My guest today is Maya Drøschler. Maya is an author, editor and HR adviser based in Copenhagen, Denmark, one of the Scandinavian countries that is a welfare state.

People there have access to free health care, education and the flexicurity model that regulates the labor market, making it easier for employers to lay off people but offering a decent monthly benefit for unemployed workers.

I’ve been following Maya for over a decade and have admired her work as not only an HR consultant but a transformational consultant. She owns her own business, named Point of HR, where she advises business leaders and other HR professionals on developing and implementing different HR processes in their organizations.

Maya recently published a provocative and interesting article called “Working from Home: Emancipation or Alienation of the White-Collar Worker.” And after reading this article, I knew I had to get Maya on the podcast. In this episode, Maya and I talk about nuanced topics like alienation, isolation, belonging and what it feels like to be surveilled in your own home by your employer.

So many of you are working from home, and if you are experiencing these feelings, I hope that you sit back and enjoy this fresh take on the realities of work from home.

Punk Rock HR is proudly underwritten by The Starr Conspiracy. The Starr Conspiracy is a B2B marketing agency for innovative brands creating the future of workplace solutions. For more information, head over to thestarrconspiracy.com.

COVID’s Slow Build to Isolation

Like the U.S., Denmark has gone through multiple lockdowns during the last two years because of COVID-19. Almost 50% of the Danish working population was working from home at one point. This explosion in remote work sparked an academic interest for Maya, specifically in how people responded to this new structure.

“In the early phases, people were very happy about this. They reported they saved the commuting time, they were in a relatively safe environment, they spent more time with the family, and they also gained more freedom and more autonomy, and so on,” she shares. Maya found that this was the central narrative about working from home, but soon enough, she began to hear an alternative narrative.

“Soon, other voices began to interfere in this narrative. And those were voices reporting domestic violence, people who couldn’t afford to heat their homes during the day because they were normally away to work in that period,” she says. “And also people living in dwellings with no room for office equipment. Add to the mix was also that parents in many countries were expected to homeschool their children.”

The differing opinions made Maya curious about the different experiences that workers have while working from home. The increased level of negative emotions caught Maya’s attention, leading her to write her recent article. “These were some of the practical concerns, but also social and psychological concerns were added. People began reporting increased levels of loneliness, stress, alienation,” Maya says.

Emancipating From Isolation

An emancipated worker is a person working on their own, doing so autonomously, is self-directed and is pursuing ends that are valuable to them. Alienated workers are less autonomous, unable to make some of their own choices, are surveilled and miss a connection to their work.

After understanding that difference, you might identify as an alienated worker rather than an emancipated worker. Maya explained in her article that the alienation of the modern worker is a subtle and discreet process, making it harder to identify. When you aren’t seeing your coworkers and face-to-face time is limited, it’s easy to fall into feelings of isolation. In addition to being academically curious about people’s responses to pandemic-era work from home, Maya was also inspired by the writings of German philosopher Karl Marx.

“And what Marx says is basically that the stuff you sell, whether it is physical labor, emotional labor or cognitive labor, is the stuff you risk becoming alienated from,” Maya says. “So when you turn human capabilities into a commodity, the risk increases.”

Maya explains that Marx had three more factors that can increase the feelings of isolation and alienation at work: “the production process and your peers — because they’re not only colleagues, but they’re also your competitors in the job market — and you can become alienated from humanity,” she says. “And by that, he means that if you engage in activities, job-related activities that are harmful to people, to the planet, to humanity, then you are at risk of becoming alienated. Today we might call that moral stress, but he saw it already in the middle of the 19th century.”

Alienating Through Surveillance

Some people loved their work before the pandemic but have since lost that joy because of working from home and being surveilled. Employer surveillance has added a layer of creepiness that’s contributed to this sense of alienation.

Digital surveillance is only the latest form of employer oversight that dates back a long ways, with Maya noting Frederick Taylor, the American engineer who developed the theory of scientific management. “And he also invented the role of the manager, the supervisor. And one of the supervisor’s tasks was to monitor the workforce in a concrete, physical sense,” Maya says. “And later on in our time, digital tools have been invented that can monitor the employees on behalf of the manager.”

