The HR Daily have written an article explaining that nearly two in three workers  are at risk of fleeing their jobs with the next 12 months. They say that there is a large proportion of the workforce with potentially itchy feet. Now that the job market shows signs of recovery, those people will feel more confident about making a move elsewhere.

"People systems" and leaders falling short
The HR Daily article follows the release of Organisational Effectiveness and Employee Engagement, a Right Management report based on a survey of nearly 29,000 workers from around the world.

It reveals that fewer than one in two employees believe they work in an organisation with the "people systems" and leaders capable of driving the "right behaviours", and only 54 per cent think their company has a "positive culture".

In Australia, some 36 per cent of workers are "committed to making the organisation a success", compared to 11 per cent in Japan, 43 per cent in New Zealand and 44 per cent in the US.

The transport, storage and communication sector has the lowest engagement levels (at 30%), followed by manufacturing (32%) and the retail trade (33%).

Mining has the highest engagement rates (48%), followed, at a distant second, by finance, insurance and business services (38%).

Tellingly, the survey also reveals a strong relationship between high levels of disengagement and low levels of perceived customer satisfaction, making it particularly difficult for employers to execute or achieve "steady business results".

Employers must strive to "engage and delight"
Employers must continuously "search for new and better ways to engage employees" and "delight customers and stakeholders", the report states.

But business leaders "have a long way to go to align and engage their employees to their strategy".

According to Beattie, engagement levels in Australia have been steadily declining over the last four years (from 38.1% in 2005 to 35.7% in December 2008).

"This decline in engagement isn't surprising, given the sense of dislocation during the global financial crisis," she says.

"However, it is concerning. Research has consistently shown that employee engagement is powerfully linked to a range of success factors, including productivity, customer satisfaction and staff retention.

"Employers battling their way out of the downturn really need to get it right. When the economy is tight... companies are even more dependent on the discretionary effort of their people; they need them to do more than simply turn up."

According to the report, engagement - or the degree of employee/organisational alignment - is driven by the skill, alacrity and support of leaders, customer relationships, training investment and competitive pay.

Achieving a truly engaged workforce, it says, hinges on "investing in the selection and development of capable leaders, employees' learning and development and getting reward systems right".

Employers must strive for "a 'fit for purpose' organisational structure where people understand what is expected of them and what they are accountable for".

This, in turn, should create a positive workplace culture, it says, in which the "systems, symbols and behaviours that leaders and other employees are exposed to" are aligned with the business strategy.

By Aaron Dodd, Operations Director of the Mindset Group

Prior to the GFC we saw articles almost daily on the so-called talent shortage. Such clichéd headlines as “Winning the War for Talent” were commonplace. My own company, Mindset used them as did everyone else. These headlines and articles have subsided of late but the talent shortage is still there. It's like a wild beast hibernating; waiting for the thaw - which will be here sooner than most Australians think. In fact, many would argue that it’s waking now as the extra cold metaphorical winter we've just experienced comes to an end.

Apart from the shortage of growth capital that the GFC has induced, the biggest threat to corporate growth in Australia (indeed the Western world) is the shortage of talent. The only reason the headlines have subsided is that the demand side of the economic equation has dropped. The supply side has not moved.

So what has caused this talent shortage?

• The populations of Western economies, such as Australia, are aging. As more of the population retire and leave the workforce, we have relatively fewer productive members remaining in it.

• The dwindling labour supply is increasingly less qualified. In Australia this is the result of decades of financial neglect of the country's schools, TAFEs and universities. Both Labor and Liberal parties have been guilty of this, although under John Howard, the issue  became noticeably worse with a corresponding increase in expensive private school enrollments as desperate aspirational parents attempted to provide their kids with an education supposedly better than the States' systems (although often not).

• The increasing affluence of Australian society has meant that most people are wealthier. Many formerly working-class families are now economically classed as “middle-class” although most would not realise or acknowledge it. What this has meant is that their children now have different career expectations  and are now no longer interested in the sorts of labour-intensive jobs their parents may well have been happy to accept at their age.

What is the effect of the talent shortage? 

