Inside CVC: Gina Kline: Redefining Disability as Innovation

What if the greatest untapped driver of innovation isn’t found in Silicon Valley, but in the lived experience of people with disabilities?

In this episode of Inside CVC, Steve Schmith and Philipp Willigmann sit down with Regina “Gina” Kline, founder of Enable Ventures and a pioneer at the intersection of civil rights and impact investing. From her years litigating landmark ADA cases at the U.S. Department of Justice to her current role backing DisabilityTech startups, Gina has seen firsthand how inclusion fuels market transformation.

Listeners will hear:

• How lessons from landmark ADA litigation shaped her approach to investing and innovation
• Why the disability economy—worth trillions globally—remains overlooked, and why that’s about to change
• Real-world examples of startups building breakthrough solutions with disability-led design
• How inclusive innovation drives top-line growth, talent retention, and competitive advantage
• What the corporations of 2035 will look like if inclusion, aging, mental health, and AI displacement are addressed head-on

This conversation is both practical and inspiring—a call to action for corporate venture leaders, boards, and strategy executives to see disability not as “edge case,” but as the future of innovation.

Transcript

Steve: 0:04

Welcome to Inside CVC, the podcast that brings together leaders in innovation and capital and investment to explore the trends shaping the business of corporate venture capital. I'm your host, Steve Schmidt, and together with Philip Willigman, we're speaking to corporate investors, entrepreneurs, and ecosystem builders driving the future of innovation. InsideCVC is brought to you by UPath Advisors, helping corporations and startups unlock sustainable growth through strategic partnerships. To learn more, visit upath.com. That's the letter U, Path.com. And to catch up on all of our episodes, search InsideCVC on your favorite podcast platform or visit upath.com forward slash podcast. Today we're joined by Gina Klein, founder of Enable Ventures and Smart Job, and one of the leading voices driving innovation in technology that serves and empowers people with disabilities. Gina's career began as a civil rights lawyer, enforcing the Americas with Disability Act at the U.S. Department of Justice. Those early years fighting landmark ADA cases shaped her belief that inclusion isn't just a social good, it's a design discipline and a business advantage. In this conversation, Gina shares how the disability economy, worth trillions of dollars globally, is becoming one of the most powerful forces in innovation. We'll explore how inclusive design can transform mainstream markets, why disability tech is gaining momentum among investors, and what the corporations of 2035 will look like when inclusion, aging, mental health, and AI come together to redefine the future of work. Here's our conversation with Gina Klein. Regina, thank you so much for joining us on Inside CVC. How are you today?

Gina: 1:55

I'm great. It's an honor and a privilege.

Steve: 1:58

Well, thank you. I'm looking forward to this conversation, not only in terms of sharing all of the work you've done around disabilities and helping folks with disabilities, but also now how you're leading those efforts in terms of innovation and technology. One of the things I think I'm really looking forward to today is sort of the sense of purpose that will come out of this conversation. And so thank you for taking the time, going to have a wonderful conversation. Why don't we start with your the beginning of your career, civil rights lawyer, DOJ, leading some landmark ADA cases? Tell us what that experience was like.

Gina: 2:34

Yes, I really had the opportunity of a lifetime to be mentored and challenged by some of the uh leaders in the early disability rights movement as a result of finding myself as a trial attorney at the Department of Justice's disability rights section. And it was there that I really understood that disability rights are not only civil and human rights, but it was one of the last uh statutes that was added to the canon of civil rights in this country in 1990 with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act. And I had a real opportunity as a young lawyer to enforce the ADA, to be mentored, and to learn from individuals that were authors of the ADA, who helped to champion uh its enactment, folks who led grassroots civil rights movements to uh for in the decades that preceded that law. And I think this is an important thing for everyone to recognize, which is the law is merely the manifestation of a community movement towards rights that lasts sometimes decades and requires personal sacrifice, community organization, and elucidating issues to our government. And so I had a wonderful education and an opportunity to meet many people across the disability community over a period of years. And I I was a civil rights lawyer for 15 years prior to becoming an investor.

Steve: 4:21

So how do the lessons, those experiences, shape the way you you go about investing today? How does that shape your approach in building all of the activities that you're in leading all of the activities you're doing today?

