Katica Roy: AI Could Eradicate Bias at Work in 10 Years

Would you be surprised to learn that over 300,000 Black women were recently pushed out of the US labor force in just three months? Do you know how that impacts all of us? It was Katica Roy’s research that brought this to our national attention, first from her MSNBC byline that broke the story and then from the front-page article about it in the New York Times. In this episode, host Michael Baran asks Katica more about how that is happening and what the implications are for workplaces and for the country more generally.

In addition, Katica discusses a wide range of issues, including (a) how policy is not gender neutral, (b) how we all fund the pay gap through our taxes, (c) how gender equity is not just women’s rights, (d) men, mental health, and the “man box,” (e) how AI has bias, but can also detect and eradicate bias in the workplace in just 10 years, (f) and how she sees equity as a massive economic opportunity.

Resources mentioned:

• Katica Roy’s MSNBC article breaking the new about 300,000 Black women pushed out of US labor force
• New York Times front page that mentions Katica’s research 
• Katica Roy articles, from Forbes
• ABC News video with Katica Roy interview
• Katica Roy website 

Transcript

Katica Roy: AI Could Eradicate Bias at Work in 10 Years

Is your company struggling, navigating through high turnover, toxic leadership, or a culture that's holding your team back from reaching its full potential? Well, you're not alone. So here's your host and guide, Michael Baran.

Michael Baran: Hello everyone and welcome to the Culture Advantage podcast. I'm your host, Michael Baran, and today I am just thrilled to bring you my conversation with Katica Roy, who is an award-winning gender economist and who is going to drop so much knowledge on us in this interview, and she's got the research to back it up.

She knows. What she's talking about, and in this interview she talks about some things that every organization must [00:01:00] consider. I mean, every person must consider, right? She talks about the pay gap and how we all subsidize it through our taxes. She talks about how gender equity is not just about women's rights, it's about all of us.

She talks about current trends where over 300,000 black women have been pushed out of the US labor force in just three months, and she doesn't just talk about that. It was her research that broke the story in the first place. What else? Everyone talks about how there's bias in ai, right? Well, Kaka talks about how AI could actually eradicate bias in the workplace in just 10 years.

She talks about how leaning into equity is an economic opportunity, and that's how we need to change the narrative for organizations and for the country and for the world. She brings hard numbers, hard [00:02:00] statistics, quantitative research in a way that. I so appreciate and that really compliments the more qualitative work that I do.

So I'm really happy to bring her research and her wisdom to you. Let's just get right into it.

Okay everyone, today we have the incredible pleasure of having as a guest, Katica Roy. I am going to tell you all about the incredible things she has done. Katica Roy is an award-winning gender economist, and we'll talk about what that means in a moment. Former Global 500 executive programmer data scientist, and the CEO and founder of Pipeline, which is an award-winning SAS company, recognized by time and fast company.

C-N-N-M-S-N-B-C, Bloomberg, C-B-S-A-B-C, Yahoo Finance. They all seek her sharp, unconventional economic insights now. Katko was the one who [00:03:00] broke the story in her viral M-S-N-B-C byline about the 300,000 black women that have been pushed out of the US Labor force in just three months. A data analysis amplified by Secretary Hillary Clinton, Senator Raphael Warnock, and others that sparked national coverage and policymaker attention.

Her insights have appeared on the front page of the New York Times and in s and p Global, the Boston Globe Essence, Ebony and Forbes, a leading voice. On the economics of equity, Kaka is the flagship columnist for Equity Observers, equity by Design, where she explores how inclusive economies drive growth.

Her bylines span the World Economic Forum, fortune, fast Company, Bloomberg Forums, M-S-N-B-C, Harvard Business Review, reaching more than 2.9 billion impressions. [00:04:00] She has interviewed national and global leaders from former President Biden, former Vice President Harris to Senators Booker and Gillibrand spoken on over a hundred stages worldwide, including South by Southwest CES Web Summit, and for Fortune 500 companies like Google, Cisco, and JP Morgan.