 

• Like any economic equation the shortage of talent has put pressure on its cost; i.e. wages have increased relative to their productive merit. This has in turn put pressure on the prices of services and manufactured goods. In numerous cases it has become more cost effective to manufacture goods in talent rich, low-cost countries such as China and India. Even services are now often outsourced to call-centres in India, the Philippines and others. 
• If a business cannot pay more for its staff, find more productive ways of utilising their people or relocate then it is likely to be in serious financial trouble in the medium-term. As we move out of the effects of the GFC, there will be a significant period of employment turmoil within Australia. Many unhappy employees who were biding their time will start actively looking for alternative employment. Adding to this, as employer confidence returns they will start seeking more employees to help them grow their businesses...i.e. the demand side of the equation will rise again increasing the gap between the static supply side and the rising demand side still further.

As an employer, what can you do?

• Proactivebusinesses are focusing on their existing staff NOW. They are putting in place whatever measures they can to retain their staff and minimise the losses they expect from the coming turmoil. My company Mindset, has been active with numerous clients determining staff engagement levels, coaching managers to be better motivational leaders and putting in place effective performance management, feed-back and feed-forward systems.

• Other businesses are utilising Mindset's talent-mapping processes to effectively understand and develop relationships with the key people in their sector so that when they need those people they can simply tap them on the shoulder and draw them into their businesses with minimal fuss and expense.

•  Many organisations are reviewing their relationships with their recruitment suppliers. They are re-establishing relationships so that when the need comes they can speed up the briefing process. Most companies are now looking for relationships with highly consultative recruitment suppliers recognising that traditional transactional contingent recruiters offer little value, especially when the going gets tough and they have to find candidates from outside the industry or from alternative more innovative sources.

   

For maximum strategic impact these actions need to start NOW. For a confidential discussion on how Mindset's transformation, talent and technology divisions can work together to deliver an integrated approach to delivering  solutions to your business's forthcoming recruitment and retention challenges, please contact us. 

By Aaron Dodd, Operation Director of the Mindset Group

This week has seen us witness the hilarious and ongoing Kraft iSnack2.0 marketing debacle. Although no longer Australian owned, the Vegemite brand is an icon in Australia and New Zealand. Like any icon brand, it takes a brave marketer to try and change it. The only comparative episode I can think of was the global “new’ Coca Cola of few years back. This was met with such significant public uproar that Coke eventually dropped the “new” Coke and reverted back to Coke “Classic”. Arguably iSnack2.0 is a new product, it hasn’t replaced Vegemite, but the icon brand has been seriously compromised. It’s not a lethal blow, but the brand will carry some scars for some time yet. After only 4 days Kraft have now announced that the brand will change as Australians don’t like it! How many millions has this cost Kraft? A 30sec advert in the middle of the AFL Grand Final was selling for over $120,000 alone.

What has made this worse for Kraft, is the publicity leading up to the new name launch during the AFL Grand Final (one of the biggest TV viewing events in Australia each year). For months we have seen the product on our Supermarket shelves with label marked “name me”. A competition has been running to source name ideas. According to Kraft they have had over 48,000 suggestions from 35,000 different people, with 16,000 unique suggestions. So from this, the best they could come up with was iSnack2.0.

So how does something like this happen? Kraft has a large consumer marketing team, probably well paid, well qualified and experienced. In my experience when situations such as this arise, it’s usually due to one or both of the following;

1. Groupthink (according to Wikipedia) is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimise conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analysing, and evaluating ideas. This can occur most commonly if the dominant team member likes an idea and is surrounded by position-security team members (“yes men or women”). Anecdotally there has been a rise in groupthink occurrence during the GFC as team members can be more reluctant to challenge the status quo or their Manager.

2. A lack of external perspective. Creative marketers need to be constantly stimulated by the world and people around them. They need to have their finger on the pulse of their target demographics and come up with product and campaigns that will grab their demographics’ attention. If a marketer is so out of touch that they make a decision based on their gut feel and personal preference, then it is likely to be out of touch with reality and fail

No doubt Kraft had some sort of external Marketing advice. Did that external advice have the acuity, confidence and independence to challenge the selection of the iSnack2.0 brand? If so was the advice heeded, or was it ignored? We will probably never know.

Mindset’s consulting business prides itself on its ability and willingness to challenge the established ways of doing something in a client organisation. After all when a consultant is engaged, you are seeking their external perspective and ability to bring something new to the table. A good consultant will break down Groupthink and throw new ideas into the mix.

