Inside Anthropic’s Culture: Learn Faster, Dream Bigger

0:00 And I hear lots of these conversations about AI adoption. Intrinsically a lot of people in talking about it are using a metaphor of AI as a tool. I think the right metaphor for it is you have a new member joining your team. When you onboard a new team member, first of all, you need to make sure that team member has a lot of context. AI actually needs to be told like here's what we're doing, here's how you fit >> and hey, how do you think you can help here? What is happening to the organizations that are onboarding AI, let's say, is congratulations, everybody at your company now runs a team, right?

0:25 Right. So I think we also have this old frame of like there are elite managers and there are individual contributors and those are very different jobs and I think more and more of those are not very different jobs >> because every individual contributor in your company now has the ability to be running this team of AI agents. >> So I want to hear more about how you actually create that culture of experimentation. Anthropic famously has deep history around experimenting. I think this is going to be one of the distinguishers between like what are going to be the great organizations of the future and what are going to be the great organizations of the past which is like how much are these organizations innovative focused on learning focused on agility and flexibility. Everything you were doing in your business before came at the cost of another thing that you weren't doing in your business or an idea that you weren't pursuing or a new business line. You're in a world in which everybody is becoming much more productive. You can then take that productivity into like well great we will keep our ambitions the same and we will just need fewer people. Or you can say like, "Oh my gosh, my ambitions can get larger here.

1:15 If we're not failing, sometimes we're not dreaming big enough." This is Below the Surface, where we talk to leaders at category defining companies to learn how they're reshaping their organizations right now. I'm Joel Emerson, co-founder and CEO at Paradigm. We're building surface to help people teams create the conditions for performance, productivity, and innovation at a time when so much is changing. My guest today is Hannah Pritchette, chief people officer at Anthropic, the AI lab behind Claude. Hannah's route into this work is anything but standard.

1:48 She studied linguistics, worked in trust and safety at Facebook, and spent years in risk and payments operations at Stripe before building and scaling teams in talent acquisition. And at her last company, Binty, she led people and at one point even stepped in as interim head of engineering. So many of the conversations I'm having with leaders right now center on AI transformation. How to drive adoption, how to change workflows, how the shape of the people team should change in the age of AI. So I thought, who better to learn from than the chief people officer at the company whose products are driving so much of that transformation in the first place.

2:24 Here's Hannah. Hannah, it's so great to have you here. >> It's great to be here. So AI adoption is one of the themes that comes up in every conversation I have with chief people officers at every organization and every stage that I talk to and we have you here from Anthropic to tell us a little bit about it. So I would love to just start with how does anthropic think about this? What does this look like internally for you?

2:47 >> Yeah, for sure. So, I am formerly trained as a linguist, which is maybe an unexpected background for my profession, but I'm going to use that for a minute to nitpick your words actually because I pay attention to things like this. >> And one of the things my grad school department was famous for was there was a professor who wrote a lot about metaphors and the way the metaphor the metaphorical frame you use that influences the way you think about something. So, you're talking about AI adoption here and I hear lots of these conversations about AI adoption, etc., etc. Like intrinsically a lot of people in talking about it are using a metaphor of AI as a tool like here's a new tool here is the tool that we want to implement here's the tool we want to adopt let's look at utilization I think the right metaphor for it is you have a new member joining your team whatever your team is whatever your company is like you have this new team member and AI is not a human but there are you know there like it it's not a human it is an intelligence it does bring skills to the table and if you think about it as like this is a new team member that you are onboarding I think that puts you in a different metaphorical frame as an organiz ization and I personally think a really productive one.

3:46 >> So if you're looking at it that way, when you onboard a new team member, first of all, you need to make sure that team member has a lot of context. What is the context they need to do their job? What are the instructions they need to do their job? >> When you onboard a new team member, you're not necessarily thinking just like, well, here's my whole workflow and I only need to tell them about this part.

4:01 >> Yeah, you need organization, the team, everything. >> You need them to understand the organization. You need them to understand the big picture goals. You need them to understand what is their role on the team and how do they fit. You also ask your new team member for their thoughts and input on things, right? So when you, you know, when you implement a new tool, >> you're like, "Hey, I have this workflow. I need to use a hammer right here for this step in my workflow, but I am the owner and the keeper of the workflow, and the hammer doesn't tell me what it's doing."

4:24 >> When you onboard a new team member, you're like, "Hey, our goal is we're building a wall." >> I don't know why that's our goal, but like our goal is when you use a hammer to build a wall. So my metaphors are getting mixed here. >> They do. Yeah, >> sure, whatever. We're building a wall that uses a hammer. But like, you know, you talked with a team member about like, "Hey, together we're going to build this wall. the reasons that we're going to build this wall are X. Here are the materials that we have to build this wall. Like, how are you and I going to divvy this up? And that's just a very different conversation and framing and way to think about it, but one that I think is massively more productive. Cuz I think a lot of organizations are out there saying like, well, but I got this hammer and it banged this nail and it wasn't quite what I wanted. And I'm like, well, but you didn't tell it about the wall. AI actually needs to be told like, here's what we're doing. Here's how you fit >> and hey, how do you think you can help here?

5:04 >> What does that look like beyond onboarding? That seems like an obvious implication, which by the way, companies get this wrong with humans also. So like, and then they're like, why didn't this person do what I thought they should? It's like, well, they also didn't have the context. So I think >> you just told them go be a hammer and stuff. I'm just going to carry this metaphor out forever here. >> Clearly the hammer metaphor. So I think the onboarding piece makes a ton of sense to me. I think we should get better at that with humans. Seems like this idea of treating AI as a human.

5:28 You're onboarding a member of the team. They need context. What happens after that? I mean, think about, you know, you bring humans onto your team. You also need to think about how they collaborate with different people. You think about performance management. So I just what what like how does that show up in other kind of touch points of the talent experience. >> Yeah. I mean one of the ways I think about this too using this metaphor is like what what is happening to the organizations that are onboarding AI let's say is congratulations everybody at your company now runs a team >> right? So I think we also have this old frame of like there are elite managers and there are individual contributors and those are very different jobs and etc. And I think more and more of those are not very different jobs >> because every individual contributor in your company now has the ability to be running this team of AI agents.