She's the daughter of an immigrant and a refugee and a proud bread-winning mother of two. Kika embodies her belief that equity is not charity, it's a growth strategy. So Kika, welcome to the Culture Advantage. Thank you for having me. I'm so excited to dive right in. I mentioned we are gonna talk about what a gender economist is 'cause I bet not everyone has heard that.

Can you just tell us in plain language, what is a gender economist, what do you do in that role? Yeah, so I'm going to explain, first what folks might have seen of my work and then I'll talk about what it is. Perfect. [00:05:00] So you mentioned in the intro, that my M-S-N-B-C byline, which first broke the news with my original research, that 300,000 black women have been pushed out of the labor force, in 2025.

That's one example of what a gender economist does, or those forced exits had cost, the US economy over $37 billion in lost GDP on the front page of the New York Times. One of the things that I talked about was the fact that in the same time period, so from February to July, black women had lost 319,000 jobs at the same time that white men had gained 365,000 jobs, and that the cuts that have happened in 2025 have disproportionately impacted black women.

So that's an example of what your audience might have heard of. Mm-hmm. Of what a gender economist does. There are two. Aspects to it. One is that a gender economist looks at the economy through the lens of [00:06:00] intersectional gender equity. So gender plus race and ethnicity and age, but also looks at equity as not just the right thing to do, though it is, but actually as a massive economic opportunity and quantifies that those exits this year, as I mentioned, are the $37 billion in lost GDP.

Don't just impact black women and their families, it impacts everybody. If you care about the solvency of social security, if you care about, any kind of programs, if you care about the growth of, our economy and good paying jobs, those exits should concern you. Yeah, can you connect the dots for folks?

'cause this is complicated stuff between those big picture numbers, right? All the 300, oh, more than 300,000 jobs lost to black women, more than 300, you know, 65,000 jobs gained by white men. Can you connect the dots on how that impacts all those other things that you're talking about? [00:07:00] Social security and all the other stuff.

So social security specifically, in that Social Security and Medicare and other programs, we have them at the state level as well, are payroll based programs. So in other words, the more people that have jobs and get paid via payroll, then pay into those systems. When you have people, like huge cohorts of folks losing jobs at that scale, like 300,000 black women.

Now you're talking about 300,000 fewer people paying into the programs on which we all rely. And for Social Security specifically, we know from the latest research that social security is supposed to run out of money in eight years. So if you care about social security or if you care about getting benefits, you should care about black women having not only jobs, but good paying jobs.

That's just one impact. I mean, you're also talking about everything from rent. [00:08:00] To mortgages. So any type of company that relies on folks to have jobs like banks, right? Which, rely on deposits in order to lend money, to make money on those deposits. Insurers are the same thing. They need more people paying into, into that insurance than taking benefits out.

Right. Those are just two examples, but your local grocery store, your restaurants, your cars, all of those things are impacted when people lose jobs, especially at that scale. Yeah, yeah. Gosh. And help people understand how is that not offset by the jobs that are being gained, say by white men?

Well, it's not a one-to-one. Mm-hmm. So, it's not like you can't just trade one for the other. What makes the impact to black women? So. Specific. There, there's two things. I mean, one is like they're the only cohort that has lost that amount of jobs at scale. [00:09:00] But the other piece of that is that black women are both the most educated cohort in the United States labor force.

So they are more likely to be underemployed. So they are the exact folks we don't want to lose out of the labor force. But the second piece is that they're actually the breadwinners in 52% of black households with children under the age of 18. So when you're talking about the impact for our labor force in our economy, you're talking about, the impact to today's labor force, but also our future labor force.

Because one of the things that we know from research is that the single most important factor that determines a child's future economic standing is their parents'. Economic standing. Mm. And so it's really important. So when you look at black women as a cohort, right, they are the breadwinners and 52% of, all black households with children under the [00:10:00] 18 age of 18, which is about 9 million black children.