Whether it’s recruiting a new team member, establishing new leadership paradigms or aligning individual performance with corporate goals, each of these can often be better achieved by bringing in an external consultant.

Recruitment and selection is especially prone to Groupthink when handled internally. How often have I heard the common refrain “we want another Roger” (or Bill or Diane etc)? A critical analysis of the position may in fact reveal a very different type of person is now required in the role. In fact the reason good old Roger left was that the role’s critical demands had changed quite markedly over time and the role no longer suited him. Mindset’s consultative transformational recruitment approach can and will uncover these anomalies and allow you to make better selection decisions.

Contact Mindset next time you need to make a critical strategic HR decision. How costly would an iSnack2.0 selection decision be to your business? Probably many times more than the investment you would make with the Mindset Group. 

By Aaron Dodd, Operations Director at the Mindset Group

On the weekend I watched the AFL Grand Final and witnessed probably two of the greatest AFL teams in history battle out an exciting tight contested game. Neither team deserved to lose, Geelong prevailed in the end. St Kilda’s leaders will use the loss as a motivator for next and subsequent years.

Many parallels can be drawn between successful sports teams and businesses (teams of people as well). A quick review of the two teams leads to some interesting (though not unexpected) conclusions.

Both clubs have recruited and selected well. Without the raw talent, no amount of excellent coaching will transform it. This is a fundamental precondition for any successful organisation. In the business world, there has been much criticism of recruiters of late. In my opinion, much of it is justified. However, specialist, consultative recruiters have continued to do well and be in demand throughout the financial crisis. This is because they create genuine value for their clients. In the AFL football world, most clubs recognise that sourcing talent is a critical skill that they may not have in-house. These clubs routinely use external talent scouts (the code’s equivalent of recruiters) to spot talent in the junior leagues, remote leagues (e.g. the NTFL and even Gaelic Football in Ireland). Not only do these scouts (recruiters) identify the talent, they then facilitate bringing the individual to the respective club. All AFL clubs will acknowledge that good talent scouts can make the difference to their clubs’ successes. It is no different in the business world, and let’s face it, AFL clubs are big business.

Once the talent is sourced, success is then determined by club leadership and coaching. St Kilda is arguably one of the least successful clubs in the competition’s history having famously only ever won one premiership (by a single point) in 1966. Although I’m a Kangaroos supporter, most of my local family are passionate St Kilda tragics so I have some insight into the club. It is a club renowned for management instability and dubious Machiavellian internal politics. For decades, club members have watched their beloved club tear itself apart from the inside. Lack of success on-field has inevitably followed. Only in the last few years has management/leadership stability finally come to the club and with that success has followed. A key lesson to be learned therefore is strong, stable, consistent focused leadership. The club has devised a strategic plan and the management team, functioning as a team, has delivered it. Success has followed. Geelong similarly has had a stable successful leadership team that has now delivered them two premierships in three years. For success therefore, businesses must have stable, consistent and proactive leadership with a defined plan for success.

And finally, one of the keys for delivering on-field success for all AFL clubs is performance management. Every player is meticulously measured and tracked. Many wear miniature GPS units on the field to track how far they run, where they run etc. Each player is constantly measured on dozens of KPIs; fitness, skin-fold tests, handling-errors, teamwork, skills, time-keeping, tackle-counts, goals, to name but a few. Each player knows their individual KPIs and also recognises that if they don’t meet them they could be dropped. Equally, if they do meet them, they will be rewarded with more game time, better contracts etc.

In summary therefore, like football, your business will be successful if you recruit and select well (don’t hesitate to use outside advice from competent consultative recruiters if it helps to get even a marginally better result). Ensure your business has a stable cohesive and focused leadership team and make sure you scrupulously measure what you actually do (both company and individuals).

The Mindset Group, can assist with all three areas; recruitment and selection, leadership development and performance management. Contact us for a confidential discussion on how we can help your organisation win a premiership.

By Aaron Dodd, Operations Director at the Mindset Group.

Much has been written of late about the “personality” of so-called Generation Y. They are a much maligned generation. My generation (X) seems to see them as disloyal, lacking in perseverance, short attention spans, seeking instant gratification etc. From an HR perspective there has been much written about how to attract, motivate and retain them in the workforce. Before the GFC these articles were everywhere. We see them less now, but the perceived issue will return as Western economies recover.