From monitoring software to always-on chat platforms, employers are intentional in checking up on workers. This can cause a significant amount of stress and pressure for people and alienate them from other things in their life, leading to feelings of loneliness in their own homes.

People who work at home have to be vigilant against the job, the employer taking over their homes, Maya explains. “It is an external force that is transgressing some boundaries into a space where it shouldn’t be present.”

[bctt tweet=” Work from home during the pandemic has raised practical, social and psychological concerns. ‘People began reporting increased levels of loneliness, stress, and alienation.’ says @MayaDroeschler. Tune in to the latest episode of #PunkRockHR to learn more!” via=”no”]

People in This Episode

Full Transcript

Laurie Ruettimann:

This episode of Punk Rock HR is sponsored by The Starr Conspiracy. The Starr Conspiracy is the B2B marketing agency for innovative brands creating the future of workplace solutions. For more information, head on over to the starrconspiracy.com.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Hey everybody, I’m Laurie Ruettimann. Welcome back to Punk Rock HR. My guest today is Maya Drøschler. She’s an author, editor and HR advisor based in Copenhagen. I’ve been following Maya for over a decade, and she recently published a provocative and interesting article called “Working from Home: Emancipation or Alienation of the White-Collar Worker.” I read this article and I thought, oh my goodness, I have to get Maya on the podcast. So that’s what we’re doing today. We’re talking about nuanced topics like alienation, isolation, belonging and what it feels like to be surveilled in your own home by your employer. So if any of that touches your life — and I bet it does because many of you are working from home — I hope you sit back and enjoy this fresh take on the work-from-home discussion with Maya Drøschler.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Hi Maya, welcome to the podcast.

Maya Drøschler:

Hi Laurie. Thanks for inviting me. It’s a great opportunity for me to share my thoughts with your audience.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, Maya, I’m so grateful you are here, and I’m pleased that my audience gets to meet you. I’ve been following you now for well over a decade, I believe. It’s a long time that I’ve known of your smart work. You’ve been active on social media. And so very quickly, can you tell us a little bit about who you are and where you’re based?

Maya Drøschler:

Sure. I’m based in Denmark. It’s one of the Scandinavian countries in the northern part of Europe, and we have this welfare state, which means that we have free access to health care and free education, including universities, and the flexicurity model that regulates the labor market, does that thing that it’s easy for employers to lay off people, but if you’re unemployed, you receive unemployment benefits from the state. And I looked it up, it’s about $2,800 a month. So there is this flexibility in the model, but of course these benefits and others cost some money, so we have a rather high tax pressure compared to the U.S. Around 50% of the Dane salaries go to paying taxes.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, Maya don’t be fooled like 50% of my salary goes to paying taxes, but we just don’t talk about that in America. And it goes to our military states. So, you know.

Maya Drøschler:

OK, OK.

Laurie Ruettimann:

It doesn’t go where the money should be going.

Well, I came to your latest article on Medium through social media, but I know your work as a human resources consultant, a transformational consultant. So before we get started talking about your really terrific article, why don’t you tell us a little bit about what you do for a living?

Maya Drøschler:

I run my own business, which I named Point of HR. You know, the point of HR, that’s what I’m doing. And I do consultancy work where I advise business leaders and, sometimes, HR people on developing and implementing different kinds of HR processes and practices in their organization, and that’s what I do. I also do speaking gigs in Danish. And workshops and all that.

I’m also an external editor at a publishing company where I edit business books and books on organizational development. And in fact, I also published my own book last year — “Organizations in Times of Transition” would be the English title — and it’s 700 pages long book. I didn’t write it all myself. I had scholars to write within their field of expertise. But I do a lot of different things, but there is a thread in it, and it’s human resources and leadership and so on.

Laurie Ruettimann:

But Maya, I think the thread is also human performance and human excellence. Like that’s one thing that I see as a theme in your work. And you wrote an article called “Working from Home: Emancipation or Alienation of the White-Collar Worker.” And I just wonder, why did you write that? And what themes were you trying to explore?

Maya Drøschler:

Well, like you, in the U.S., we have experienced multiple lockdowns during the last two years. And obviously because of COVID, people who were able to do their work from home were called to do so. In some periods, almost 50% of the Danish working population worked from home. And I believe that pattern is fairly consistent across all Western countries. And this prompted a huge academic interest in this new way of working, which wasn’t so new after all, but all of a sudden became very visible because so many were … affected by this practice. And where I began paying attention was the lack of consensus, that the experiences reported differed a lot.