That black, breadwinning moms support in the United States. It's about a third of all children that live in breadwinner mom households in the us. So you're talking about a huge cohort of folks that we are impacting not just today, right? So food security, housing, healthcare, et cetera, but also, our future labor force.

Wow. Wow. It's fascinating and scary. How, if folks. Hear those numbers and maybe have an idea of why so many black women have lost jobs, but don't know exactly the specifics like you do. Can you walk us through like how those folks are exiting the job market? What is going on? What are the different factors?

Are there specific industries? Just walk us through how it's happening, why it's happening. So, there's really three pieces just so [00:11:00] folks understand. There's labor force participation, employment, right? Like having a job and, unemployed. So you're looking for a job but you don't have jobs.

So those are like three different numbers. But in terms of, folks understanding, so there are a few different factors that impacted, black women's employment in 2025. One was the federal job cuts. We know from research that, black women are 6% of the labor force in the United States. They made up prior to the federal job cuts in 2025, 12% of the federal labor force.

And there's a very good reason for that. I'll talk about that in a second. And they made up 33% of the cuts. So they made up almost three times the amount of the cuts relative to their representation in the federal labor force. That's the first reason. I'll talk about why they have such a high employment in the federal [00:12:00] labor force in a minute, but that's the first reason.

Yeah. The second reason is the pullback of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. So both funding. That's one, but also just those positions in general. And I'm not saying that because black women have those like that, like they might be employed in the DEI position.

But in actual fact, we know, that because black women sit at the intersection of race and gender, they tend to be most likely to be impacted by inequity. And so when diversity, equity, and inclusion programs go away, they are also most impacted. They're not the ones who benefit the most from the programs, but they're the ones that are most impacted when they go away.

That's the second. The third one, who does benefit the most? Got it. Guy White women. Yeah. White women benefit the most from, DEI programs. The second, the third reason is artificial intelligence in tech. Mm-hmm. So we know that. Black women sit, their jobs are one of the [00:13:00] highest risks to being automated.

A lot of that has to do with occupational segregation, kind of tying back to what I talked about, black women being underemployed, not through any fault of their own. And so their, job risks, of automation is about 21% of their jobs. The jobs that black women hold, yet they represent only 3% of the tech labor force.

Mm-hmm. So they're not actually in the rooms where the decisions are being made about what jobs we automate, et cetera. There are, so you'll probably ask me about solutions. So I'll just stop, hold that answer for a second. And then the last piece is that we, and we saw this during the pandemic. We've seen it other times as well, but we in the United States don't use what's called gender mainstreaming or gender budgeting.

So Canada uses it, Finland uses it. A lot of European countries use it. Iceland uses it, which is this idea of we assume [00:14:00] that public policy is gender neutral. It isn't, it's gender ignorant. Mm-hmm. Okay. And so we make, and I'll give you a concrete example. We make decisions about policy, assuming that it's just going to impact everyone the same way.

And the data shows that that's not an actual fact true. So one example of that is during the pandemic, we sent out stimulus to households. And the way that that stimulus was calculated was you got a certain amount per adult and you got a certain amount per child. So if you were a married couple. With two children, you got more money than if you were a breadwinner mom with two children.

And we know from, for instance, my research that breadwinner moms as an entire cohort, and I'll talk about what this means specifically for black breadwinner moms as a cohort have the largest gender [00:15:00] pay gap of any women in the labor force. Mm. 66 cents on the dollar. Wow. As they Yeah. Of any cohort.

Now, when you look at that data through an intersectional gender lens, so as a gender economist, right, gender plus risk ethnicity, black breadwinner moms have the largest gender pay gap of any women in the labor force. It's 44 cents on the dollar if we have, oh my gosh, yes. If we, they, if they earn about, on average $15,000 per year per child, you're talking about just, I mean, it's like.