6:07 >> So one of the things that I think about beyond those kind of first onboarding steps is also like cool does everybody in your company have the skills to say this is the wall that we are trying to build. Here's how I'm going to chunk out work or work with AI to chunk out work. I think that's a very different skill we're asking many of our individual contributors to have. I think also our managers like congratulations every frontline manager just basically turned into an executive because you have these kind of infinite resources that you can be thinking about. So you know it happens at the onboarding stage but I think even through the ongoing talent life cycle the way we're starting to think about it is like we don't really have that distinction you know on the human side we have that distinction of manager versus IC >> but more and more I think we should be thinking like but our IC's are also leading teams they are just leading these AI teams like what do those look like? What skills do those people need?

6:48 How do we empower those people to do that? On a very tactical level, something that I've been hearing a lot of people in anthropic saying is we're kind of, you know, surveying people and listening to them talk about their jobs. but a lot of people, especially on the technical side, are saying like, "Wow, my job used to be very hands-on keyboard, lost in deep focus. These days, my job is much more interruption driven >> of like, yeah, I'm delegating these things out to AI. I'm waiting for the AI to perform it. I then need to review what, you know, I then need to review what Claude has done. And so I'm kind of like delegating a thing, waiting for it to come back to me, waiting to review it. And like, man, I just keep getting interrupted in my deep focus.

7:22 >> Honestly, every time I see that, I'm kind of like, hi, welcome to an executive job. But also, welcome to an executive job, right? Like, we need to make sure that everybody in the organization that has like excellent taste, can think about this delegation, can think about, hey, how do I now need to chunk and structure my day when I am waiting on these agents that I have delegated to and waiting for things to come back to me? You know, if the step looks right, what's my next step? if the work from the agent doesn't look right, okay, well, where am I going to go with that instead? How do I correct it? What kind of coaching and feedback do I need to be giving to Claude to make sure that Claude can accomplish this successfully?

7:52 So, one of the things we've been thinking about a ton is just like in the talent and training world, like how do we need to start giving people more of that kind of training? Yeah. >> For their jobs because the job is no longer like I'm going to be hands- on keyboard writing the code myself. >> Yeah. That's what I was just going to ask is what does that training look like? Because, you know, one of the things I'm so curious about around how it looks internally at Anthropic is everything's changing quickly. This is true for you know every organization but you know your team structure is changing. IC's now look a little bit more like managers. Managers may look a little bit more like executives. Roles are changing. The thing I was hired for is maybe not what I'm working on anymore. How do you create the a sort of culture that's able to manage all of that change and individual contributors that are able to now adopt some of the skills of managers that they weren't hired for? What is that? Is that mostly like traditional learning and development or what does that look like?

8:40 We're not doing a ton of traditional learning and development here. What that looks like for us is far more that we have hired people who are excited about this. We have hired people who bring in that kind of learning mindset and flexibility and like agility anyway and they are on the forefront of figuring it out. And then some of the way I think about it is like cool my team is like my team should not be on the forefront of figuring this out, right? And I think there's super interesting roles for a people team to play in this kind of world and where we are going, but we shouldn't be on the forefront. I'm like, the practitioners should be on the forefront of figuring this out. And then we should be hearing from the practitioners like, "Hey, this is what we're doing. This is where we're going."

9:13 And we should be able to say, "Cool. Here's how we're going to support you. Here's how we're going to help scale this. Here's how we're going to help you take this amazing idea that this person over here had and translate it so that like the whole team can access this idea or that everybody can kind of catch up on these skills." on the culture front, I think this I'll give you some gospel of Hannah here, but I think this is going to be one of the distinguishers between like what are going to be the great organizations of the future and what are going to be the great organizations of the past, which is like how much are these organizations innovative, focused on learning, focused on agility and flexibility. I personally think the past models of organizations were like it's command and control, it is top down, you must be ordered to do everything just does not mesh very well with this AI world that is coming. And I think the organizations instead that are saying we are creating conditions for people to create be creative. We are creating conditions for people to all collectively understand what is our goal as an organization and what are the ways that I can point towards and help achieve those goals. I think those organizations are going to be the ones that are really going to thrive in this future.

10:07 >> So I want to hear more about how you actually create that culture of experimentation. Anthropic famously has a lot of kind of deep history around experimenting. internal experiments are what led to claude code. I think earlier this year you launched or expanded or formalized labs which is a team that is explicitly dedicated to this idea of experimenting and figuring out what we can take from the models's latest capabilities and turn into products and I can imagine a lot of companies trying to do that and I've seen a lot of companies try to do that even before AI you know creating internal labs I can imagine a company following what looks like anthropics playbook from the outside and completely failing at it and obviously you know you alluded to hiring ing being a big part of it. You need to hire people with a growth mindset, with agility, who want to work in this way, but I I imagine that's not the whole of it. And so, what else do you need to be doing internally to foster that mindset and that dynamic?

11:04 >> Yeah, for sure. So, I'm going to start really high level here cuz I have a framework that I kind of use in my head for this. I think the model for creating any kind of culture, not just a learning culture, but I'm like whatever company you're at and you run, there is a culture, there is something and someone needs to be creating it. My little framework for this is that that is a function of selection, expectations, and interactions. And so the selection part is like, well, who are you bringing in the door? What are their kind of natural modes and tendencies? But to your point, that's not where it stops. Expectations then you should be explicitly setting expectations of what kind of culture are we? Who are we? You know, people join a company, they join any institution and they want to be told who are we like who am I when I am part of this group?

11:41 >> Yeah. >> Right. And so I'm like leaders can leaders can and should be setting expectations upfront and explicitly. So again to your point actually at the labs team right and it's not the only place that we have experimentation but we do have places where we just set up front like your job is experimentation I'm telling you really clearly I want you to take big swings and if you miss that's okay there are other parts of the company where we're like yeah we want you to have a learning and agile mindset but actually it's not okay if you miss on giant swings here so you need to like tone down the experimentation a little bit >> right so like there's a role that leaders can play in explicitly setting those expectations I think leaders should also think about what sorts of you know something things like your performance systems and the way you you know the way you run your company are also feeding towards expectations. So if on the one hand you say like we expect you to experiment and take big swings but also we're going to judge you on the success of every single one of those and if any of them fail you're going to get punished like people are going to see through the gap in that and they're going to see well no I'm not going to take big swings thank you very much like you know I'm going to try to hit singles and doubles look at me doing a sports metaphor my metaphor >> I don't even know what sport that is >> I think it's baseball >> okay >> go back to the hammers and the walls >> yeah all my metaphors are terrible but I do love them and And lastly, interactions. Humans are also social creatures and they look, you know, humans are social creatures and they look around at the other people around them. So they look to what their leaders are saying in the expectations category, but they're also looking to what their leaders are doing.