Gina: 4:36

It's really interesting. A lot of people will ask in conversation why such a nonlinear path and and how internally dissonant it might seem to vindicate civil rights and work with the community enforcing a law and turn around and invest in the community. But I see them as actually very uh compatible and incredibly intersecting. What is really important about what we're doing with investment capital is in many cases we are as a community of investors and as a category in the capital markets, in many cases, we are now seeing the movement of capital into the rival image to discrimination. And what we saw for the first 50 or so years of the technology market, 50 to 100 years of the technology market, is that we saw the movement of capital into technology without even a question early enough as to whether that technology worked for real people. And that's a that's a pretty brazen, bold statement that I've just made. And I'll underscore it and stand by it, which is that we did not condition our capital to think about what other facts would be relevant to underwriting a technology opportunity. And by what other facts, I mean what other facts about real people's lives, whether that meant understanding people with intellectual developmental disabilities, physical disabilities, mental disabilities, whether it involved understanding speech and language, whether cognition mobility. And what we had was this recognition that the market could support scale and growth without the edge cases. That it's a recognition that the technology market need not worry, should move fast and break things, and need not worry about those edge cases. We have a grand reconditioning that's happening now in the technology market and as a result in the capital markets, where we understand that that was a mistake. That when we ask early in the design process who is using and benefiting from the technology, we have better consumer adoption, better market penetration. When technology and tools have realized their full design potential, meaning technology is open and free for all, it has great benefits for the edge cases. It sees an image of the consumer before in in the design process, well before it executed go-to-market strategy. What we see is a better business case. And what we see is a mitigation of risks that later have the ability to put real drag on founders, on companies' growth, and impose unnecessary and needless liabilities. And so what we are doing with the disability design discipline, which is very much a learning of the ADA, think of the world as it should be designed to be non-discriminatory. It's calling us to think of design as a technique to create the best technology in the world.

Philipp: 7:56

I love the way you're thinking about this, Regina. And it's a pleasure to have you on the podcast. Maybe just taking one step back, providing a perspective from Europe and Germany when it comes to civil rights. I grew up with my sister Catherine, who was born tied to a wheelchair. And back in Germany in the 70s and the 80s, nobody really thought about people in wheelchairs or people who had a disability, which I think was slightly different in the United States, just given that the US went through a lot of wars and a lot of people, veterans came back and needed other support. In Germany, that was not the case. And I remember my parents having lawsuits and fights with basic things around can my sister go to a normal school? Is she allowed to be sitting in a school where other normal people you guys on the podcast don't see I'm saying normal in a sense, what defines normal, but my parents had to go into lawsuits to make that possible, that my sister could get an education than everybody else. So it's it's fascinating to hear also here in the US that this kind of a people movement to make these things happen. When when we talk about disability and investing in the disability community, one of the things I always hear is, oh, is this not such a small space? Does it really make sense? Is it a big enough of a market when the venture and corporate venture space? The first question is like, what is the temp? What are the gross rates? From your perspective, how do you tackle this? And describe the economy and the implication to our listeners and why this actually really, really matters and is going to be more important in the future than probably ever before.

Gina: 9:36

It's always a fun part of every conversation to be challenged on the size of the disability market because it's an easy win on my part. Because really, I love when people ask this question. We need to wake up and realize in the United States, it's one in four American adults that strongly identifies with the disability. We are experiencing dual demographic trends. We have a rising generation, which I call the ADA generation, of people born of civil rights and technology, who are now prime working age years. They're knocking on the front door of new and emerging industries, on the front door of work, and they're demanding technology solutions that will meet their needs. This is the first generation born of civil rights and technology in the way that the ADA generation has been. And they are more likely than their predecessors to evoke the subject at work to self-identify. We also have the aging tsunami of people who are aging right into disability globally, who are the predominant super users of our healthcare system, who might not culturally identify with disability because it's new to them, but they have urgent demand for things like captioning mobility devices, for things like augmentation and digital personal assistance, caregiving solutions, for solutions with transportation. And so what we're seeing is a global population that amounts to 1.5 billion people on planet Earth that strongly identify with disability and growing. When you add to those numbers the prevalence of climate refugees, geopolitical strife, multiple wars around the globe. We're contacted by people who are working on assistive technologies for people who've been injured in wartime. What we're talking about is a world that needs to remain agile and nimble as it relates to assisting people, augmenting people with technology.

Philipp: 11:49

I think the other part is like a lot of people don't think about there's so much technology and so many solutions, which at some point were created for somebody who may have a limitation, right? Basic things like curb site, curb cuts in the smart city environment, if you talk about like a building environment, but also like things like voice assistance, text messages, which are all mainstream today, which had motivation at the beginning to support people who cannot talk or can't use their hands. So I think it's also an era where a lot of innovation is really coming when it comes from accessibility. But before we go deeper, I would love for you to maybe just define when you talk about disability tech, what do you understand by it? So disability and accessibility tech, so that our audience really understands the magnitude of this field.

