Close Compliance Gaps: Assess Risks & Implement Tech for Impact | Ep 2
Episode Transcript
Hilary Framke:
Hi everybody. Welcome to the Elevate EHS podcast. I’m your host, Hilary Framke from SafetyStratus. I’m here with Jon Liesmaki, who’s going to join us today for this episode. Jon, thanks for being on the podcast.
Jon Liesmaki:
Good morning, Hilary. Thanks for having me. I’m excited to be here.
Hilary Framke:
Fantastic. Let’s get into it. Tell us a little bit about your career history. I love hearing people’s EHS stories, how they got into their career. How’d you get into EHS?
Jon Liesmaki:
So I started out biology, chemistry major. I played college hockey on division three college hockey. So playing college hockey and keeping your grades up good enough to get into med school are two things that don’t go hand in hand. So I finished up, I was looking around I had an internship with Medtronic, so I was a chemist in one of their reliability labs.
I had a good family friend who had a small EHS firm back in my hometown and said he indicated like, Hey, there’s this master’s program in the University of Minnesota, Duluth that’s designed for EHS professionals. You might want to take a look really enjoyed looking at the program and jumped in and got accepted.
I thought it was a great way where I could still help people, which is what I wanted to do in medicine just a different route, and more of that occupational setting both people and the environment. Ended up at University of Minnesota, Duluth, finished up their master’s program.
From there had a couple different offers. I had an offer right away for an internship on Eli Lilly Pharmaceutical Company out of Indianapolis. I was lucky enough to write a scholarship paper for the semiconductor industry. They have what’s called SESHA, Semiconductor Environmental Safety Health Association.
And so as a student, they take so many papers. And so I presented at their national conference. And got a chance to speak to a couple of potential employers there. Eventually selecting to go with a consulting firm out of Southern California that was called EORM or Environmental and Occupational Risk Management.
That’s where I started my career in EHS. A great opportunity there. I got to learn a ton. Working on some different projects getting in and doing a lot of semiconductor stuff while I was there, but some other facilities as well.
From there, spent two and a half years down in Southern California doing that took a promotion and moved up to support their office in Portland, Oregon. From there, I had two main roles helping Intel they coordinate and hire a number of URMs, professionals to help with that large facility to have there called Rottner Acres.
And then a couple of their smaller semiconductor plants, just helping them out. But yeah, from there, I got the call to move back to Minnesota where I’m originally from with Honeywell. So Honeywell’s got a facility that does semiconductor for a lot of government projects out of Plymouth, Minnesota.
I spent 5 years there. Then just getting ready for my first manager role, took over as an EHS manager at a medical device company called Covidien. That was based out of Boston, but eventually got bought by Medtronic, which is obviously a big local Minnesota medical device company here. So moved up through the ranks at Medtronic and then got plucked to be a director of my current position with Harmon.
So at Harmon, we’re just, outside of medical device, but we do the large glass that you see on high rise buildings outside. So we both manufacture that glass and then use local construction unions to hang that glass on the side of buildings, and I’ve been with Harmon now almost six years and reporting right to the president. I have a great relationship there and actually helping do a lot of stuff, even outside my Harmon role with our parent company, which is Apogee Enterprises right now.
Hilary Framke: Fantastic. I think hearing that people have started from a lower role and like slowly progressed up through the career is one of my favorite journeys, right? Because I think you get such a broad perspective of EHS in that way, having been a practitioner first, like at a low level. And then slowly seeing, you have to bring different skills to the table at every different level especially in the soft skill category, to be successful in EHS.
Awesome. Let’s shift gears a little bit. Tell me about, you have brought up, you, you report directly to the CEO, right? The president top level leadership. Let’s chat about this. We know how big of a deal this is for EHS and its success in a business. I would like for our listeners to hear what tangible actions do you want to see from top level leadership that will make the biggest impact for your program?
Jon Liesmaki:
To me, the, It’s a couple of versions, but the biggest one is commitment. They have to be committed, right? And similar to how I report directly to our president, that’s where the commitment comes in from an org structure. And then the next, commitment comes in staff meetings, right?
Making sure that, even though, I might talk about my section of safety or EHS and what’s going on, but just being included in all those meetings from a business facing standpoint, right? So not just, Oh yeah, safety’s here. Yeah. Let’s talk about all the production and quality issues. Making sure that that person is truly part of the executive leadership team.