13:01 >> They're looking to what their peers are doing and they're looking to what's getting rewarded and what's getting punished in the organization. >> So generally then I think if you're trying to create this culture of like creativity, innovation, learning, all those things, like look at the people you're hiring. Look at the expectations you're setting. Like do you say you want creativity and then every creative idea gets shot down? Do you say you want creativity, but you're only rewarding the people who hit singles and doubles?

13:21 Do you say, do you not even say you want creativity, so people don't even know you want creativity? >> And then you look at your interactions like if you say you want creativity, but what you're rewarding is people who played it safe or you know, you punish somebody every time something fails and like you don't actually want creativity. And if you say you want creativity and then you as the manager come in and criticize every idea at the idea stage, like congratulations, you don't actually want creativity. Yeah.

13:42 >> So, I would say this is less, you know, if I were talking to another company about this, I would say less like steal every piece of anthropics playbook. Like, first of all, we don't have the perfect playbook on this, but also nobody does. The importance of is it tailored to your environment and is it tailored to the way that you select and expect and interact with people? >> I feel like the performance piece is so interesting there. Is there, you know, definitely what you can't say we want experimentation, but then we're going to punish you if an experiment fails, but is there also an aspect of actually rewarding experiments that don't work?

14:10 It's very easy to reward experiments that do work, but that doesn't encourage experimentation because you don't know at the outset if your experiment will work. So, is there is there anything you all do to reward experiments that fail or to reward experiments that you know or or like to elevate and talk positively about failures as a path to success? I mean, these are sort of like hallmarks of creating a growth mindset culture. And I'm just curious if there's any examples you can think of of of doing that that another organization might be able to learn from because I think it's very easy to say, "Let's experiment." It's much harder to be like, let's celebrate this person that tried something that it was like a swing and a miss. Totally to build on your totally. yeah. Now we're building on baseball metaphors. Look at us. This is amazing. yeah. I mean, again, there's there's like a whole wide range of tactics that a team can use here. I'm sure there's teams at anthropic using tactics that I don't even know about.

14:58 one thing that is pretty common across a lot of the company and my team does as well is we do retros on various projects. And in a lot of places it's like okay when something really goes badly then you have to do a retro for it. I try to just set a habit of do a retro for any project regardless of whether or not it went badly. And in that you talk really openly about hey here were the things that were great.

15:15 Here were the things that we tried and they weren't so great but what did we learn from it? >> Because the point of that is like the point of anything you're doing is what are we learning from it and are we going to do it better the next time? So I have tried to make sure when my team is doing retros that I'm really talking about like yeah we tried this thing and it wasn't great like >> why wasn't it you know like ask them follow-up questions about why wasn't it great? what did we learn from it? And then always just making sure to say like, "Congratulations. That was great.

15:37 Like, we're so glad we tried that thing." >> Yeah. >> This is another sports metaphor I'm going to bring. This is now some of my leadership habits. Another sports metaphor I'm going to bring to the table. But I've been really into strength training lately. And one of the principles of strength training is you have to push yourself to the point that you fail. And that is a really hard thing, especially for super high achieving people to do. I've been teaching some friends of mine and they're all these very high achieving women. And so they come and they do their first set of lifts and they fail.

16:00 And you can just see them going like, >> "Oh no, that was terrible. Like I should have been doing lighter." And I make it a habit in the group that we always give a round of applause and high fives the first time somebody fails on a lift because it's like if you didn't fail, you weren't like if you didn't fail, you were wasting your time. You're not actually pushing yourself hard enough. >> And I actually bring that metaphor in and talk about it with my team a bunch that I'm like if we're not failing sometimes we're not dreaming big enough.

16:19 We're not trying hard enough and we're wasting our time. Like sometimes you actually have to push yourself to that point of failure in order to be able to grow. >> I love that. I'm thinking about how we kind of reward and recognize and incentivize the behaviors we want and sort of contrasting that with something that I find interesting about your engineering culture which is that it's a flat very flat sort of you know very consistent titles across the organization. It doesn't seem to be a very title oriented team and I'm wondering >> no in fact we regard it as a pretty negative signal when somebody gets very fixated on title.

16:52 >> Yeah. >> That's not what we want people thinking and worrying about. You want them thinking and worrying about the mission, their impact. >> As you scale, is there any aspect of that that gets harder or that needs to evolve around how people, if it's not through their title, how is it that people that your highest performers know that they're doing well? I mean, humans at the end of the day, even if you can say I'm not motivated by title, want to know how they're doing. They want to know if they're achieving their goals.

17:17 Is that all through you know performance management or is anything about that like you know low ego lack of hierarchical approach that needs to evolve as a company scales? >> I hope not. cuz I think those things are very precious for us in our culture and I've been at anthropic for a little over two and a half years and we've resisted that pressure thus far. My hope is that we resist those pressures forever. My view here and then listeners can be like that is way too rosy a view of human nature but you know there's intrinsic motivation and there's exttrinsic motivation and we try as much as possible to key on intrinsic motivation at Anthropic. And so intrinsic motivation for your work can come out of I care so much about this organization's mission that I want to do well for it. It can also come out of like I care so much about my craft that I want to do my work well. It can come out of I find this problem really interesting and challenging and therefore I am motivated to solve this problem. Like I think the things around a performance system and titles and status like all of those are exttrinsic motivations. And personally for me and I think this does show up in the psychological research like the more you start to put extrinsic rewards on something the more you start to damage the person's ability to be intrinsically motivated towards that thing I think we see this with studies of kids all the time is that once you tie like >> yeah once you tie this pleasurable thing to an extrinsic reward for it they're like oh now I'm only doing this for the re reward instead of like I'm doing this for the pleasure of the journey I'm doing this for like learning my skill.

18:35 So, as much as possible, we just really have tried in our culture to like look, titles are flat. You're a member of technical staff. it was a big deal actually when we even moved away. We used to just be all like members of technical staff or members of operations staff. It was like a big deal when we introduced members of I forget what other staff specific teams, >> you know, and that comes with costs. Like it can be very confusing for new people to navigate our organization because they're like, well, I looked up this person to see what they did, >> right?

18:59 >> And they're a member of technical staff. And we're like, yep, that is one of the costs that we are willing to pay to then have this like flat system. The same thing also I think we very famously don't negotiate offers at hire. There are many reasons for that. But among them is that we really want to put our focus on the team and what can the team achieve rather than the individual and what can the individual achieve. And when you're running a negotiation system, >> first of all, you're potentially differentially rewarding individuals who are good at the skill of negotiation >> as opposed to the skill of doing the job. But kind of both as someone is coming in the door and as someone is on the team, we want to make the we want to send the message to them that like this is not about you being an individual superstar.