In the early phases, people were very happy about this. They reported they saved the commuting time, they were in a relatively safe environment, they spent more time with the family and they also gained more freedom and more autonomy, and so on. That was the dominant narrative at the beginning. But soon other voices began to interfere in this narrative. And those were voices reporting domestic violence. People who couldn’t afford to heat their homes during the day because they were normally away to work in that period. And also people living in dwellings with no room for office equipment. Add to the mix was also that parents in many countries were expected to homeschool their children. And there were many different reports and experiences. And that made me curious.

These were some of the practical concerns, but also social and psychological concerns were added. People began reporting increased levels of loneliness, stress, alienation. Maybe they didn’t use the term “alienation,” but if one started examining what these voices actually said, that term would not be inappropriate to apply to the lived experience of so many.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, when I read your article about loneliness, isolation, alienation, these words to me had not been used consistently, especially here in America, around the work-from-home experience. And you write beautifully about the emancipation and alienation of employees who work from home. And I wonder, can you define some of these terms as they’re used in the article? What did you mean by emancipation?

Maya Drøschler:

Etymologically, emancipation is derived from Latin, and it is used about someone who’s set free from the power of another person. Autonomy is a Greek term, and it means that the individual or the self makes her own laws. So the autonomous subject is self-directed, and emancipation in this context is an experience of self-directedness and self-mastery. And it is also a state in which the subject has the freedom to pursue valuable ends. That is very important. And valuable ends could be anything from reducing workforce complexity to arranging some kind of social event in the workplace. The essential thing is that the worker herself or himself find the activity valuable.

And in our position to this self-directed subject is the alienated subject. And alienation means that one belongs to another, to a master. And in the alienated mode being one does not belong to oneself anymore. And that is a really, really creepy feeling.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Yeah, that is creepy.

Maya Drøschler:

And the alienation of the modern worker is very subtle, very discreet, you might say. You cannot call it out in any easy way. And that is maybe the reason why that it’s not used that much anymore.

Laurie Ruettimann:

So just to clarify, the emancipated worker is someone who is working on their own, autonomously, self-directed, and they’re working to fulfill interesting means to an end. They’re on a journey, and there’s value in that journey. And an alienated worker, it may even be a subtle alienation, is actually less autonomous, less able to make their own choices, probably surveilled and not really feeling like they’re connected to their work, or their work is not their own. Am I hearing you correctly?

Maya Drøschler:

Hmm, exactly. And I would also like to talk a little bit about Karl Marx, because some of his works inspired me to write this article and to get closer to this concept of alienation, because we have to turn to philosophy in part. And that’s why I also used … Karl Marx to find out what is this in a work context. And what Marx says is, basically, that the stuff you sell, whether it is physical labor, emotional labor or cognitive labor, is the stuff you risk becoming alienated from. So when you turn human capabilities into a commodity, the risk increases. And this is not to say that you are alienated every time you use your brain, or every time you use your legs and arms or something like that. Because he says — Marx — that if you have a direct connection or relationship to the receivers of your effort, you do not become alienated, but if you produce something that circulates in an anonymous market and to which your effort, your human capabilities are invested and embedded, the risk of alienation is present.

And this has also to do with the Marxist notions of exchange value and use value, because the same human capabilities can have exchange value in one situation and use value in another. And I would really like to mention an excellent example. And it’s a book published by the American professor of sociology Arlie Hochschild in 1983. And this book is called “The Managed Heart”. And in this book, she presents a study of the emotional labor performed by stewardesses at Delta Air Lines at the time. And the study shows that those feelings the stewardesses are supposed to express toward the customer, like kindness, are feelings they are estranged from, or alienated from, in their private life.