Gina: 12:41

Yes. So a lot a lot of folks begin with the proposition that they want a diff definition. And what's interesting about definitions is that they are narrowing, they're winnowing, and they are practical necessity of lawmaking. And but what many people don't think about deeply enough is that there are also political compromises. So when we think about who is covered by a legal definition of disability, it was some type of political compromise as to who would be covered and who would not be covered by a certain law. As an investor, we think in a blue sky way. We don't think in quite the same way about opportunity. What we're looking for is how are people moved for the need for tools in their own lives with such a sense of urgency that it will remove barriers. So we are less interested as investors in particular subgroup populations, who's in and who's out, and more interested in how is a tool going to help as many people as possible within the disability community. And so what we look at is across the spectrum of disability, whether it's intellectual, developmental, mental, physical, emotional disabilities, mobility disabilities, cognition, what we're looking for is how effective are the design discipline with which these tools are made? Are they working to solve the problem? Are the folks that are in the driver's seat building the tools knowledgeable about the problem that they're solving? Are they testing systemically across the community that they're a part of or the community that is facing the barrier? And what we find is when we have a more agile and dynamic design discipline with which tools are made, we have cross-cutting solutions that impact multiple disability communities. The perfect example of this would be, Philip, captioning. We can find young Americans who are excluded, definingly excluded from equal education without captioning. And when they have a highly accurate, 99% accurate captioning tool in the classroom, they can achieve a level of educational equity they did not have before. We can also find older adults who might not even identify with being part of the disability community, who are hard of hearing, who utterly need captioning, and for whom captioning brings them back into the conversation. We can find kids, I shouldn't call them kids, students at Stanford who are using captioning because they have dyslexia and it provides them better note-taking. And so that's all off of the basis of one solution. And that's what we're talking about when we're talking about design discipline.

Steve: 15:37

You mentioned something earlier, and I maybe want to turn the lens uh if you if you wouldn't mind for from a personal perspective before we get back into maybe some of the opportunities for for partnership and investment, et cetera. You said something earlier relative to identifying if you have a disability and how people struggle with that. A little bit of a personal story. You know, I'm I'm on a third organ. I've had several surgeries in my life. Uh I carry medical supplies with me that I need every day, but I don't consider myself disabled, right? I do endurance, et cetera, et cetera. But at the same time, some of these things, I'm walking through the airport and I see these restrooms for disabled individuals. I don't feel comfortable, right? I don't, am I part of that class? I don't know, right? And so I'm curious when it comes to this notion of an individual and do I have access? Do I am I am I allowed to in to to sort of take benefit of these things that are helping disabled person? And I don't necessarily, I don't believe, fit on that, that, that defined list, that politically defined list that you talked about. Do you have any sort of advice for people that that might be listening to this? I'm also a caregiver to my two elderly mothers, and they have some of these things you're talking about as well. And so I'm curious from from a more personal side of the conversation, if you're somebody that looks at these things and understands these things and sees the benefit of these things, but are not necessarily comfortable taking advantage of these benefits because you might not fit on some sort of defined list, any sort of perspective or or conversation or points of view on that?

Gina: 17:19

Well, I think that's what's all very much changing, which is if do you use sliding doors? Are you have you ever used cruise control? Do you enjoy OXO grip can opener? I mean, these we're no longer debating eligibility or entitlement. Disability has become innovation. And it is not about whether you're in or out. It's about whether you acknowledge what is a true force in everyone's life, which is problem solving. And I think some of the best problem solvers in the world are people for whom the world was not designed with them in mind. And I don't think that the founders and makers and dreamers in our market are worried about whether you're the beneficiary of their designs. In fact, I think that they welcome you into their designs. And that's what has changed is that it's no longer a cultural debate about who's in and who's out. It's a cultural discussion about how disability will bring innovation to all parts of society. And people with disabilities will be the leaders in that movement. And as allies to that movement, the question is how to layer resources in to back and support people who have that design construct, who are building for the purpose of excluding the least number of people in society. Imagine that. Imagine what we got wrong 50 years ago in the technology market, where we were designing for the very few at the thought that we had no time to waste for the manifold diversities of end users. We thought we would move quick, break things, and scale fast. What we realize now is that if we take the time to design with everyone in mind from the beginning, we can solve really hard edge cases early, but we can also serve people in the community who may not have made up their mind yet about whether they culturally identify with the disability rights movement. And that's okay. That's an individual experience.