19:33 >> This is about you being a member of a superstar team. >> And so like we are paying everybody on this team the same because we expect this to be a superstar team. >> And so like yes, we do have some systems of leveling and you can get like advanced in your level, but right now actually that's our main mechanism for changing somebody's pay >> as opposed to then giving performance rewards. And all of this is because we just really want to hire people that care about this thing we're doing >> and this like big consequential mission we have of helping make transformative AI go well. And we want people to be attached to that as their motivation and to be attached to how do I contribute to the team as their motivation.

20:03 >> How do you look for that even at a high level in the hiring process because I think of anthropic as one of the most sort of notably missionoriented companies I've ever heard of where people truly do seem to join for the mission which is a big mission. I understand why people would join for the mission. I don't know what the lessons are from what we're going to talk about for like you know a bank. I think it's it's I think it's easy to be missionoriented when when your mission is as kind of foundational to society as anthropics is. But how do you look presidents out there would point to the ways that they're providing essential infrastructure for society to operate and things too. So I also think as an organization you can conceptualize yourself as like oh I sell widgets.

20:44 >> Yeah. Or you can conceptualize yourself as like my the widgets that we are selling are doing this thing for the world. And so I would encourage any organization to think about like the widgets that I'm selling like what impact are those having on the world. What change are you trying to see in the world via your widgets? >> And do you think organizations under prioritize hiring for mission alignment? I mean this seems like fundamental to the way you all work. I I don't think it's that fundamental to how most companies work.

21:05 >> I generally think that most companies could be framed as having a grand mission. Again, whether a good one or a bad one, whether a consequential one or not. And I do think that more people should be asking questions of like what is my organization more people both at the company level and when they're thinking of joining a company should be asking questions of like what is this company doing for the world and what what is it mission and is that where I want to be giving my time and effort and talents towards that mission for the world. So yes I do think more companies should be hiring for Martian and I think more employees should be filtering for like what is the mission of the company they are working for and is that where they want to be giving their energies.

21:35 >> Have you had great candidates ever that just didn't that you didn't weren't willing to make an offer to on mission like they could do the job? >> Yes. all the time and we stand by that. We're very comfortable with that. >> You didn't really come up into HR through like what I would call a traditional path to the field. You have you studied linguistics, you've been in trust and safety, you've been in risk and payments and you even briefly held a kind of interim engineering leader role in your prior organization. So, you've done a lot of things. I want to just hear like what interests you about the people space? Why is this the space that you're focusing your time on right now and at a time of so much organizational transformation and the world is changing so quickly? What's exciting about the people space to you?

22:14 >> Yeah, for sure. so I always tell people and it's a little flippant, but it's true that like I spent so much time as a, you know, and I loved my job as like safety manager and risk manager and all these other things, but I moved into management fairly early on in my career and when you're a manager, you always have a major in your business domain and then a minor in people work. And so one of the ways that I thought about it when the opportunity came up to move over into the people's side, I was like, I should test out making my minor my major. I have always loved my minor. And it turns out like, yeah, that was a great move. Like it probably should have been my major all along. I think that I I'll reference back to my linguistics training, but a lot of people think, oh, you're trained as a linguist, therefore you must speak a lot of languages.

22:49 >> I happen to speak a few other languages, but to me, that's actually incidental to what linguistics training teaches you. Linguistics training teaches you to recognize pattern patterns and think in systems. And for me, the people space is a one that is just rich with patterns and rich, right, for systems thinking. >> And then also just I'm interested in people. I've been a, you know, I'm a novel reader. I like I've like been interested in people and their stories and history and all of that my whole life. I'm very much on the humanity side of the spectrum. And so I kind of have that interest in people and then working in the people's space. Again, a lot of people think of it as like, well, you work in that space if you like are super empathetic. You work in that space if you want to take care of people. I think that's true. I think that's in the interest, but I think you do well in that space when you are a strong systems thinker and when you can recognize patterns and when you can think about like cool, how do we want to do this from a systems perspective? From a perspective of what are my organization's guidelines? What are our policies? What are our training to get people to behave in certain ways and not behave in other c in other certain ways?

23:43 >> What's the purpose of the people team at Anthropic? What do you see your mission, your team's mission as? >> Yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, like we're here for the people who are here for Anthropic's mission and so everything kind of backs stops to that. One of the ways that I talk about it for my team is that our mission is to help people at anthropic fit, function, and flourish, >> which you've noticed that I love three-part frameworks and ideally with illiterative things in them. that's a little more of the linguistic coming back too.

24:08 >> But you know, part of our job is to help bring people into the organization that are going to fit. And I don't mean this in like you want to have a beer with them culture fit kind of ways but like are these people also aimed at our mission >> and really trying to build the things that we are building and are they going to have the skills for the role and are they going to have the ability to adapt and all these things >> function then I think people teams often sit at the heart of like well how does this company work what are some of the norms the leaders are obviously the ones out there setting that and out there making the these many of these decisions but we should be the ones kind of sitting with those leaders and saying okay here's the risks you know if you want to make that decision here's some risks behind it or like is this a good set of norms cool we're going to help you come up with a plan to communicate and operationalize those sets of norms.

24:45 And then just the flourish piece to me is a lot of like, okay, what is the culture? How does it feel? Is this an organization where people like wake up excited to come in to work? Wake up excited to see the people they're going to be working with. Is this the kind of organization where we're retaining the right people for the long term, where people are able to grow their careers. Like, you know, we want to be more than just the functional like you exchange your time and money for labor. We really also want to be a place where you feel like you're >> attached to something larger, attached to this team, and really flourishing in that environment.

25:11 How do you other than signals of retention and career growth, how do you know if people are flourishing? How do you know if you've succeeded at creating that environment? >> I mean, those are some of the signals we look at. I also feel extremely lucky because anthropic employees are very vocal. They are not shy about exactly what they think. They will let us know and I love that. I think that's such a privilege. Another thing I talk about with my team is I think a lot of people teams end up as kind of service providers.