I sit on my son’s High School curriculum committee as a parent representative. There are student representatives also on the committee. The young adults I have met there are well-spoken, hard-working and have a strong moral sense to them. They show respect to their teachers and peers alike. Clearly many of the negative comments about Generation Y as a whole are stereotypes. However like many stereotypes, there is a grain of truth to them.

It is true that Generation Y tend not to have the ingrained company loyalty that my generation have. They are more forthright and blunt in their statements if they disagree with a policy or management decision. Generation Y is also much more likely to make an employment decision (or unemployment decision) based on environmental concerns or fit with organisational culture. In short if they don’t like how they or their peers are treated or the way their employer treats their community or the environment they will leave.

Many Generation Y do not suffer from affluenza the way my generation does. They are not motivated by the big McMansions, the European car in the drive and the overseas holidays. As many of my Generation X friends, peers and colleagues mid-life crises can attest, money doesn’t make you happy.

I argue that perhaps it’s we who are wrong? Misguided loyalty means many of us have worked for years for long hours for poor pay in crappy conditions on the promise that one day we’ll get that promotion and that the company will always look after us. This is a notion that must be cast away. The fact that Generation Ys have the confidence to look us in the eye and say “No I’m not putting up with this” is the correct attitude. Generation Y’s focus on the environment; in fact their focus on fixing the mess that my generation’s afflueza created is laudable.

So as employers, before we write off Generation Y, perhaps we should take a long hard look at our values, how we treat our employees and the effect that our businesses and lifestyles have on those around us. All of us will probably be found wanting in some areas. One thing is for sure, Generation Y may not have our lifestyle, but they and their families and communities will likely be richer for it. 

HR Daily have written an article explaining that the brands of top-performing companies are characterised by an emphasis on the experience of employees instead of customers.

The article explains that the “best employers” are differentiated from other employers in five key ways, one of these areas is leadership.

Leadership commitment
Leadership commitment is the fundamental starting point for high-engagement employers, David Clarke says. "This commitment is not about saying the right things, but exhibiting behaviours and making decisions that clearly signal people are their greatest asset."

The behaviour of leaders needs to demonstrate that developing and retaining strong talent is a critical element of business success, he says, "but their role goes beyond this. Leaders in 'best employer' organisations play a pivotal role in defining and championing the organisation's values and building a culture and an environment that values people".

Leaders, he says, set the tone through their openness, involvement and leadership style. "While they instil a strong sense of accountability, they also make a commitment to growing and stretching their people."

Clarke notes that while senior leadership is generally ranked in the top five most important engagement drivers during stable times, it ranks in the top two during times of change.

"Clearly, in the current economic environment, it is critical for leaders to demonstrate their commitment to the people in their organisation, and ensure that this message is effectively cascaded to managers."

Atlassian are a Sydney-based, enterprise software company. They provide products to over 15,000 customers in 113 countries. They are currently recruiting 32 engineers for their Sydney office.

Atlassian have set specific rules for recruiters who want to work with them. Calling them Bounty Hunters and they've set the following recruiting rules:

Rule 1: You can't empty your candidate database into our inbox.
The first time you send us candidates, you can only submit a maximum of 4 candidates (across a 5 month period).

Rule 2: Great candidate, means a great relationship
Make sure that these candidates are awesome. If one (or more) of these 4 candidates is hired, you are eligible to submit more candidates and become our recruitment partner.

Rule 3: Unsuitable candidates, sorry mate!
If none of these candidates you put forward is good enough, then we must unfortunately part ways.

More information can be found on the atlassian website.  

Our response to this is:

Mindset's talent division operates with a different process and methodology to most. Mindset takes a long term consultative partnership approach with its clients to ensure that the role is scoped in its entirety using our High Performance Role Clarity (HPRC) Definition process.

This takes in not just skills, qualifications and experiences but also maps out the ideal personality profile for that particular role at that point in time. The HPRC takes into account the multiple and often conflicting requirements of the role’s various stakeholders.

Once the role is scoped Mindset then goes through a comprehensive talent sourcing exercise so that we then have a pool of candidates to select from. Mindset then works with its clients through a structured screening interview, assessment, debrief and reference checking process to be able to make a final recommendation to our clients.