Not at all enough. So when that funding went out, it didn't take any of that into account that, like if you're looking at breadwinner moms, they're underpaid, they're less likely to have savings. They were more likely to be in, positions that were impacted by the pandemic. Right? We know that women lost 57.5% of all jobs during the pandemic.

Mm-hmm. So now I have [00:16:00] less money coming in from the stimulus 'cause it's not taking into account that, you know, that I actually had less money coming in before. And by the way, the last thing I'll say is this. If you think this doesn't impact you, you are wrong. If you are American taxpayer, you are funding the pay gap.

You subsidize companies that underpay their employees through social welfare programs. Mm. Can you say that again and again in a couple different ways so people understand it? So, just one example of how inequity impacts all of us is that if you are an American taxpayer, right, you pay either taxes as in as your individual income, you pay it on your capital gains, you pay it as a corporation.

However, you pay taxes into the federal government, you subsidize the gender pay gap [00:17:00] because we know that the sectors that historically and occupations that historically have the largest gender pay gap, and therefore people rely on social welfare programs to make up the difference. Like we as American taxpayers are subsidizing that.

Mm. And why is it set up like that? Because we don't. Because we think, because we assume. So this is the last point of like, why did black women lose jobs? Those four reasons that I laid out. The last one was gender mainstreaming, gender budgeting, right? This idea that we assume that public policy is gender neutral, and when I say gender, just so PO people know, I mean intersectional gender equity, gender plus race and ethnicity and age, right?

So it's 120 intersections of data and we know that that public policy is not gender neutral. It's gender ignorant, and we all fit the bill for that ignorance. Every single American taxpayer. Yeah. Gosh, I [00:18:00] bet there's so few people that kind of get that. So I think that'll be really interesting for people to hear.

Just one quick point of clarification or maybe two. One is just when you say breadwinner mom, you mean what is that exactly? Yeah, so that is, mom, like with one or more children under the age of 18 who earns 51% or more of the family's income. Okay, great. And then you talked about coming back to why are black women so overrepresented, right?

In federal government agencies? Yeah. And I wouldn't say overrepresented, I would say they have a high concentration, just higher consum me. When people say overrepresent, it somehow sounds like it's their fault and it's not their fault. So the reason why black women historically have had, or not historically, but sort of, in recent history have had a high level of employment in the federal government is because it was a pathway to the middle class.

So when we talk [00:19:00] about pay. The federal government historically had far more equitable pay, and also equity of opportunity. So you're talking about jobs that, are salaried, they're not hourly. They have health benefits and retirement benefits and sick leave and vacation, you know, and they have the opportunity to progress up.

So that's why, black women, their representation in the federal government, they represent 12% or historically before the cuts this year, 12% of the federal labor force, which is about double of their share of the labor force overall, because they had equity of opportunity. Mm-hmm. Which they haven't had in the corporate world, not at scale.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. And I, you know, we know for instance, like all the cuts in the federal government were made to organizations. To departments, agencies where, that, where black women were, had a high share of the labor force. Whether [00:20:00] that was by design, I can't tell you, but I can't tell you that where those cuts made were made because, yeah.

Yeah. And so help us understand too, like, let's say you are a leader at a, a medium sized organization or a large organization, not federal government agency. How is this kind of thing impacting you at work, your organization or, the culture of your organization? Obviously we talk a lot about culture, cultures of inclusion, exclusion, equity or not, safety or not.

We talk a lot about that on the podcast. How are these kinds of trends that you're seeing impacting organizations? Well, I think that one of the things that we know from, so lemme just take a step back. The oftentimes folks, equate gender equity with women's rights. They make those a synonym and they are not.

So, gender equity is men, [00:21:00] women, non-binary. It's not just we're women. And I'm talking about all women that you know. And so one of the things that we know from the research is that gender inequity doesn't just impact, women. It impacts men. And I'll talk about that specifically. And that's not.