These feelings, they can’t get in touch with them without experiencing some strange sense of inauthenticity. And what these stewards are actually experiencing [is] that their kindness has turned into a commodity with exchange value. And this instrumentalizing and commodifying gesture is exactly what triggers alienation. And use value is a quite different thing. You don’t become alienated by showing a homeless man in the street kindness or by smiling at strangers. So that’s different. And Marx has three other factors that you can be alienated by in the work situation. That is the production process and your peers — because they’re not only colleagues, but they’re also your competitors in the job market — and you can become alienated from humanity. And by that, he means that if you engage in activities, job-related activities that are harmful to people, to the planet, to humanity, then you are at risk of becoming alienated, Today, we might call that moral stress, but he saw it already in the middle of the 19th century.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Yeah.

I was just thinking that, I mean, it’s so prescient how we feel about Karl Marx. Aside and even before COVID, these themes around alienation were ever present in our work, and then COVID adds another layer of complexity. But as you were talking, Maya, I was thinking about the warning that you should never try to make a business out of your passion or your hobby because you become alienated from that passion and that hobby. And I would say that is, pre-COVID, the story of my career. You know, I love the world of work. I loved writing. I love technology, and then I actually go and pursue it as a business, a second career post-human resources, and then it just becomes a job. It becomes a commodity.

And it also makes me think about essential workers during COVID, they go to work and they have to show empathy, they have to show kindness — nurses, doctors. And they become alienated from empathy and kindness themselves in the process of just being on the front lines. So that all really absolutely resonates.

You know, I think about workers who maybe enjoyed their work before COVID, and now they’re working from home, and they’re working all the time, and they’re now being surveilled at home. That adds another layer of complexity and creepiness, right? Your word, “creepiness,” to your point, but it’s becoming so common to surveil employees who work from home. I wonder how that’s contributing to that sense of alienation.

Maya Drøschler:

Exactly. And I would like to mention Jean-Paul Sartre now, the French philosopher from the 20th century, because he believes that alienation is constituted through the case of the other, but not some random other. It’s another with some kind of normative power, another who has the power to evaluate and judge, and another whose approval is always conditioned like the employer. So when I’m exposed to the case of the other, I am alienated from myself because I watch myself through the eyes of the other, through the normative horizon of the other. And that means I am turned into an object to myself, an object to be evaluated against the standard that does not belong to me.

And this situation obviously produces alienation and also shame. And surveillance has a long history in the physical workplace. Taylor — the American engineer Frederick Taylor — invented, well he developed his theory of scientific management. And he also invented the role of the manager, the supervisor.

And one of the supervisor’s tasks was to monitor the workforce in a concrete, physical sense. And later on in our time, digital tools have been invented that can monitor the employees on behalf of the manager, but it is still the same case. The case of the big other, the case of an agent that is able to include and exclude, that decides who is part of the herd and who is not. And when this case moves into the worker’s home, the feeling of alienation is intensified. Because in this very gesture, the personal and private dwellings are subjected to the norms which this case represents. And I could go on, because workplace norms also stick to the artifacts — the workplace artifacts like laptops and work papers and such and so on. So these artifacts are not neutral, like the case is not neutral. They carry values and norms with them and brings them into the home.

It’s very important for people working from home to pay attention that work does not colonize the home. I think that’s a term that is appropriate because that is the process that happens. And maybe it’s too strong a term. Maybe I should figure some different term. But I believe this process, in a micro perspective, in the singular home, is some of what is going on. It is an external force that is transgressing some boundaries into a space where it shouldn’t be present.

Laurie Ruettimann:

I like that. Maya, it’s provocative, and I find it to be correct. And I just wonder if alienation is ever helpful. And it’s a complicated question. In a regular work framework, alienation for the employer, for the organization, may help with productivity. But I know you think that alienation should be reduced as much as possible, but in some ways organizations have benefited from alienation. Does that make sense?

Maya Drøschler:

It does. And that’s exactly what Karl Marx also says. Well, that in your formulation, of course, it benefits employers, but I also must say that these abstract categories like capital and market and employer, they are too dominant because this is also about concrete people, concrete lives. And I would like to see that hierarchy reversed between work and life. I think the work — well, this is an ought — ought to adapt to life and not the other way around. So that’s my project. I’m also very influenced by an American feminist and professor Kathi Weeks, who writes about that we should work less.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, I definitely believe that. I mean, I’m an advocate for universal basic income and making sure that everybody is provided for, and also detaching from work. So many people, Maya — this is just a tangent — but they say, oh, I worked 60 hours this week. And I want to say, give me your best 30, and then go do something else. Go be interesting, go live an amazing life. Because when you do that, you have an amazing life. You bring that good stuff back to your work. You bring that energy.