Hilary Framke:
And Jon, are you at the bottom or the top of the agenda? Just curious in this staff meeting.
Jon Liesmaki:
Safety’s first.
Hilary Framke:
Yeah!
Jon Liesmaki:
And, it usually starts the meeting off right, because we, knock on wood, I’ve been successful lately. So we’ve had some good numbers and things are going well and programs are going well. So I usually get, the difficult questions happen after I’m done.
Hilary Framke:
That’s a question I always like to ask. Because so often those meetings run over. And it’s great to be included, but if EHS is at the back end and then we’re always being cut or being asked to. Hey, you’ve we’re late. So can you give a quick update in one to two minutes, right? Again this is a tangible action that says a lot about how we prioritize EHS in our business.
Jon Liesmaki:
Yeah, absolutely. And then, all those other things too, all company meetings, right? Do we have a safety topic in those meetings when we’re talking, right?
Is it referenced, right? And you can see that in the culture- budget. I’ve been to some places where, you know, even with within our parent company, we’re not all of the EHS professionals have a budget, right? Hey, if something safety comes up, we’ll, we’ll pay for it out of the manufacturing budget.
Don’t worry. And they do a great job, right? They still fund stuff, but to have an actual budget for professional development for travel for staff for equipment, right? All of that stuff, right? And then being open to new ideas beyond compliance, right? And that’s a telltale sign that if I bring something new, something different is it going to be open to collaboration with those leaders, or is it just keep things where they’re at, right? Getting beyond what the normal safety professional do. And so all of that takes commitment from that top level leader in the way that everything is organized, everything is structured, everything is communicated and talked about. That’s probably the biggest telltale sign of the way an organization is going to work.
Hilary Framke:
I agree. I want to go back to budgets. Because this is a key point I want to make for our listeners, both EHS listeners and listeners. I think it is so valuable to do things like that, to actually designate and structure out an EHS budget. To have one that’s set aside for them, right?
Because again, about what it says. About how we spend. If we spend in EHS every year, it should be very easy for us to go back and to see how much we should allocate out of the total production budget for EHS. And if we’re not spending in EHS every year, we should be asking ourselves why, right? Because there absolutely are significant spends that need to take place, right?
And I think it’s important, as you said, for that EHS budget, to not only include potential compliance upgrades that need to take place, equipment upgrades that are significant, program technology, we’re going to talk about that next, because I think that’s a place that all EHS people need to go if they haven’t gone already.
Having technology on board, right? Having your staff, like you said, professional development travel so important. I would advocate for every business to have and to set aside. I don’t care how small it is, right? And every EHS person should feel this way. I don’t care if the first year it starts at seven grand. You have a budget. You have money set aside for yourself. Don’t get worried about the amount. Think about actually what it means to have that designation.
Jon Liesmaki:
Yeah. And like you said, there’s a lot of those, it’s not, it doesn’t have to be when you’re starting small, it doesn’t have to be huge pieces, right?
Or huge, values or whatever, right? You talked about like bringing donuts down to the maintenance staff in the morning and sit and have a conversation with them, right? That’s, 20, 30, 40 bucks in your budget that you use wisely to help develop that relationship. And those things go such a long ways when you have it. Something I’ve seen sites and wherever where they’re like we don’t want to spend anything.
We don’t want to spend anything or they’re afraid to go ask for money for those advances and those changes. And then our profession stops, right? If you give me, 40 bucks to do X or maybe a couple thousand dollars to revamp this program, or maybe even bring technology in, I can pay X on the backside of all those hidden costs that are going to get avoided because we did something right and spent some money.
Hilary Framke:
Absolutely. And then you have that flexibility to be able to partner and to section out costs, right? So let’s say, we know there was a huge walking, working surfaces upgrade, right? That happened in 2016, that incurred a lot of changes to like vertical ladders, right? Double bar, self closing safety gates, ladder safety systems. We’re quickly approaching the deadline for removing all the cages, right? That was, seemed so far away, but is quickly coming upon us, right?
Things like that, that you can go back to your business and you can say, look, EHS will pay 10 percent of that total cost, right? It’s an EHS upgrade. I have it in my budget. We can participate. I’ve budgeted myself wisely. I have extra money. And so to be able to show that you’re going to participate in reducing the profit loss, to the business for some of these necessary changes to be continually compliant I think says so much about an EHS department. There’s just nothing more impactful, sometimes than being able to do that with money, and what that looks like.