Not only like the economic pieces that I was talking about in terms of things like solvency of social security or growing at the United States economy, so we have more jobs and good paying jobs, et cetera. One of the things that we know from research is that one of the primary ways that, and when you're talking about culture of inclusion and belonging , is that gender inequity impacts men is what is typically referred to as the man box.

This sort of strict, rules that men have to live by it are society, which get. Stricter when inclusion and belonging go away. This [00:22:00] is where when people look at diversity, equity, and inclusion as binary, in other words, you're either for it or you're against it. It is, that's an incorrect way to look at it, is it is a continuum.

So we know from the research that one of the primary ways, and there's other, but others, but one of the primary ways that gender inequity impacts men is mental health. Mm-hmm. So men are account for 79% of all suicides in the United States. They are four times more likely to die from suicide. And it's not that women don't have mental health issues, but they are more likely to actually access mental health.

So, you know, like therapists, et cetera. And men are not because they're not supposed to. And we teach that one of the, primary ways that we. Teach boys like to man up, if you will, is through sports. Mm. Right? Mm-hmm. So this culture of youth sports, there's a [00:23:00] lot, you know, I have a girl who's an elite athlete.

We talk a lot about the benefit of, athletics and sports to our girls. We don't talk about the negative impact it has on our boys, and if we change that culture, how we could actually fundamentally shift, we could break the man box, right? We could actually d those strict guidelines for men and boys because men and boys, and they both watch this as in professional sports, but they also experience it in youth sports.

And I have a son, he's 18, so I also saw him go through this and ran interference for it. But, is this idea of like, we tell our boys not to cry. We tell them to man up. And so then they end up stuffing all that stuff. And one of the things that we know, from the research is that 48% of working dads would actually like to stay home with their kids.

And we experienced this because my husband was a stay-at-home father for 15 years. And the reason that most, and there were like [00:24:00] when he started, so I live in Colorado. I think our population is 6 million or something like that. When he started, as a stay-at-home dad, there were just over 26,000 stay-at-home dads in the entire state of Colorado.

Wow. So the reason that men don't do this even though they want to, or the same thing happens with paternity leave, talking about culture of inclusion, we can have paternity leave, but what the research shows is men don't take it. And this idea is identity and isolation. Who will I be and who will I connect with?

And that's all about culture and belonging. For sure, for sure. So our, like we are leaving our boys behind as a society. That doesn't mean we should not focus on what's happening for women and girls and non-binary folks, but we are leaving our boys behind. We see that in education attainment. We see this in mental health.

That should also be something that we invest in. This is where we get it wrong when we say like, you're either for gender equity or you're [00:25:00] against it, or gender equity is rah wow, women and it's women's rights. It's none of those things. The data does not support that. That is fascinating. I hadn't heard that term man bucks before, but it makes so much sense.

I mean, just from my own experiences and like the experiences of raising three boys in a small town in Maryland where they, I've seen them go almost, you can almost like visualize it going from this world of open possibilities to as they interact with other kids and adults, they're that box like closing in on them.

And like you said, having to run interference to try to keep it open, but like swimming upstream, you know? Yeah. Yeah. What another thing I think about, when I hear some of this stuff that you're talking about. Is all the kind of invisible labor that women and especially black women do at [00:26:00] organizations.

And what the cost might be for these trends that you're seeing in terms of that, like, I mean, in my, I'll just give you one example and then I wanna talk about the rest of it. But like, when I was in my MBA class at my executive MBA, the first group project we had, I was asked to take notes and only 25% of my MBA class was women.

And I was like, this is the first and last time I will ever take notes. And they're like, well, I'm like, 'cause women always get asked to do this, and I, you are just as capable of taking notes as I am. So this is the first and last time I will ever take notes in my entire MBA. Class. Yeah. Right. Well, men just don't, men don't see that stuff.