Maya Drøschler:

I totally agree. And what I personally have, I said I’ve written a book the last years and I do a lot of speaking around Denmark, and what I achieved is because I am my own employer and I can decide for myself what I will spend my time on. And these things would not be in the world if I had been in my previous job as an HR manager or HR business partner. So beautiful things happen if people are free to be creative and to take care of each other and all that stuff. So I also believe we have a huge reproduction crisis in Western societies at the moment where, well, at least in Denmark, I live that way myself, too, with four children and all of them way in kindergarten and school and a full-time job.

Thinking about this, I don’t think it was worthy in a way as of the way we lived. Two full time working parents and four children. Well, it was just a labor camp. It was just from 6 in the morning till 10 in the evening. You just work, work, work, work, and you get numb by living such a life.

Laurie Ruettimann:

This is fascinating to me because, as we transition back to the economies of the world starting up again, it would be very easy for people who reconfigured their lives during COVID and started to reconnect with their children in a different way, or working mothers who stepped out of the workforce, to come back in and to go back to their lives in 2019. That systematized numb way of dropping your kids off at school, which feels like you’re dropping them off at the factory, going to work in your own factory job, being alienated from your work, coming home, having a system with your children. So you’re basically just managing their time, feeding them and getting them back to bed.

I think my fear is that starts to reemerge as people start to go back to work or gets even worse. That’s why we’re talking about this today, and why we’re talking about how we can potentially improve the post-COVID landscape of the world of work. And one of the things your article does is offer ideas on how managers, supervisors and HR professionals can produce the best conditions for employees working from home. And so I wonder, what should we be paying attention to?

Maya Drøschler:

I think that the success depends on whether HR managers are able to strike the delicate balance between meeting individual needs and also safeguarding the interest of the organization. And by organization, I don’t mean individual managers’ personal needs of control. Because many organizations, not all, but many, do not need people to be in a specific place in a specified number of hours. Rather they need the people to perform the agreed tasks. If that can be done in another setting and at a time other than between 9 and 5, the needs of the organization are fulfilled. And so there is no conflict of interest.

However, the most important thing if working from home is going to be a success, is that HR managers listen to the employee’s individual needs. Some may not be able to work from home at all for different reasons. And others may wish to work from home one day, a week or four days a week. And all these preferences can change throughout a person’s work life. I know this takes more coordination on the manager’s part, but it is necessary if we are to abandon the factory notion of the office workplace. And by that, I mean that the structure and principle of the factory have been able to maintain themselves, even in organizations that have nothing to do with physical and material production.

It is amazing that we tend to believe that such a structure represents the best option for knowledge and office workers. We have just replicated the original factory structure invented at Marx’s time onto a knowledge-producing assemblage without asking any critical questions at all. The factory structure is a paradigm we must leave behind. And I believe that working from home is one of the core components in such an endeavor.

Laurie Ruettimann:

So, Maya, I’m with you. Like, I don’t ever want to replicate the factory environment ever again, whether it’s in a traditional, modern building or in our homes. Like, I’m done with the factory model of working. And in your article, you quote the German sociologist Hartmut Rosa, who claims that we should seek inspiration in pre-modern societies to move forward and obtain a more sustainable working life going forward. And I just wonder if you would elaborate on that, how do we move forward?

Maya Drøschler:

Well, the point is that the distinction between work and life, or between workplace and home, has only been in effect for two or 300 years. Before that, Homo sapiens lived for thousands of years without any such distinction. And this is not to romanticize past ways of living, but merely to make the point that this distinction is a construction and in no way natural or given. The division of workspace and home space, work time and leisure time is constructed by the catalyst order. The division was constituted when the first factories were built in England in the 18th century, and we should therefore not accept such divisions without asking these critical questions. In pre-modern societies, people worked where they lived or very close to where they lived, and they worked until the needs of the family members or the flock were met. When these needs were satisfied, people simply stopped working.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Brilliant, just amazing.