25:37 >> I think the right mindset for a people team is like you're a product team. like you're building a product and that product is an organization that can achieve its goals and like work on its mission and I'm like well what does a product manager do a product manager pays a lot of attention to their customers and they pay a lot of attention to what are the customer problems what does the customer think what feedback is the customer giving me around around this and again we are lucky that our customers tell us very proactively >> but we also put in place a lot of things to like listen to what customer you know when they're not coming to us directly like well can we watch how they are behaving can we like listen to what they are saying in other places this is things like employee surveys >> yeah what do What do you what do you do around employee surveys? It's a hotly debated topic these days of like what is what should employ employee surveys look like? It probably shouldn't be unless you do this in which case >> sounds good. I mean you know a lot of critiques of pretend that we figured everything out here >> like the annual survey as watermark. We ask the same 20 questions every year then we look at it or 50 questions and we're like people feel like 2% worse about you know decision-m like interesting let's check back in next year. Have you any innovation on this?

26:37 anything that you're finding work to get you know better more actionable feedback from people at scale >> I mean I just think feedback is amazing in any volume and in any direction so actually we do do a lot of the standard stuff here I think the pitfalls with the standard stuff is not that it is intrinsically bad but that a lot of companies don't actually make any changes based on those surveys >> yeah the survey is fine if you do something about it >> and I see that very much as like look if I have asked for your time then I have a commitment in exchange for that right so it's not necessarily that we're going to fix everything we see in the survey But I'm like, yeah, if I've asked for the time and energy of all of our employees to tell us what they think, then I owe something back. Even if that is just an answer that, nope, we're not going to fix that thing right now.

27:16 >> Yeah. >> Like that is the obligation I have to give. And by the way, in our standard surveys, like sometimes people ask for a little stuff and we give it the next day. >> Like the in our last employee survey, there was somebody who left a little comment of like, "Oh, I wish that we had a different type of drink on my floor." And that one, I saw that comment and I just messaged my team right away and I was like, "Just go buy this drink right now." Like there's nothing that should stop us from just doing that >> cuz hey, there's some bigger problems here that I don't think we can fix overnight, but that's a tiny problem. If they took the time to tell us about that, >> we should take the time to just go buy that drink.

27:46 >> I don't know if that employee ever put two and two together on exactly why that drink appeared the next day, but like they told us we should listen to that. We then do a lot like I don't think there's any secret magic here for the other things. And again, our employees are very vocal, which is helpful. >> but you know, we ask employees for feedback. You know, we do our regular standard things and we ask our employees for feedback in between, too. And some of that's tactical feedback on like, hey, we're going to roll out a new program, >> go identify five people in the organization who might represent these different parts and just go ask them what they think about this. Like, >> we also have the privilege that like our customers sit right next to us.

28:19 >> They're right there. They're humans. You can just go ask them. >> and so we do a fair amount of like just go ask people in between. >> Yeah. >> and then we do have some reasonable amount of employee surveys pegged to specific moments in the life cycle. So like, hey, you're a new hireer. At 90 days, we're doing a new hire survey. >> You know, how are you doing? How does your manager think you're doing? Things like that.

28:36 >> Yeah. What does onboarding look like? Since we going back to this idea of treating agents as, you know, we are bringing in a new team member. Is there anything that you found particularly effective in bringing in actual new team members to get people up to speed quickly? I think, you know, always the, you know, the great thing about a super high agency culture is, you know, you should probably get to work pretty quickly in your job and start starting to have impact. But as you said, people and agents need context to to work well.

29:03 And I I see a lot of companies really skip that step. And so I'm curious if there's anything that you've seen work really well that other organizations might learn from and how to bring people into an organization that is high agency and wants you to just like dive in pretty quickly. >> Yeah, we have a constant tension here between kind of the amount of context and onboarding that I think we would like to do for people, which is like ease them in, give them lots of context.

29:23 And of course, our business is moving at such a pace that when someone joins, their manager is like, I need them to produce this yesterday. Like where are they and where is this thing? So where we have right now is we have kind of a two-day onboarding that covers like here's the big picture company context. We focus a lot on culture and the how >> as part of that because we're like look, you're probably going to pick the what of your job needs to be determined by your team. You're probably going to pick up a lot of that as you go, but let's kind of again to the selection, expectations, interactions. That's our chance to really set some of the upfront expectations.

29:51 >> Yeah. And then team various teams have different onboarding modules that they put in place to give people more like domain specific training and things like that. we also do have some cloud onboarding sessions at the beginning. Some people come in very experienced with working with cloud. Other people come in much less experienced and we do want to make sure that we get everybody on the same footing and again actually it's the point of innovation. That's also where we set a lot of the expectations of like hey at our company you will be working with cloud a lot. So here's some of the hands-on skills you might need and by the way here's permission to experiment. Here's permission to like mess around and see what else you might find. What does an AI native people team look like? Like if I am just we ran a benchmarking study recently at Paradigm and one of the things I was so surprised by is the rate of AI use in HR teams was like incredibly low relative to other parts of the business.

30:40 >> And so I think we're a little behind here. We're not always the earliest adopters on technology. Technology is also not always, you know, built and designed and rolled out really thoughtfully for people teams. But if I'm leading a people team and I want to be using Claude as much as we possibly can to have more impact and dream bigger and operate in this sort of viewing our company as the product that we're helping enable how should I be using AI? What does it look like?

31:04 >> Yeah, I mean a lot of this is going to depend on a lot of this is going to depend on like well what kind of people team do you want to be running and especially like what's your tolerance for mistakes, right? I will also say in all this like creative learning agility organization like >> you know a bank is going to have a harder time with a few of these things because the error bars >> that are permitted at a bank are just going to be narrower. So I like for me I started first with what are my error bars? What is my risk tolerance here?

31:29 And so like yes I definitely want my team to be using AI but I need to think carefully about what's my risk tolerance. How do how like how am I going to think about privacy? What guard rails do I want to have around this philosophically >> before I even then kind of dive into like cool everybody AI all the time. Beyond that now in terms of what I have done, I actually have an engineering team within my organization and we have engineers and product managers and they are like building with AI and for AI and like kind of kind of one by one tackling like what are the areas that we work on as a people team and how do we just bring claude directly into the mainstream of those areas. So one example is our performance review system now runs through a really cool tool built with and what that built with claude and where claude is built in and so like you can have conversations right there about performance as part of the like standard tool for the company through the whole cycle.