Like, I'll often tell men about that and they'll say, no, it's just that my handwriting's bad. And you're like, yeah. That's what every man, and I think that also goes to. So the other, piece of, so let me, just talk to that and then I'll go back and answer your question. But I, [00:27:00] that also goes, you know, it goes back to the fact that we assume, just as one example, we assume that putting more women in leadership roles will automatically solve inclusion.

It won't, because, one of the things that we know from research is that nine outta 10 of us, so 90% of us have bias, have gender bias. So, your, gender determines how likely you are to, experience bias, but not how likely you are to have it. Those are two very different distinctions. It's why mm-hmm.

Having more female venture capital partners is not going to automatically mean we have more funded female founders. That doesn't actually, now we should want more female venture capital partners because they're better asset managers and they Right, they have on average, have better returns for their LPs.

Right. Their investors. Yeah. But that's not, it's not the reason to have that, so, and just as one example, but to [00:28:00] go back to your question, one of the things, and we did this at Pipeline, you know, we have processed, you know, a million performance reviews, right? Over a million performance reviews.

And we, created the, was trained on a, the pipeline platform was trained on data sets from over 6,000 companies in 32 countries. Over a billion data points. And what we found, was two things. When you're talking about what that inclusion, you know, I think now it's an opportunity to re to rebuild it in a more inclusive with inclusion and equity at the core.

So rather than inequitable by default, equity by design. And what I mean by that is two things, in the pipeline platform, there's really, there's five different engines, but two of them are, one of them is, is germane to what you were talking about. One is, performance and the other is potential.

And one of the things that we saw in, running performance reviews through our platform [00:29:00] is that about a third of all performance reviews contain bias. And 4% of the time that actually leads to women receiving lower performance ratings for the same, performance. Wow. And that 4%, you said 4%, which doesn't sound like a lot, but actually modeled out over an employee lifecycle means that it takes, and this is all women, not just black women.

And I'll talk about what it means for black women. 'cause the platform is intersectional, modeled out. It means that it takes women, all women, twice as long to be promoted into the same role. Wow. So when we're talking about invisible labor, that's some of what, and we would look for that. We would look, one of the things that the platform looked for was rewarding employees for invisible labor or non-pro promotable tasks.

Right. Gender task and highlighting it for them. And the second is when you [00:30:00] receive a lower performance rating for similar performance, then. In most large corporations, they have potential ratings that's either typically a four box or a nine box, and one of those axes, like one of those sides of that grid is your performance rating.

The other is your potential rating. Ah, you can't be in the top right box that is a high potential or whatever we wanna call it today. If you don't have a top performance rating, which means that you won't get the visible tasks, the visible projects, the sponsorship, to actually even have the opportunity to get promoted to the next level.

And this is why we see 6% of the labor force is black women, and they make up 0.4% of Fortune 500 CEOs. Wow. So we now have the opportunity with what's happening to rebuild with equity at its [00:31:00] core, right? Mm-hmm. The other benefit then. For men is we can break the man box. It shouldn't just be women or black women that are actually, you know, being turned to for emotional support, right?

Yeah. It should all could be men. One of the things I'll just say, and I had said, you know, I'll talk about what it means for black women. One of the things that we found is like from that very first promotion, like the promotion rate, why we looked at, why we look at our data through an intersectional gender lens is that and are permitted a rate of 21% greater than women, right?

And when you look at that through an intersectional gender lens, so gender plus race ethnicity for black women, that gap doubles, right? So Wow. So that's why that intersectional gender lens matters because black women sit at that intersection of gender and race, and so you have to take that into account.

Yeah, you are so full of information and you dropped these little nuggets that I wanna ask so many follow up questions [00:32:00] about, you threw, you dropped in there that we have this opportunity to rebuild with equity at the core or breaking the man box. Are you hopeful about that? How, what, how does one do that?

How would an organization do that? Why is this a good opportunity? So, the pipeline platform, just based on my research, I'll talk about this and why you should care about it, not just as the social issue or the right thing to do. Started with research. So we did research across initially and then we expanded, but we did research across 4,000 companies in 29 countries.