Maya Drøschler:

And it is no secret that people lived a far more sustainable life in these pre-modern societies. They didn’t overexploit nature — not the nature within and not the nature outside themselves. Well, that is also a forced distinction because we are entangled in so many ways with nature. But the point is that the past may teach us something if we let it, this doesn’t mean that we should all live in caves. It simply means the past ways of living represent opportunities to understand alternative ways of living and working and a whole other perspective on the ranking between the two. And that is also my project. I want the hierarchy reversed.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Wait, tell me more about that.

Maya Drøschler:

Well, I think that work should adapt to human lives and not the other way around. We are arranging everything in our lives according to what our work requires. And that perspective, I want to shake it all, and well, that’s kind of idealist, I know.

Laurie Ruettimann:

I feel as if the only way to shake it is to show that it can be successful, and at scale. And everybody out there in the media, in pop culture, in the world, who serves as an example of a successful human being identifies work first, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, they’re all white men, right? And Western white men. But even your Chinese and Russian oligarchs, right? It’s work-first, it’s identity-first. And it’s not the model that you and I strive to achieve, but those individuals have ruined the planet. It’s not like they’ve done anything net-positive for our planet. So I’m with you, but where’s the model of the person who’s doing it right?

Maya Drøschler:

Yeah. That’s a great question. Because what I do is I offer criticism and no solutions, but if you want suggestions, proposals, you have two, I believe. Turn to utopians as a utopian theory. I’m not into that field, but I know some work on it. But also you name the universal basic income. That is also an element. And there are movements around the world trying to achieve that goal.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, I don’t mind offering a criticism without a solution because it gets other people to start thinking about the idea and to contribute their solutions. You have to motivate other people to tackle a problem. So I don’t mind saying that the titans of industry are successful but they’re ruining the planet, and I would like to see other alternative ways of running businesses. I hope that one day, whether it’s through utopian thinking or philosophies or through someone who’s just practical, they rewrite the handbook and they do things differently. So I’m OK with that kind of aspirational thinking.

I have one final question for you. Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of work?

Maya Drøschler:

Well, I’m optimistic in that sense that I think that the planet and the climate will decide.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Oh, yeah.

Maya Drøschler:

Yeah, I think we have to change our ways of working. It will be mandatory.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Nature always finds a way, doesn’t it?

Maya Drøschler:

Yeah.

Well, COVID didn’t do it in the beginning. We felt so, but I believe that we have to, as I said before, we have to produce less. We have to consume less, and we have to live more sustainable healthy lives in the ecosystems that we are embedded in. We have to leave the thought of being superior as humans. So the people you mentioned before, they have this superiority idea and —

Laurie Ruettimann:

I would say narcissism. Yes.

Maya Drøschler:

OK. But I think that if nothing else happens, then we will have to adjust and do things in new ways because there is no other option. So I’m optimistic.

Laurie Ruettimann:

I don’t know, Maya. I mean, you’ve got that nice Danish way of being an optimist, but also being realistic. I like it.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, please tell us all, what’s the best way to connect with you and your work? How do we find out more about what’s happening in Maya’s world?

Maya Drøschler:

Well, I publish a lot, but mostly in Danish, but —

Laurie Ruettimann:

Sometimes in English. That’s how I read your article on Medium, which we’ll include in the show notes.

Maya Drøschler:

Yeah. Great.

Well on Twitter, I don’t tweet in English, so you can find me on Twitter and also on LinkedIn. That would be the most ideal places to find me.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Well, Twitter translates your tweets into English, so that’s a nice little benefit of Twitter. And so there’s no excuse for people not to find you on Twitter and LinkedIn and follow along.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Thanks again for being a guest today.

Maya Drøschler:

Thanks for having me, Laurie. It’s been a big pleasure.

Laurie Ruettimann:

Hey everybody. I hope you enjoyed this episode of Punk Rock HR. We are proudly underwritten by The Starr Conspiracy. The Starr Conspiracy is the B2B marketing agency for innovative brands, creating the future of workplace solutions. For more information, head on over to the starrconspiracy.com.

Punk Rock HR is produced and edited by Rep Cap, with special help from Michael Thibodeaux and Devon McGrath. For more information, show notes, links, and resources, head on over to punkrockhr.com. Now that’s all for today and I hope you enjoyed it. We’ll see you next time on Punk Rock HR.