Jon Liesmaki:
The other piece of that too is, one of the things that I’ve adapted from previous roles was getting EHS in as a requirement in our CAR process, our capital asset request process.
So anything that needs a capital request across Harmon now has a separate tab for an EHS review and sign off. So before they can spend any money, even in the facilities, I’m getting a chance to review what they’re buying, and they’re probably buying it for production reasons, but I get the chance to review and make sure all of the safety aspects are looked at as well.
Sometimes we buy a number of pieces of equipment from overseas and it comes over, but it doesn’t necessarily might have the machine guarding we require in the US. It might be loud and it doesn’t have any kind of noise attenuation to it. Having me as a sign off before they can spend the money gives me a chance to ask the right questions.
It seems it’s a ton of money on the front end because of the equipment comes in and now I say, okay, now you have to spend another $100,000 getting all the machine guarding upgraded. So it’s OSHA compliant. It’s a huge savings for us. And I’ve been able to implement that. And that was a nonstandard request.
That was beyond compliance. Do they need to check with the safety person? No. But again, that kind of fits into beyond compliance, getting buy in from leadership’s commitment to say, yeah, that’s a really good idea. Let’s have a new separate tab for EHS to sign off. And Jon needs to review all of these before you guys can spend the money. It touches on a number of points that we covered earlier in the podcast.
Hilary Framke:
No, absolutely. And I think, too, there’s something to be said about socializing. You talked about socializing ideas, right? There’s also something to be said about socializing our current compliance adherence. Every single business that I’ve gone into my entire career has significant gaps in compliance, right?
And they may not even be related to risk per se. It may just be a compliance gap, right? There’s no way that we can adhere to the 36 inch rule on this panel, right? Because of the way there’s a huge piece of equipment. blocking, that we would have to relocate, that would take us you know, $70,000 in order to do that, right?
Things like that, that we’ve gotten in our own way because we haven’t had EHS included or we didn’t consider it, right? Things like that. We made a decision as a business. It’s important for the business to be aware of its compliance exposure. I would love to hear about how you’ve handled this in your career, because I know this is something that many of our EHS colleagues are dealing with.
How do you, without being overwhelming them, right? the cost and what that will look like, right? Cause we are all for profit businesses. How do you socialize this idea of we have gaps in compliance, right? That potentially all in like machine guarding all in or electrical safety all in, or significant costs. How do you work through that?
Jon Liesmaki:
Yeah, that’s a fantastic question. A lot of leaders are non EHS leaders the top of those rungs, the executive leadership teams often don’t really realize that, yes, almost every company has compliance gaps. We’re working on them. We may accept some level of risk like we talked about, but we know them and we’re working on at least within the EHS profession. So communicating that to them is a big deal and making sure they understand those. The best way in my past that we’ve really done that is, we would have an annual risk assessment that we would do. And part of that risk assessment was a quantitative set of numbers between, what is the number of people that are impacted? The frequency, how often are people impacted on this? And it’s really a numeric base and you multiply these numbers together, maximum probable loss, right?
If someone were to get hurt by this, are they losing an arm or is it going to be a first aid cut? And everything in between. And you put numbers associated with those risks. And then one of the numbers is, are we currently compliant? Or are we not compliant, right? And that’s another multiplier in there, and it would kick out, critical risk, high risk, medium, low, insignificant risk. So we would go through the facility and do this once a year, and anything that was critical or high was required to have a risk reduction, corrective action, put in the corporate system with a name and a date, and you would have put a project plan together to say, hey, here’s how we’re going to reduce this risk. So each of the business units would then compile their list of criticals and highs. And those would be presented to the CEO of the company to say, here’s the open biggest risks we have, here are the action plans, and sometimes they would require capital to move a huge piece of equipment outside of an electrical panel clearance, right?
That’s a simplified example, but a lot of these things, sometimes would require capital. So that’s where they would bring them to the CEO in the annual AOP, so the Annual Operating Plan, or the STRAP. So the three year plan and say, okay, here’s how we’re going to reduce these risks, whether it’s incrementally year over year, or we need to put in per a capital request for the next year to be able to do this.
That’s something that’s in their wheelhouse in the leadership because there are numbers, direct data, right? I can show you this is why this is a risk and why we’re out of compliance and why we need to make a change. So that’s something that I’m trying to work in my current role is trying to get that up into our standard operating processes to do that large risk assessment.