We later expanded it to 6,032. And what we found was. For every 10% increase in intersectional gender equity, so gender plus race and ethnicity and age, there's a one to 2% increase in revenue. So this is not just the right thing to do. It's [00:33:00] actually as a CEO, your job, your number one job is to maximize shareholder value.

This is one of the key levers that you do that. And since we're recording this podcast in 2025, during a time of economic uncertainty mm-hmm. We also know from the research that companies that put equity at the core of their strategy, not just their human capital strategy, but their business strategy, so cash management, vendor management, everything you're doing actually, in an economically, like a volatile economic environment. They actually have a 50 percentage point swing on their stock price. 50 50 percentage? Yeah. Wow. So they actually come out better in economic, in a volatile economic environment. By the way, as a recent [00:34:00] example, this also happens if companies are struggling regardless of the economy.

This is also when they should double down on equity, and I'll give you an example of that. That folks may have heard about, but may not have heard the backstory to it. So there was the target fast, right? Mm-hmm. So in January, target pulled back a lot of its diversity, equity, and inclusion.

There was a very large boycott that was organized called the Target Fast. By the time I wrote about it, target had lost a third of its market cap. That is an existential crisis. Yeah. Yeah. But that is an existential crisis and a huge amount of their foot traffic. And of course, their CEO was replaced.

Here's what proceeded TAR Target's decision. In January, 2025 and why they should have actually doubled down on equity. They were already struggling [00:35:00] financially, in terms of growth and their financial metrics, their business metrics prior to January, 2020. So they actually did the exact opposite, the wrong thing, yeah.

Of what they should have done. And we now see the result of that. Wow. Oh my gosh, that's so fascinating. I love these specifics. You often hear people talking about, you know, what they call the business case for diversity and equity and inclusion, but getting this fine grain is so important and so interesting.

Another thing I wanted to follow up on is you were talking about finding bias in performance reviews, and I just, I wonder if people would be curious, what does that look like? How do you find the bias in performance reviews? 'cause we recently had a whole episode talking about bias, so I think that'd be interesting for people.

So, I started pipeline eight years ago [00:36:00] before really, over eight years ago, on equal payday in 2017, which I think was April 4th, 2017. And, this was before. People knew, really understood artificial intelligence. So it is a software platform engineered with artificial intelligence. And what we did was process a lot of data.

We, we also had access to a lot of research, but looking at what are the different ways that bias shows up? We know some of the things, right? We know that, working, by the way, there's no mom that doesn't work. We never say working dads, but whatever, that moms that participate in the paid labor force, are more likely to be mommy track.

That is, they're more likely to, . Have the, like, the bias that they experience is that they're less committed to, because they're moms. We know that for every child they have their pay goes down. And then the inverse happens, for dads. [00:37:00] And in fact, what we also know is from the research that the most productive employees over the course of their career are moms participating in the paid laborers.

So if you wanna actually invest in any employee, that's who you should invest in, in that cohort, Uhhuh. But we knew a lot of the research in terms of what to look for in the data and then in the performance review. So now that people know what chat GBT and generative AI is back then, they didn't. But that's what Pipeline does.

So in performance reviews, it actually. Codes the bias and codes, the level of bias. And then uses generative AI to actually recommend replacement language in those performance reviews. And it's all done before the performance review is actually finalized. That's cool. So you're looking at that performance review and then for the ratings themselves, we're looking across, you know, a set of performance reviews so that we can actually have, [00:38:00] across that set, what would be the equitable performance rating for this performance?

Yeah. Okay. That makes sense. And here's the thing that's interesting by the way. And you said you had, yeah. So people, you know, the, world Economic Forum, I think the current time, in their 2025, a global gender gap report, it's like 103 year, thirty two, a hundred thirty five years until we reach gender equity and it's I think 165 years in the workplace.