Philipp: 19:26

I would also say, and Steve, I really appreciate you sharing your story. I was at a couple of events over the last years, and there was, it always came back. Let's define what disability actually means. And I personally have a bit of, I don't like that type of conversation because I feel like we, I would love to hear your thoughts on it. For 20, 30, 40 years, I always find myself in rooms. Oh, let's define what is disability. What is, what is, what does it really mean? Back in the days at Deloitte, where I ran our DI initiatives in consulting, I was also, okay, who can be part of the disability group? Yeah, what does it mean or what does it not mean? And I've I find by spending time defining, we are kind of like losing focus on let's actually bring everybody together, because at the end of the day, we need to be inclusive of everybody and uh let's solve problems for everybody and also for the edge cases. And one story which sticks with me out of my childhood, my parents were super active in in Germany. And there was a, when I was six years old, there was a little computer standing in front of my sister. Like not little, it was pretty big, like think two, three big boxes and a big camera. And it was the first computer which was able to detect eye movement and so that you could be able to control a computer with your eyes. It was the same system, you know, it was uh created by MIT and NASA, and it was done by a company called Ramkaromic, which is still around. And they were really struggling then after they first got the first pilots out there to do the system to find people to finance it, because it was just this edge case. But to your point, Regina, today we were around with Google Lens and all these types of like systems to help you use your eyes to control stuff. And it's it's something for everybody. And that's kind of like which I guess fascinates me on the one inside, but also where I feel like we can do so much more to make sure we can actually focusing on on the edge cases, it creates opportunity for everybody.

Gina: 21:27

Yes. And I think don't mishear me. It is important for the advancement of civil rights that people who truly have experienced the most discrimination are a protected group and can experience the benefit of those laws. But venture thinks a little differently. And venture and in investment, what we're thinking about is how do we get people who have an urgency, an urgent need for solution in the design seat, and particularly in impact investing, how do we make sure that those folks, it's not that they won't move fast and scale, but they'll move fast with the community, not for the community. They will design, co-create, co-design, and iterate with people who are objectively experiencing the barriers, and and and it could benefit the rest of society and the rest of the consumer and user base. And I think that the example that was just used, one of the things that we are realizing about the rapid evolution of technology and disability tech is that we are at the front door of the technology market today, not a side door, a side alley, a specialized market, a niche market. What we're talking about is the directionality of tech in general, which is augmentation and personal digital assistance. And it was people with disabilities that have invented, dreamt, and iterated around this idea since the beginning, which is how do I not allow machines to take primacy, but how do I allow machines to support, uplift, and generate opportunity in order to allow me to center the human spirit in the economy? And I think essentially people with disabilities are working on that issue right now.

Steve: 23:28

Absolutely. Yeah. Such a terrific conversation. Thanks so thank you so much. So you you say opportunities. Where are the opportunities for partnership, for investment, for acquisition in this space?

Gina: 23:40

Aaron Powell I think that there is it is a testament to the market that we're in that we're seeing companies in the disability technology sector that are serving some of the largest companies in the world as their customers. And those companies are open to the idea that the disability community is exemplified in some of this inclusive, universally designed, powerfully iterated tech that is built from the grassroots with the disability community and open and ready to serve the talent acquisition, talent retention needs of large companies, the assistive technology needs of large companies, the need for workplace productivity tools, the need for upskilling and reskilling to fill skills gap at a time when AI and other technologies are displacing workers in the market. We're seeing founders with disabilities filling those skills gaps with technology that is designed for large corporations to acquire the talent they need right now. So what we're seeing is essentially a flexibility and agility on the part of makers in the disability technology space to serve corporate interests as customers. We're seeing companies like Inclusively that have 135,000 qualified people with disabilities looking for work on their platform, using their platform, and companies like Salesforce that have platformed that tech for talent retention around the world, across a global footprint. We're seeing companies like Ava that have that really highly accurate 99% captioning selling to companies like Nike and Disney for deaf and hard-of-hearing employees and for workers that might need better note-taking and better understanding of conversations and communications. So what when we see is that there is a new, just a new channel for value creation coming from these high-growth startups that are emanating from the disability community.

Steve: 25:47

So what do you tell venture leaders, chief strategy officers, board members? Is the business case for inclusion, and I think in particular, why at this point in the US where DENI seems to be under attack? What's the business case?