At the previous company, it was done across all departments. It was done with multiple disciplines. We have a couple of workers from the floor. We’d have a couple of maintenance people, engineer facilities in that group. So those are those discussions would take place year over year. It would be super interesting because we would rotate the different people that were on those teams and we had six or eight people per team. But we’d have multiple teams to cover the entire facility, right? The entire campus. And it was a heavy lift but it was so beneficial to us because we typically know some of those compliance gaps, but with that multi discipline team, we would come up with things that are hidden factory practices that we might not have had any idea about.
One example came to mind, we’re sitting there going over this and we got to the section that says hot work, right? And we’re like, no, we don’t have any hot work in this area. It was a worker who’d been there for a long time. This lady, she says like, what does hot work mean?
Because her first time in one of these, groups. We’re like, it just means open flame spark kind of gave her the standard definition. She’s like, oh we cut these glass tubes on second shift in the back corner. We have a little, acetylene torch back there. And we’re like, you do what?
What? What now? No idea. And then she’s like, yeah, we’ve been doing this for years and this was like, my third iteration through this system. Yeah. I’ve been in that facility. I’ve been down in those workers areas like you talked about earlier. No idea this is going on. It gave us an opportunity to, you know, well, yeah, that’s a critical risk.
We’re not in compliance. We don’t have hot work permits. We don’t have a fire watch. We don’t have XYZ. Oh, by the way, that acetylene torch you’re putting next to is next to the flammable cabinet that has gallons upon gallons of stuff that could blow the building up, right? So it was giving us that opportunity. It gives us those non compliant risks that we can bubble up and hand to leadership and say, these are the things that we need to work on and then provide that insight with the data. That quantitative approach really speaks to that level of leadership.
Hilary Framke:
I love this answer, Jon. Thank you for this. Thank you from me and our listeners, this is so impactful and I’m totally aligned with you. And it’s something that I’ve found in my career is one of those key lessons, right? Qualitative is important. You have to have that qualitative purpose. But if you don’t balance that with the quantitative measurement and the quantitative results of your business, that quantitative picture it does become and start to feel like crying wolf.
EHS is important. EHS is so important. This is important. And you’re constantly saying, everything is at the same level. Everything’s critical, and that will slowly wear down a non EHS leadership team over time. They’ll start to not listen to you, right? You might at first win them over, right? With your messaging, because it’s heartfelt.
But over time, you’ll start to lose them, right? Because everything sounds the same. So to give that range of these are the things that are critical. These are the things that are severe here. And then the picture right of where we are and getting to an acceptable level of risk. That’s how you’re going to make a business case.
That’s how you’re going to move your business forward and elevate it. And I think the important piece, the other pitfall I’ve seen with this is don’t overestimate things just to get funding. If it is critical, you have to be able to back that with what you said, either the outcome is so serious that could transpire, or it’s a significant compliance gap that could lead to significant exposure in the business, were we to be inspected or something else.
So important. I love that. And almost like an EHS criticality assessment. Look, on the hinge of that, right? Because I think there’s two things. So there’s the things that will score high, right? On a risk index, right? That’s what we’re talking about with this criticality assessment. I think the other side of things that often gets overlooked are the minor risks that are ubiquitous.
Let’s say chemical labeling is a great example. Okay, a chemical missing a label, not a big deal. Maybe, right? Most of the time, not a super severe chemical, not of concern. It’s considered a compliance gap. Now, 200 chemical containers missing labels? This now if you look at one picture, not critical but when you look at the cumulative impact of being non compliant in that one item a potentially serious risk.
How would you suggest going about dealing with that? Do you upscale it just based on probability, then sometimes it’s still not even going to get to critical, right? Because the severity is never going to be, as high as it needs to be. How do you push those getting those very ubiquitous what you’re seeing everywhere, minor risk dealt with?
Jon Liesmaki:
Yeah, and that becomes where is it a one off? Do we have a systemic problem? That is going to hit to the number of people that are impacted. Changes so that ups the level, especially right?
One bottle X that’s not labeled properly, maybe, two to six people, whoever’s in kind of in that work cell versus we don’t label, secondary containers very well anywhere. Now, I have a plant of 1000 people. And that risk number goes up because of the number of people that are impacted.
And then you hit that number drives it up. And then your frequency, right? Are they being exposed to this? Only so many people are being exposed to it on a daily basis because that’s now if it’s all of these people then it elevates that number of times that that risky exposure is given as well.