32:14 >> so just on that so the engineering team built it but members of your team acted as like the product managers of that product. >> We do have a product manager for that but like members of my team acted as kind of the consulted experts and they like state what it should look like. Exactly. Like hey here's the process we're going to run. now let's all come get in a room and say how do we make this as simple and easy as possible for everyone in the organization to do this and like where can claude really be a helpful team member as part of the performance review cycle >> another small example is our open enrollment for benefits right this is traditionally a really heavy >> really heavy load on a really heavy and painful process and really heavy load on a benefits team to answer everybody's questions this is a place where like we made an effort to have really excellent documentation that answered every possible question we could think of and then we put that all in a project and opened it up to the company and said talk to cloud about your benefit situation like I know you're not going to read this 40page document with every single detail but guess who's a really fast reader and can help abstract information for you like it's Claude and then we got people coming you know and then my team obviously still provided support but people then came and said okay I talked to Claude about this really nuanced situation and I just need you to clarify this p this one piece yes or no and we could like provide that kind of extra human layer clarification on the expertise >> so I don't you know we are still very early in our journey here it is also huge for me to like give folks on team permission to experiment. Our recruiting team is running tons of little mini experiments on this of just like hey if I'm running this process where are places that I can use partner with cloud to make this process more efficient and when somebody has a great idea we actually also have a regular like kind of open come to coffee and talk about the way you're using cloud session with a team where someone can come and say hey I came up with this really cool hack like me and claude co-worker doing like I automated this thing or I'm doing this in this way you all might want to try this too >> and we celebrate the people that are coming up with great ideas and allow them to also act as like trainers ers and mentors for the rest of the team. So I'm trying to make sure this innovation happens from all angles both kind of the standard engineering development cycle and then also just giving folks permission on the team to like go like you are your own little mini startup of how you achieve the goals you know you benefits team member have these set of goals like run your own little mini startup with cloud on how you're going to achieve those goals >> and then if a team member comes up with something that looks like it's going to be really successful is that how you then evaluate where to distribute engineering resources to go build something more you know production grade sometimes they come up with there's something really successful that doesn't need more engineering resources. It just works, right? Like purely FAQs, there's in a project, we just talked a lot about it.

34:36 >> if they come up with like a glimmer of an idea that is really successful, yeah, that is where then we'd talk with the engineering team and say, okay, hey, can we take this, can we scale it out to everybody? But the engineering team of course is also coming up with tons of ideas. They're coming at it with a lens of like, I'm a product engineer. I've built products in all kinds of places. Like, hey, the way I see you doing your work here, like we could revolutionize this.

34:54 >> Yeah, sounds really fun to be a member of your team. I It sounds amazing. I'm a little bit biased here, but it does. No, it sounds really fun. >> Actually, on that, I I'm a little bit biased because I think it's fun to be a member of my team. I think it's a really fun time to be a member of any people team anywhere right now. Like, I just think we have an opportunity as people and HR teams to rethink like who are we and what do we do for businesses? And I think in so many places we've been seen as like, oh, they're the boring compliance people. Or like, oh, they're the people that tell me no. And I'm like, that's not the right way to think about our jobs. And yes, sometimes we do have to tell people no or we do have to like come in with compliance. But really, if you think about it, is we're here to empower. We're here to create these conditions. We're here to help kind of set and operationalize the culture that the leaders and the founders want. That just opens up, I think, so much room for creativity in an organization right now, especially then powered with being able to partner with this really cool AI team member.

35:43 >> Is there pitch for why everybody should work on a people team? I no and that's what I was going to I was going to ask you about that because I think you know there's some narratives out there right now that like HR is not relevant and it's not g you know it's not sort of a you know core part of the business of the future sort of you know a lot of companies are like collapsing management hierarchies and and maybe HR doesn't need to be there. I think about it in the exact opposite way. I think people teams are so important in this time of change. I know you do too. If I'm in a company where I'm not so sure if leaders share that perspective and I want to start to be this product innovator, you know, shaper of our business strategy, enabler of better business outcomes, is there like one or two things I could start to do to help my team develop that reputation in the business? I mean there's kind of this vicious cycle in the industry where like if leaders don't think HR is useful they have low expectations for HR and like teams rise to or fall to the level of things that are expected to them. So the way to break that cycle is either like in my mind the way to break that cycle is either then go challenge the leader on the expectations they are holding or go start holding yourself to the higher expectations.

36:51 >> Yeah. So if I were an HR leader in that situation, I think what I would do, I mean, first of all, I'd sit down and think like, okay, but if I had free reign in this organization and if I felt like a fully empowered and creative like executive team member here, what is like what are the things that I would doing? Where do I think my organization needs change? And then I would either just figure out what's the minimum viable path for me to start doing that like don't wait for permission. Don't wait for someone to ask you. Just start doing it. Or if there's no minimum viable path, I would go to my leader and I would say, "Hey, I don't think you're expecting enough from me and my team.

37:21 like here's a vision of what we could be. I want you to start expecting this and I need permission to do X or Y or Z. And I would always, you know, and I'm I'm an experimental type myself, but I'm like I would I wouldn't go and say I need resources to do this or I need you to give me permission for everything. I would go and be like, I need this little thing unlocked and I'm going to start providing this value for you.

37:41 >> And like that's the way you can turn that around and start getting into the virtuous circle of like where people can really see the value. They're like, wow, I want more of this. Like I want more of this value. I'm going to give you more resources. I'm going to give you more permission. >> I think some of the fear that I see from people teams and I think this is obviously reflective of a broader concern is sometimes when companies get more efficient which is obviously a byproduct you know it's one thing that can happen when you start using AI a lot more is a lot of your processes do get more efficient that companies might start to think great now we need fewer people and we've seen examples of that quite a bit over the last couple of years. Is that the right way to think about what happens when you get efficiency gains of you know we can just have fewer people? How do you, you know, every time you find an efficiency gain through AI, you know, is there a way that you help your team think about instead of, well, we just saved time here, what does this go unlucky to be able to do? Cuz I I just I think the conversation right now around efficiency is so uninspiring. and I'm curious and I think people leaders should be drivers of a much more inspiring conversation about yes, we'll get efficiency gains and thus we can go do.