The HPRC, our process, the assessment etc all create significant value for our clients, not least of which is that they end up with a candidate who will deliver the required results in a shorter ramp-up time and with an excellent fit for the company culture, and a much longer “guarantee” period. However to deliver this result, a Mindset consultant must also do significantly more than a conventional “flick & stick” recruiter and as a result we have to charge more for our services, and only a retained basis.

Throughout the GFC our recruitment volumes have increased as a result of this focus on creating client value. Mindset has been recruiting new consultants to keep up with the volume of work while others have been shedding staff.

Our take on Atlassian is that it is an approach that will work to screen out the vast bulk of contingency recruiters who add little value to their clients’ businesses. However, the Atlassian approach also takes little account of innovative more-value added recruitment and selection approaches. It tars the whole industry with the same brush.

Mindset won’t participate as 1) the fees aren’t worth our efforts and 2) Atlassian probably wouldn’t appreciate the value of our approach and therefore be prepared to pay what our service is worth....and hey, we’re cool with that! Some companies just aren’t ready for us.

The HR leader and Libby Sartain have reported that CEO’s now rank HR as one of the functions that adds the most value to their organisation. CEO’s commented that people issues, such as finding and keeping the right talent and building a high-performance culture, are at the top of the corporate strategic agenda as keys to sustainable competitive advantage. By focusing on HR you can easily add value to any organisation.

Where HR can add the most value
Start the culture conversation at all levels. One way to accomplish this is to conduct a cultural assessment or audit of your organisation through employee surveys, focus groups or interviews. Review your organisational history, leadership styles, HR programming and industry practices to determine what currently drives and reinforces the culture. Finally, what is your customer experience? What cultural elements are obvious to customers? Is culture aligned with business strategy? Where are the disconnects? What needs to change? This can be the basis for healthy discussion at team meetings and employee chat sessions.

Develop a business case for cultural change. Why is the change needed? How will desired changes in culture support the business strategy?

Work with the senior leadership team to determine the desired culture. Core values, desired behaviours and shared vision are essential for a positive culture change effort to succeed. Every leader must embrace the need to change, or it won’t happen. Senior leaders must make new behaviours their way of life to reinforce desired change.

Develop an agenda or action plan for enhancing the culture or bringing about change. Start with the highest priorities and work on the toughest issues. For your culture to become self replicating, the way things are done will have to reinforce the core values and the culture.

Communicate what needs to change and why. Solicit input from people. Once the needed changes and process for change is defined, tell people what is expected. What are the rewards for changing, and the consequences for more of the same.

Change the organisational structure to enable change. Find new ways to accomplish work tasks. Use teams for one-time projects. Broaden roles and responsibilities.

Acquire talent based on cultural fit. Identify the characteristics of people who exhibit those behaviours that you’ve identified as desirable. The people who fit and thrive in your culture will perpetuate that culture in everything they do. If you have to choose between the candidate who has better skills or knowledge but doesn’t fit, and a candidate who is slightly less qualified but fits culturally, choose the slightly less qualified person and provide the necessary training or on-the-job experience. Get rid of those who don’t fit in the culture.

Redesign your on-boarding process. Make sure that every new hire knows what it will take to fit in, and understands the cultural imperatives. Talk about the ways of working that lead to success and those that will derail careers. Create legendary stories of successes and failures.

Create cultural messages. Be sure that every meeting, every training program, every communication to people includes cultural messaging and reinforces the values, mission, traditions and practices.

Involve everyone. Southwest Airlines has a culture committee, but there are many ways to get people involved. Try focus groups around topics. Form cross functional teams. Call random groups of employees together for monthly breakfast or lunch meetings. Engage the help and support of a group of passionate, committed people to identify cultural disconnects and recommend remedies.

Build an internal brand that supports the external brand. Make a promise to deliver a consistent employee experience. Be sure that your employees know the differentiating elements in their experience in the organisation that will enhance their work lives and careers. Begin to create an employer of choice reputation internally and externally.

Recognise and reward results. Your recognition and rewards should support the culture that you are working to reinforce.

Cultivate leaders who promote your culture. Develop excellent leaders who will propel the culture down the ranks. Identify high potential leaders and promote them. Invest in leadership development programs. Be sure content reinforces cultural messages. Keep the good ones, and get rid of those who are unable to pass the culture on.

