. Mistakes are never desired, right? We don't want to make mistakes. But they're they're not shameful either. They're always opportunities for learning. Yeah. So we don't have to sort of celebrate mistakes, to want to learn from them and understand that they're part of the human condition, right To err is human. So there will always be mistakes, but the quicker we can correct them. And the more of them we prevent in our daily practices, the better. Whereas failures are different, right? failures. Well, some failures are caused by mistake. Again, we'd like to minimise those. But some failures are simply the result of an experiment where the hypothesis wasn't right. You know, the customer didn't want to hear about it that way. That's okay. Right, then those are the kind in new territory that we learn from.
Chris Rainey 24:01
Yeah. And I think it's really cool. When you understand and you you're exposed to the idea that the most successful companies that we all know that we only see the successes, but if you look at it, look behind the scenes, and I luckily I unfortunate to speak to those companies for actually making the most mistakes,
Amy 24:18
right. The most successful companies are making more mistakes, more failure,
Chris Rainey 24:22
failure. Sorry, yeah.
Amy 24:25
The others, right. And that's the same the best athletes have more failures, the best, you know, inventors have more failures, the successful people among us, don't fail less than the rest of us. They fail more than the rest of us, but good failures, new failures,
Chris Rainey 24:40
and just because they their relationship with failure, is a healthy
Amy 24:46
is less is more healthy. It's less fraught. Yeah,
Chris Rainey 24:50
you said, and that's the thing, you know, fail forward, you know, for us would be for me and saying we were talking about failing forward and seeking discomfort and we know that those are the places that the magic happens. Our most our best products, our best innovations are come in the most in the fire, as well. Yes.
Amy 25:09
Yeah, I'm glad you use the word uncomfortable because this spring brings us back to psychological safety again for a moment, which is recently and I think especially among HR professionals, there's been this notion that psychological safety is about being comfortable at you know, at all times, and in fact, if anything, it's the opposite, right? Because it's really about being willing and able to learn, knowing deep in your heart that you won't be rejected, humiliated, embarrassed, but that it's okay. And learning is uncomfortable. It's supposed to be right. It's, I love who I was wrong, that's uncomfortable, who I'm stretching beyond my current capacity as an athlete. Today, I'm going to try to run, you know, a six minute mile it's, it's gonna be uncomfortable. Always.
Chris Rainey 25:58
Yes, I'd love to have you added that as well. Because you're right. When people talk about cycling safe, they assume it's like make everyone feel super comfortable. But no, no, it's actually comfortable with, you're comfortable with
Amy 26:09
risk. That's what it's all about love, whether those are scientific risks or interpersonal risks. We got to take them. Yeah,
Chris Rainey 26:17
what would you say that is the if that's the sort of misconception about that what we say is the biggest misconception of failure,
Amy 26:23
I think it's just a knee jerk reaction to it, that it's bad. And now it's always disappointing, right? Even if you're a scientist in the lab, and you have a failure, not a success with your experiment, you are disappointed, make no mistake. And if you're smart, you know, this is useful data. I'm going to put it to use to design the next experiment, hopefully faster than the other labs and, and get there first, before
Chris Rainey 26:49
we wrap up, what are some practical tools and steps that leaders and companies can take? You know,
Amy 26:55
I think the framework of archetypes of failure is quite, is quite practical, because it helps sort and it helps have very good learning processes, or three archetypes you mentioned on it. Yeah, the three hours of basic, complex and intelligent. The second part of the book is about the competencies that I think can and must be developed in organisations to do this well to experiment well, and to operate in a failure free manner and to operate in a failure free manner, in familiar territory in operations. For example, the three competencies that I described, and I think I described fairly practical ways to work with them, or self awareness, situation awareness, or context awareness, and system awareness, sort of the discipline to understand how the parts fit together those competencies both help us design better experiments in our lives and in our work, but also help us avoid preventable failures more often than we than we do.
Chris Rainey 27:55
I was reading a book recently and the co founder, the company was talking about his reunited after the name of it, we were talking about people, the learning from the mistakes is the number one thing that he would he would speak about, as opposed to actually trying anything new. Is that before for that, because it ha how much? I think the question he asked the audience was, How much money would you have, if you just didn't make the X mistakes? And all of the people noticed that the billion extra 10 million? And he was like, well, so. So let's focus there first.
Amy 28:33
Right, right, right, let's do what we know how to do. Right? For exactly then, and then do r&d.
Chris Rainey 28:39
Yeah, yeah, that's what he was getting. And I was like, wow, and I mean, shiny or interesting for me to say it was like a couple of 100, a couple 100k. small
Amy 28:46
improvements can be hugely consequential. I mean, that in a way, that's what the Toyota production system tells us, of course, you know, that there is real value in investing in in quality and error prevention or defect prevention, it's hard to see it in advance and then you realise it's worth billions.
Chris Rainey 29:06
Are you planning on doing any follow up research? In a way this book was a tying
Amy 29:10
together of research and ideas that I've been working on for a very long time? So at the moment, I'm really consumed with work on the employee experience and how how, what are the different influences of their religion plays relationship to the organization's purpose, to the culture and community to growth and development opportunities, which of course is related to what we're talking about, as well as to the material aspects of the job. All four of those things had been studied separately, but the relationships among them have been less well studied.
Chris Rainey 29:46
Looking at that, it's also to help you when we did a survey of all of our audience in it is a CHR O is a global brands employee experience is number one. On the list. Yeah. Oh, good. Well, this is yeah, yeah. So I would disagree, you're in the right direction.
Amy 30:01
Mark and I had a Harvard Business Review article last year called rethinking your employee value proposition and, and this from our qualitative interview data. But we're now collecting a lot of quantitative data on this as well.
Chris Rainey 30:16
All right, well, we'll stay in touch. And before they go, where can people reach out to you if they want to say hi? And then where can they go have a copy of the book,
Amy 30:21
either my HBs faculty page or ABC edmondson.com, go to LinkedIn. Also, I'm proud I try to stay active on LinkedIn. and to a lesser extent, Twitter slash x. But please read the book because I always do a better job in writing than
Chris Rainey 30:40
you always say that but I think you do an amazing job either way, but appreciate. Listen, it's so great to see you again. I'm so happy to afford a success. And I'm honestly, when I first found out us writing this book, I was really excited because I know how many people are gonna benefit from it. So I wish you all the best until next week. Thanks so much. Thank
Amy 30:57
you so much, Chris. It's great to see you again.
HR Leaders Newsletter
Sign up below and well send our weekly newsletter packed with actionable insights, podcasts, clips and compelling content directly to your inbox.
More from the HR Leaders Podcast
Steve Degnan, Advisor, Board Member, and former CHRO of Nestlé Purina.