38:45 So I'm curious how you think companies should be thinking about that, how you think about it. I mean, I think there's so many parts of the AI and jobs conversation that are uninspiring right now, but this is certainly one of them for me. I mean, to me, it's a problem of are you thinking about it only as efficiency or are you thinking about opportunity cost? So, like everything you were doing in your business before came at the cost of another thing that you weren't doing in your business or an idea that you weren't pursuing or a new business line or certain value that someone could be adding. And so to think that like hey we've gained efficiency on task X therefore let's just reduce the number of people is to forget about that whole universe of other things that you were always trading off >> and I I think sometimes people don't people forget they were always trading off that whole other universe and they think about it as co as only cost and not opportunity cost >> and so like for me in the conversation I would then look at cool what other opportunities do you have now that your people are not doing these little thing now that your people are not doing these things that AI is doing like you're in a world in which everybody is becoming much more productive >> you know you can put that product you and then take that productivity into like well great we need we will keep our ambitions the same and we will just need fewer people >> right >> or you can say like oh my gosh my ambitions can get larger here and I'm always surprised I'm like most of the CEOs I know are very ambitious and they have much longer lists of things to do than they have the people and the capabilities to do them so I'm always surprised when companies then default into the like fantastic we will save on people's time instead of go pursuing these going to pursue >> yeah it's almost like we get like tunnel vision on this is our three-year road map and we can execute on that faster rather than like what what are couple of things outside of that road map. Things outside the road map.

40:11 >> Yeah. Anthropic has been pretty unusual in the number of just like product releases and the new things that we are getting from you all the time. Often things that are like I wouldn't have expected that because every time we get more efficient in one area and get more productive in one area like great we got a whole list. Let's go pursue it. I do think that also takes thinking about people as fungeible resources. And I think sometimes companies get fixed in the mindset of like, oh, this person is in this box and therefore if we don't need as much of this box, we don't need this person. And I'm like, that's thinking about people as a box or people as a cost. Like humans are so much more than that. And I think many organizations would also do better if they were able to think like, okay, cool. We've reduced the size of that box, so I don't need the human doing only that box. Like what other skills do they have? What else can they bring to the table? This also comes down to like the way companies account for their people, which is they're accounting for their people as costs. I wish they were accounting for their people as R&D.

41:03 >> Like if you think about your people as R&D, like that's where the ideas are coming from. That's where the creativity is coming from. And like yeah, maybe you have some junior recruiter in an organization and you've made their life more efficient. >> But like is the answer that you want less recruiting or is the answer that like that junior recruiter might have other skills. They might be able to move to another part of the business. They might also have other great ideas for ways they can make the candidate experience better that they haven't been able to pursue >> because they've been doing these things.

41:26 And so again, so circling back to the like creative and learning organization, if you're a creative and learning organization and you treat all your people as if they are like smart, intelligent, have good ideas, have the ability to learn, I think you will be the type of organization that can really capture then a much broader range of opportunities versus just like optimizing for the cost and efficiency side of things. >> Do you see people changing roles a lot?

41:46 I mean I imagine with that vision like that recruiter is one tiny example but within anthropic are people often moving just like into different functions different roles. >> people are often moving into different functions and roles. I'm going to get folks on my team reaching out to me after this but I wish I saw more people moving into different functions and roles. I think we're actually making it slightly too hard today and we need to make it even easier for people to do that. Now I'm obviously a test case for this. We talked about my background.

42:09 Prior to this role I had never been in a role more than 18 months in my career. I was in four roles in five years at Facebook. I was in I think like five roles in seven years at Stripe. So I'm somebody who's just always bounced around in the business. Yeah. I always talk about my attitude is just put me in coach like where am I most needed? But you know even on my team so I'm I have that bias here.

42:28 >> but even on my team at anthropic I we have seen people move from recruiting to our go to market team. We've seen people move from recruiting to comms. We've seen people move from recruiting to public policy. >> I'm naming just recruiting. I shouldn't be. I've seen people move from basically every part of my team to almost every other part of anthropic. And even not just at anthropic, if I look back back in my past career, like several of the people who used to report to me on operations teams are now software engineers.

42:50 >> So like people can learn, people can grow new skills. >> I think a manager really knowing this person has skills that are translatable. Does it take the person saying I have skills that are translatable? Does it take in a larger organization, you know, there's software products that are doing this these days and saying we're going to catalog everyone's skills or how do you actually like do who whose job is it to identify this person could actually be really impactful over here? I'm going to cop out a little bit and say this is everybody's job because if it's everybody's job then everybody has watched team backup for each other and everybody can really make sure this happens. So if I'm looking back at some of the past examples both at anthropic and in other parts of my career like one of the people who is now a software engineer came to me one day and was like you know what I think I really want to be a software engineer in the future and I was like cool do you know how to code and they were like no >> I'm like okay well then let's you know let's start there. I was like, I can't magically transfer you into the job if you don't have the skills, but you know what I can do? I can agree with you that we're going to carve out 10% of your time on a project that is going to help you get a little bit of those skills.

43:46 And hey, once you complete that, let's carve out 10% of your time for the next project. So, that person and I just actually like made a plan over the next 12 months of how they would be dedicating little bits of their time to learning coding. And I said, you're going to have to do a lot of this on your own and in your own time. But the things that you're learning in your own time, I'm going to allow you to come practice. I'm going to allow you to come put in practice in your day job. And these are ways honestly these are little bug fixes that would benefit our team too. So like it's still a win-win for the team, >> right? So that's an example where like it came from the person and then I all I as a manager had to do would be like cool let's figure out a plan like I'll support that. And other times it's come from me as a manager. There have been cases actually where I spotted like >> I can think of one where I said to the person like look you seem much more passionate about this team's job over there than you seem about my team's job over there. Like am I misunderstanding that? And they were like no I think I am. I'm like, "No, okay, no shame in admitting that.

44:35 >> Like, let's admit that and let's talk about what it would take to get you over there. Cuz by the way, I think you have the skills." And like, if that's where you want to be, that's where we should put you. >> I also really fundamentally believe that people are going to contribute most to the business if they are at the intersection of their skills and their passion. >> And so, I'm like, look, if someone is on my team and they have the skills but not the passion, then like I want to work with them and find the place that they're going to have the skills and the passion >> because I want them to flourish. I want them to do their best work. And I want that for them and I want that for the organization, too. And if you have the passion, I feel like we're in a time like AI really enables you to develop the skills far more quickly than you ever could have before. I feel like, you know, I'm not I'm not an engineer, but I can use clawed code to build a pretty accurate version of what I want something to look like and then an engineer can go. I would have never been I would have not been able to do that 5 years ago, four years, three years ago, two years ago. It's actually incredible what or if I really wanted to learn how to you know build skills in a given domain. I think working with AI for people that have passion in an area but lack the skills. I'm guessing, you know, if you have an organization that has this mindset of allowing people to be, you know, resources that can be plugged in in different ways and you have and you really communicate that to people, I'm guessing AI could accelerate people's >> Exactly. Guess what? You also now have a team member who's an endlessly patient tutor with an endless fountain of knowledge and intelligence and like, hey, if you want to learn, there's so many more interesting resources and so many more interesting ways to learn things. you said a minute ago when I was asking about the conversation around jobs and people you said there's so much that's depressing about that.