Gina: 26:08

I choose not to get into the language wars. I think that's a language war. The truth is that companies are in a war for talent retention. And there is no business leader that won't regard a tool that actually works to create better productivity as something that is a good to have, not a necessary. I think most employers are on the other have the shoe on the other foot. They're saying, I will lock in and adopt where I can see a tool that creates better retention, that creates better top-line revenue, that creates better upward mobility within the business, that creates better sort of customization for the worker. Because what we find is that today, not just in America, but across the world, the race is on to customize employment solutions, to make sure that workers are routined and that they have the tools they need to be productive. And we almost have underinvested in conversation on this piece. We have a conversation on the one hand about a small number of employees at work who've self-identified to their employer, but we have a sea of talent with profound unmet disability needs at their desks across the world who have not identified to their employers. And the economic opportunity that exists right now is to help those workers get to be their best selves, to self-optimize, and to have the tools they need to thrive at work and have the right job match in the right spot in the company, which is something that is really hard to achieve without the knowledge base of what workers need. And I don't just mean assistive technology tools, but filling skills gaps, upskilling and reskilling workers for the massive global disruption that we're in the middle of. We're frogs in a boiling pot. And it's not a disability-specific issue. But what's really interesting is that there's been a lack of approach to the unmet disability needs of all of workers because it has been relegated to one of those side alleys in terms of space that has been traditionally viewed as fraught with litigation and misunderstanding. And so what we're seeing is that there are the most bleeding-edge forward-leaning employers in the world are thinking about the unmet disability needs of their talent, regardless of self-identification. They're thinking that disability is a channel by which to help understand people's needs, customize them, and optimize worker contributions to the business. And it's an old stat, but I'll mention it, is the 2018 reporting that shows that companies that optimize towards disability at every level of the business have 30% higher net profit margins. And we know that globally. And we now have the tools that are originating in the disability community with founders with disabilities, with those who are not founders with disabilities, but who are co-creating with the disability community, who are generating altogether new workplace tools, new upskilling tools that the largest companies in the world can adopt.

Steve: 29:36

What do you think about the most successful inclusive corporations? What do you think they're going to look like 10 years from now, 2035?

Gina: 29:44

Well, I think that the most important thing to think about is what are the what are the core issues that really confront us right now in the technology market and in the workplace market? Let's not even talk disability. Let's just talk about. What is the wave, the coming wave that's going to hit us? And I think that we have a market that needs to adjust quickly. We are in the middle of a transition that is not only our generation's transition, but it's a transition that is striking for its effect on human civilization, period. And it's one of those things that was the thing of science fiction until it wasn't, where we are generating a public conversation about where we place man and where we place machine. And it really is a moral imperative that we have a full public conversation that includes all of us in it. Not just some of us deciding what parts of the human experience should be taken over by technology, but the very people who have the possibly some of the most significant downside to decisions in the technology market, and possibly also the most significant upside in their personal lives should be at the table. And I would submit to you that people with disabilities have experienced preceding technological revolutions that have left them with a great discriminatory effect. Example A would be at the dawn of the internet age, the blind community still fights a battle of civil rights with 90% of the internet remaining inaccessible to blind screen readers. And that was because their equities were not taken into account as stakeholders in the Internet Revolution 1.0. What we're facing now is even more epic, even more uh fundamental in terms of transcending from the basic internet age to the AI age. And we need to make sure that individuals with disabilities are at the table. And that means more than just in a pro forma fashion, but that they actually have economic stakes and have innovation stakes in how this technology is built. And not because that's a theoretical good thing to do, it's because they're some of the best builders in the world, the builders and makers that choose to exclude the least, that may not commit the original sin of the original internet revolution, that would bear in mind the full effect of technology on society, that would optimize towards the human experience and would center people. And why do I think that? Why is that my theory? Because we've seen through the ADA, the ADA is fundamentally a statute about modification and augmentation. That is exactly what the Zuckerbergs and the Sam Altmans are grappling with right now. And who should we trust with deciding the future of augmentation and accommodation and modification? And so I submit that I think some of the most exciting and possibly most responsible technology in all of the market is coming from this sector for exactly that reason, which is that it's founders that are grappling with the future of how to keep the urgent human needs at the core of why technology is created and not the other way around.

Philipp: 33:24

You're speaking so much to my heart. I was doing an interview in Germany the other day, and I said this following the amount of innovation my sister has probably driven, you can't even measure it. All the different test groups and things she was part of over the last 30 years. Yeah, what you just said, I think come coming from that perspective, a group of people who has limits, who has also make a real choice. I want to be part of community. What is the what are the means to be part of community? I think yeah, it's the right way to think about it. I love this, Gina. So, but but with that, if you think about the future and the innovation landscape, what gives you the most hope in terms of technology solutions you can see? And also, what are the risks we are really concerned about?