Make it interesting and fun. Create contests, activities that enhance the culture. Decorate the office in inspiring ways. Celebrations and events can reinforce the message.

Use HR tools. Something as mundane as the annual benefits enrolment can be a source of key cultural messages. Every training class should reinforce the basic behaviours and values that reinforce the culture. Performance review forms should measure cultural fit, as well as, job performance.

No one should be locked out of the efforts to build a high-performance culture. Culture has to become the DNA that forms the building blocks over everything else. So the entire organisation must have a role in keeping it alive. Work with corporate communications, advertising, and marketing to capture the culture messages and tout these internally and externally. Let product management see that new product development manifests the cultural values in the way it responds to the marketplace demand for quality and service. Work with your legal department to demonstrate the company culture by developing ethical standards and a code of conduct that is not just in compliance but also the right thing to do.

And remember that no, one department can force corporate culture on to the rest of the company. You must achieve buy-in from everyone, from the CEO all the way down. This way you play it safe and also to win!

Human Resources IQ has written an article claiming that the current economic situation is creating difficulties for human resources leaders.

The economic challenges that we are facing are creating a difficult environment for human resources leaders. Many companies are simultaneously experiencing surplus and scarcity of talent and are struggling to find the right human resources delivery models, the right labor and organizational structure and solutions for attracting and retaining key talent. In recent years, a distinct trend has emerged. More companies are selecting human resources leaders who do not come from traditional human resources backgrounds. An unscientific look at recent changes in human resources leadership shows that nearly two in five human resources leaders have come from outside the human resources function in the past five years versus pervious trends of one in 10. Reasons cited by corporations are many, including:

• An increasing need to get the people part of the business right
• Concern over the ability of traditional human resources leaders to understand the company and deliver business-oriented solutions
• “Human Resources Transformation” initiatives that are too slow to deliver results
• An inability of human resources to get costs under control
• A lack of robust people analytics

The emerging model is to place a strong operations leader in the top human resources spot and surround him or her with the appropriate experts who have deep functional knowledge. Operations leaders tend to have demonstrated strong people management skills in their roles and are seen as strong people managers. The expectation is that these leaders can model the behaviors of good managers and better balance business needs with more traditional human resources concerns. In addition, there is a strong focus on operational leaders who have led business transformation efforts and have a strong grasp of metrics and cost-cutting. Their mandate is often to simultaneously make human resources more efficient and effective with a strong focus on improving business results.

This trend has been enabled by a number of changes in the vendor marketplace, including the evolution of both the human resources outsourcing and human resources systems markets. Companies have more and more options for getting core human resources services and technology delivered and can find others to do many of the transactional activities. This allows these operational leaders to leverage their external relationships while focusing on the most strategic human resources priorities for the business. In addition, having the right staff with the appropriate expertise is critical to making these leaders successful.

Read the full article.

HR leader explains the new discrimination law powers of the Fair Work Ombudson should cause concern amongst employers.   

The recent changes to the Federal Disability Discrimination Act should not be employers’ greatest concern. The impact of the new discrimination law powers of the Fair Work Ombudsman are of more significance, according to Jane Seymour of Justitia Lawyers & Consultants.

Although the changes to the Disability Discrimination Act, which came into effect on 5 August, will affect employers, Seymour said the newly introduced right of employees to make a discrimination complaint to the Fair Work Ombudsman should cause employers more concern.

“The recent changes to the Federal disability legislation do change the detail of the law, but not so significantly that employers can either relax or, on the other hand, have to significantly tighten their practice,” said Seymour.

She said what should be of more concern for employers is potential prosecution by the Fair Work Ombudsman for taking discriminatory “adverse action” – where employees can make a direct complaint to the Fair Work Ombudsman in relation to disability (and other types of ) discrimination.

“This adds a much greater risk for the employer who puts a foot wrong in the area of disability,” said Seymour. “Employers could face investigation, prosecution and potentially a penalty of up to $33,000 for each breach.”

Since 1 July the Fair Work Ombudsman can start legal proceedings against an employer found to be discriminating against an employee.

The recent changes to the Disability Discrimination Act include the introduction of an explicit obligation to provide “reasonable adjustments” and extending the availability of the “inherent requirements” and “unjustifiable hardship” defences.

“One of the main changes is that the onus of proof has shifted from the employee to the employer,” said Seymour.