46:03 That's one of the pieces. I'd love to hear your broader take on this conversation and what does it get wrong and how do you think we should be thinking about what the future looks like in a world where AI is taking on larger and larger shares of human work? how do our jobs change? Should we be, you know, primarily pessimistic about this? Primarily optimistic, excited, nervous, and how should we think about the future? >> Yeah. I don't want to tell people how to feel. I feel any of those things on any given day.

46:33 >> Yeah. >> a couple things about the conversation as I see it that are like really depressing to me. So, one, I see one is the thing we talked about of like I see companies only then doing like, yes, let's save costs. I'm like, guys, that's so shortsighted. Like, there's other ways to think about this. >> Two, I do see people out there in the conversation who I think are just being deniialists in the face of this. And so I see a lot of people being like, "Nope, it's not happening. It definitely won't happen." And I'm like, >> "I think it is happening." And the evidence is pointing in that direction more and more. And obviously like anthropic has also been at the forefront of calling this out and saying like this is where the trend line is going. We need to pay attention. Three, I sometimes see people then like admitting conceding that this is happening and acting like this is a force of nature and there's nothing we can do about it and therefore we are all doomed. M I'm >> like look there are lots of things that we as a society can do and I hate the trope of a like societal conversation but there is a societal conversation to happen here which is like well what are jobs and what do we need jobs for and what do we need humans for and there's a you know there's a world in the future in which we could just be entirely protectionist and say yeah we want humans to have jobs because we think jobs are good for them and so even though AI could do it we're going to have humans do it there's a world in the future in which we could say do humans have to have jobs like are there different ways for like are there different ways for people to live are there different ways is for people to get their material needs met. Like we can go back and rethink a lot of the way things are structured. And so just acting it's this like it's this force of nature. It's going to come. It's going to take everybody's jobs. Everybody's going to be out on the streets. It's going to be terrible. And like we have intervention points. We have methods.

47:57 There are policy things that can be done here. >> And again, Anthropic has been involved in the policy conversations and helping brainstorm like what can we do? How can we make sure that we are mutually taking care of each other as these changes are happening. So those are all the things you're find depressing about this conversation and there's obviously a lot to you know be concerned about and be thinking through really rigorously but you generally seem pretty optimistic about your work and the possibility to have impact and what are what what gives you optimism?

48:26 >> I mean some of this is just a constitutional thing. I wouldn't I wouldn't say I'm optimistic to the point of like being delusional or anything here, right? Sometimes you see optimists and I'm like you're not even acknowledging right >> the things that could go wrong. one of our values at anthropic is hold light and shade >> and what we're really trying to talk about there is like intellectual honesty and like yes there's a lot of terrible things there's a lot of good things you should be able to like you know look at those really squarely in the face weigh those pros and cons and try to navigate a path like acknowledging both of those things. So I am constitutionally optimistic but that doesn't mean I'm trying to ignore all the depressing things that might happen or all the ways that this could be really bad. I just also think if you care about humans and you care about human flourishing as I do like we do have some potential reasons to be optimistic. We can see this as there's a doom wave coming at us and things could be terrible. We should absolutely do everything we can to prevent that. And then meanwhile we also need to be thinking through like but what does human flour what could human flourishing look like and can we use some of this as a reset? And like you know one thing I'll point out that I'm optimistic about is AI for science is really interesting these days and like really seems like it's taking off. I'm like, I broadly think that science has been good for human flourishing. And I'm I was showing my eight-year-old son a graph of child mortality you over the past 150 years at the dinner table the other night because that's apparently how we do in my family.

49:37 >> But, you know, that graph is driven by scientific discovery and innovation. And if AI can >> accelerate that, >> if we could accelerate that graph and other graphs that kind of point at what does human flourishing look like and how do we actually take care of everybody on the planet, I think there's a lot of reasons to be potentially optimistic in there. And so, you know, I think like you got to look squarely at some of the existential risks that could happen here and some of the terrible things that could happen out of AI. And we need to do our darnest to prevent all those. And we should also look squarely at some of this vision that could be coming for humans and what can happen and how we accelerate science and how we can reset on who we all are and what we do together and how a society should work.

50:10 And we should look just as squarely and be working just as hard for that. >> What a great note to end on. So, excited to hear a little bit of your vision for the future and it puts me in a better, mood to think about things in that way. I would love to end with a quick lightning round. So, I'll ask you, some quick questions and you can just share the first the first thought that comes to mind. What is a common people practice that most companies should probably retire?

50:33 >> I personally hate really finely graded performance reviews, like stack ranking systems, fine grades in between things. because I just think that ends up setting the wrong incentives for everybody in an organization. To our earlier point about are you working for the organization's mission? Are you working for yourself? Like those are finely grained extrinsic rewards. It leads to lots of arguing and lots of politics and lots of working for yourself. >> Okay. I think a lot of people would agree with you.

50:58 >> I think the research agrees with me pretty clearly here and the research. >> So it's not that spicy a take. >> If you want to build a talent dense organization, what's something you absolutely have to get right? >> You absolutely have to define what talent dense means to you. I the con like talent density is an incredibly important concept but it will look different in different types of organizations and I think the thing that you really need to get right is who is going to succeed in my organization what are the skills and traits and attributes that I care the most about and that's what talent density means for me and then go out and build that >> if we deploy AI effectively across an organization everyone's jobs become more fun >> okay last one the companies that are most successful over the next 5 years will be those that >> learn amazing thank you so much Hannah I've learned a lot from you today.

51:42 Thanks for being here. >> Absolutely. My pleasure. >> That was Hannah Pritchette, chief people officer at Anthropic. If you came into this thinking of the people role as a thankless behind-the-scenes job, I hope Hannah changed your mind because the throughine of everything she said is that this is one of the most exciting seats in the company and one of the most strategic, particularly at this moment in time. One thing she really shifted my thinking on is this idea of AI adoption.

52:06 that bringing AI into your company isn't like rolling out a new tool. It's more like onboarding a new employee. You have to give it context, set it up for success, integrate it into how the team actually works. And I'm also walking away from our conversation inspired by this idea that we should dream bigger, bring more imagination to what our roles, our teams, our companies, and even our lives could become. This is below the surface. >> >> If you liked this episode, share it with someone and subscribe wherever you get podcasts. I'll see you on the next episode.