So it drives the number up into that listen, this is more than just we missed 1 or 1 got dirty or 1 started to fall off. We don’t realize that we’re supposed to do this. That one off, I might not even give a, Hey, you’re out of compliance, but those 200, now you’re out of compliance.
Now there’s probably three different categories that I upped numbers on. It may be a medium risk or a low risk if it’s that single one off versus we have a systemic problem because multiple people are not following a compliance rule, right? And that’s where it can drive it up and you can say, all right, this is maybe a culture issue or maybe just a skill and knowledge issue that they don’t realize that training that we say, secondary containers need to be labeled, right?
Those are falling off somewhere. Or you have a management issue, right? You have management issue that says, and this is where sometimes those managers, it’s the things they don’t say that mean more than the things they say, right? If they’re walking by and they see all these labels that are missing and they’re not talking to their employees.
Hey, we got to make sure we get that relabeled. Then it’s a top issue that we have problems with in your scenario. There’s a lot of layers. You have to find where that root cause is. And where it’s coming from.
Hilary Framke:
Yeah, in my mind, and in my previous life, being a practitioner. Whenever I saw something like that, that to me, I would label that a process gap, right? Immediately once you see that level of recurrence. And look, that could be anything, right? That could be recurring safety incidents, right? That we’re seeing the same over and over, those I always think about those little step ladders. We had a big issue with those when I was in the med device industry. People constantly falling off of those, tripping on them, tripping over them, right? I’m like, I keep seeing these two to three step ladders. This is a process problem. Are we going to do something about this?
Are we going to see that these aren’t a good fit, for our workplaces? They’re supposed to be for temporary usage. But we have them built in as a permanent use with the way that we’re feeding machinery and things like that. We’ve made a process gap ourself, right? We’ve created process risk.
Whenever I see those process recurrences and gaps my mind always goes to technology. There has to be some type of technology solution that we can go pursue to be able to get our hands around this process gap, either through data extrapolation or some type of optimization that we need to be seeing these insights more readily, right?
And I always think tech enabled is a way that we can get there. What are your thoughts about when to implement technology solutions?
Jon Liesmaki:
Technology, the biggest challenge with technology is change itself. People inherently do not want change. There was a study came out just recently, I read this article of why do we continue to watch reruns on some shows when, all of this new content’s coming out daily, streaming services, everything like that.
And every time you log into Netflix, there’s another new series. You know that’s changing the way. But why do I go back and turn on Friends or Modern Family and watch the same episode 17 times because it’s comforting to us, right? Our normal things that we do over and over.
Technology comes into that mindset as well of Oh, I have to do something different now and getting people to buy into that. And so it’s a two sided coin of getting the right level of technology so that it’s useful and it’s not cumbersome and I’m not trying to babysit it.
And I’m constantly fighting it, but then getting that end user acceptance. And when we do those technology changes. Going all the way back to talking about socializing stuff. Talking about it, getting them aware, not just rolling it out. I was in one facility where they were changing their incident reporting platform.
They had been working on it up at corporate and we heard an inkling here or there, and then all of a sudden on a Wednesday or Thursday, they roll out saying, Hey, here’s the training. We’re cutting over to the new system on Monday. And you’re like, Whoa, what? And so the use of technology has to be done the right way, or it can blow up in your face, right?
That end user acceptance has to be huge. And so integrating it, that accepted technology solution and using it to get the data we need readily available. And so in my current role in Harmon, when I first started, they were doing their incident reporting was, kind of paper and email.
Their audits were being done on paper. They were being kept at the local level, whether that was a construction project site or our manufacturing plants. To me, then sitting at the corporate level, with leadership saying, Jon, what do we need to work on?
It’s sailing in the pitch black dark without a map and no GPS. I don’t know where any risks are. Cause I don’t.
Hilary Framke:
Yeah. Especially with all the installs all over and all at height. Because you’re doing commercial buildings.
Jon Liesmaki:
Yep. So we could have an injury in New York City and without that feedback loop to me to say, Oh, that’s a gap in our process.
We need to communicate this out to everybody. We could be making the same mistake in Dallas and potentially about to hurt another person. And so some of the solutions that we use now allow us for, using mobile devices incident reporting on a cloud based solution that can send out notifications to myself and the leaders.