Gina: 34:16

I think that the matters that have the most urgency in the disability community are the matters that will help lead society. And so what gives me the most hope is that right now, today, there are people with disabilities and those working co-creating and co-designing with them that are working on the future of transportation, of geospatial mapping, of emergency management and global risk management, of communication and speech, of memory, of cognition. It gives me the most hope that we are taking on not just how do we deliver a pizza more efficiently with a drone to somebody in California, but actually issues of societal urgency with leaders that have equities in the issues that they're solving for, closest to the problems they're solving. It matters to them whether they get it right. When you think about creating a steering solution for a powered wheelchair, there's real ramifications if it drops off the curb. That founder is going to plan and design and originate his or her idea with particularity with a very low error rate. That's really different and fundamental than any other market. When that technology or any technology like it gets to market, it will be more efficient and more effective because it has uh fewer room for error. What gives me the most pause is that we live in a world in which there are people who are not close to the community who are planning technologies that have not been tested systematically with our friends in the disability community who should be end users. I should say that differently, who will be end users, but who should be early test testers. And so we have a choice right now. We have a choice whether to adopt AI, deep tech, neurotechnology, other tools that will have real, that could have real significant ramifications for discrimination in the future. We also have a choice as to where to put our equities in terms of technology, because we know that there are founders and builders and makers who are building highly responsible tech that will not only take into consideration being non-discriminatory, but might actually optimize use for all market penetration because of, I'm gonna say it, the definingly elevated customer experience, which I think we get from our founders with disabilities. So that gives me a lot of hope.

Steve: 37:00

Gina, thank you so much. Why don't we close with one more question uh for our audience, for the corporate leaders that are listening to this? Uh, what is the one call to action you would like to leave with them?

Gina: 37:25

I think the call to action is to know that there is something new in the in the known universe. And and rarely do you get to say this. There's a new category of inventor, innovator, founder out there who's building in a highly collegial, I would say global marketplace. It's always good to see a global marketplace with porous borders, with huge exchange of ideas across countries, which is what we're seeing in the disability technology sector. Um, but they're building for a future that they want to live in. They're building for not only a future non-discriminatory state of employment, of education, of higher education, but they're building for a world in which they're optimizing their talent, they're knocking down needless barriers, they're knocking down doors, and they want to work with you. And so there's this unique opportunity to change what the future of work, of education, what higher ed looks like by partnering. It's not that these startups can do it on their own. Yes, corporations are their customer base, but they're also helping to co-create the solution. And it's gonna fundamentally change the way people work and live. It's also gonna bring about new opportunity for there to be different leaders at work, for there to be folks that think about work differently in a more optimized fashion. So I'm very, very excited to live in that future that these founders are building. And I think that the more exposure that there is between corporate leaders of very large companies and mighty small, high-growth startups, that those partnerships can really engender a different world.

Philipp: 39:12

I love it, Regina. And yeah, let's collaborate and bring these founders, these startups to the corporates. And yeah, look forward uh to many more conversations and collaboration with you. And this was terrific. Thank you.

Gina: 39:25

Thank you both. It was really fun. Really appreciate it.

Steve: 39:28

Thank you. And uh before we go, Gina, where if someone's interested, where can folks go to learn more about you, learn more about your work?

Gina: 39:36

They can go first and foremost, happy for them to contact me. You can go to LinkedIn, Regina Klein, or they could go to enableventures.vc on the web.

Steve: 39:48

Wonderful. Thank you so much for spending some time with us. Amazing conversation. It ended exactly where I where I thought it would end. And that's a overwhelming sense of purpose from a more personal sense. Thank you for as part of this conversation, uh, giving me a little bit more personal permission as well. So thank you.

Gina: 40:07

Thank you.

Steve: 40:12

Thank you for joining us for this inspiring conversation with Gina Klein. Her message to corporate venture leaders is clear. The next wave of innovation will come from founders designing to include everyone. And corporations have a unique opportunity to partner, invest, and co-create that future. To learn more about Gina's work, visit enableventures.vc or connect with her on LinkedIn. And as always, you can find every episode of InsideCVC at uPath.com forward slash podcast or by searching Inside CVC wherever you listen. I'm Steve Schmidt, and with Philip Willigman, thanks for listening. We'll see you next time.