Hey, we just had this happen, allows us to follow up, allows us to now develop trends and say, Hey, we printed this out. Our biggest risk is in these two areas, which might not have been known just by using that qualitative approach you talked about, right? The feel of, Hey, we have to make sure we were focusing on this and this well, when you have the data in technology solutions, and then you can honestly say yeah, those things feel big, but these other three things, we’re finding them most often on our audits, they’re also causing us injuries. Is a game changer to be able to change your culture and get understanding and get, that leadership buy in, right? Data to them means a big difference. And those technology solutions help us so much.
When I first started Harmon, they said, take a look at our trends and future compliance. It was like a two week effort to dig out all those paper records and say, here’s our problems, right? Now I can log into my technology solution that I’m using now and it’s 30 seconds and I can tell you where our biggest risks are and what our problems are. And I probably have a project plan and they’re working on closing out corrective actions that are going to help us reduce that risk.
Hilary Framke:
Yeah, and even that too, we didn’t even chat about like the visibility on the corrective action resolution process, right? Being able to list all the corrective actions, to rank them by severity, to see who they’re assigned to, to see how long they’ve been open, right? And reassign them to new people, escalate it to their supervisor, if you’re not getting traction, right?
We as EHS people, I spent so much of my career administratively just chasing that part of the process, which is already lagging. Something’s already happened and we’re behind the eight ball, right? As they say I haven’t even gotten to the proactive things.
Jon Liesmaki:
Yeah. And what you talked about, right? That my solution right now, my technology solution right now does all that for me. Amazing. So if they have a finding, it automatically generates a kind of a general corrective action for at least on our simple audit. And it assigns it to whoever that supervisor or superintendent on the job site is automatically.
So I didn’t have to add it. It happens automatically and then they get the email reminders at the corrective action when it’s due. And if they need to change the due date. And then if they go past you, the system automatically emails the supervisor of that person and says, Hey, your employee is late on this corrective action. I save so much time not doing what you just talked about. The system does it for me.
Hilary Framke:
That’s right. And look, I think the biggest reason for technology, right? One, the optimization, the visibility, right? The transparency, certainly all the things that gets you the business continuity, the documentation, right?
We all know that’s important. But actually, what I think is the most important fix is the time save on your technical EHS experts so that they can go out and be technical EHS experts out on the floor, not behind a computer, not in a meeting. In process, seeing the risk, making relationships, driving change.
Jon Liesmaki:
And that’s a great point. My current president that I report to uses a phrase that I use all the time now. You can’t run the business and change the business at the same time. And from a professional running the business is doing all those simple things you talked about. Chasing people down, all that administrative stuff. I can’t change the business if I’m running the business.
Hilary Framke:
Oh, I love that. Oh, we’re going to end on that because that is extremely transformative. Say that one more time for me, Jon, for our listeners.
Jon Liesmaki:
So you can’t run the business and change the business at the same time. So running the business is those daily tasks, making sure audits are getting done, making sure, investigations and, following up on corrective actions and making sure people are doing all those things.
Changing the business is coming up with, groundbreaking programs. I can step away from the day to day. And I can do research on the next level. I can look up ideas. I can partnership with other groups that come up with, okay, how am I going to change the needle? How am I going to change my business? And I can’t do that if I’m stuck in the weeds running the business.
Hilary Framke:
That’s exactly right. And I would say that’s a big reason why I’m always an advocate for we can’t be out here policing, for PPE compliance. And, did they do their fire extinguisher inspection, all these really low level EHS tasks, that’s why we need to work to delegate and integrate those back into the business, because all of that is a time suck, right?
That’s, like you said, a running the business type of activity. And when you’re running the business, you can’t change the business, which is the strategy side of things.
Oh my gosh. Love that so much. Definitely going to steal that. That’s a game changer. Thank you, Jon. This has been a fantastic podcast.
Thank you for all of your insights. Learned so much from you. It was great to see your perspective. I think the things that we covered, especially around empathy, the impact of top level leadership, the pitfalls from being so like black and white and compliance versus moving into a more than compliance approach.
And all the value that you can get out of that in having a successful EHS program is game changing. That’s what this Elevate EHS podcast is about. So thank you for sharing your insights with us, for spending this time with us and our listeners. And Jon, wish you continued success in your business, in your EHS career.
Jon Liesmaki:
All right. Thank you. It was a pleasure being here.
Hilary Framke:
Fantastic. Bye y’all..