Those are generally accurate. I don't have those quite off the top of my head, but that's about what they're, wow. Here's what's so interesting. With artificial intelligence, we could actually, using artificial intelligence, we could eradicate bias in the wor in the workforce in 10 years using artificial intelligence.

Like in Wow. In yeah. It is within our, grasp to Wow. Have the, and it would lead to. Massive [00:39:00] economic opportunity. Yeah. How, I mean, okay. So many questions. It's not usually how you hear about bias and AI in the same sentence, right? Yeah. You hear the flip side of it. You hear the flip side. Yeah. So like how, tell me about that flip.

Like tell me about bias in AI normally in the way we hear about it and how that plays out, and then how you've managed to flip it so that it could do that work of eradicating bias. So, I'll start with the first is, like, what people talked about is bias in ai, which, something that we've paid attention to obviously for a long time.

I think it's gotten more, more coverage in the, especially in 2025. But ever since, like chat, GPT and other generative AI models were released, so there's really two pieces to, bias and ai. I wrote about, some of this for Katie Kirk Media as well as Design Observer, and I've written [00:40:00] about it for other outlets as well, like Fast Company, et cetera.

World Economic Forum. So there's two pieces, of that in terms of bias and ai. One is the data that's actually put into the systems, and the second is the algorithms themselves, right? So mm-hmm. The data, often has bias in it, right? We saw this for SI mean, then probably the one that your listeners may be most aware of is the Amazon hiring app.

Where they tried to create art, where they did create artificial intelligence to screen out resumes. And because Amazon hires mostly men downgraded women. So that's an example of the bias and the data. We also saw this with the original launch of the Apple card underwritten by Goldman Sachs, where you could be a woman with the exact same assets as a man and have a lower access to credit.

Right? Yeah. Yeah. So that's that. The second [00:41:00] is how we actually create the algorithms themselves. So if we understand the bias that may be in the data, how we actually create a supervised learning system. 'Cause the algorithms need to process a lot of data to learn. How we create those algorithms and then continue to train them so that they're not hard wiring bias into the algorithm.

Those are the two pieces and we are seeing that happen at scale. I mean, you know, LinkedIn is one example. There's been numerous studies that have happened, this year, well this year, and specifically around the bias toward women on LinkedIn. And that's not just, about being heard though. That is a key part of it, but it's also about getting customers and thought leadership and who's recognized as a thought leader.

So we've seen that, [00:42:00] that, and LinkedIn is not the only example, but we see that and we see that replicated across social media in general. Right. We're seeing that on Facebook and Instagram, et cetera, and. And now what's happening with the algorithms, that drive social media is outraged cells.

Mm-hmm. And we're seeing it replicate that at scale and we see that particularly happening for women. So female candidates, for instance, experience something like 10 times the harassment that male elected officials, you know, folks running for office. That's just one example. We've seen, a downgrading, I think it was on Instagram, might have been on Facebook, but a female owned businesses, having, you know, having their posts shared out.

Right. The algorithm. And they of course, we're seeing this on LinkedIn too, and that's actually happening at a time when. In the United States, women own 42% of all companies. Right? [00:43:00] And now we have this, you know, black women being pushed out with labor force doesn't mean they're not working. I mean, maybe some of them, but that's highly unlikely.

Where they're most likely going is into entrepreneurship. Well, if they algorithms are downgrading them because of gender and race. Yeah. Now they can't make a living, as an entrepreneur, right. So, mm-hmm. So that's just one example. And we can talk about how you make AI equitable, but that impacts everyone.

I mean, we. Entrepreneurs to make money because when they make money, they employ more people, they can pay people more. We increase our tax base. Like those are all really good things that we actually want entrepreneurs to succeed at. Just even set aside the innovation piece. Right. Right, right. Wow.

Now, given that people know about the bias that is in a lot of the ais, like are you [00:44:00] seeing companies try to do something about that either in the way they adjust the algorithm or the inputs, or is it still kind of a new emerging idea that you could have a more equitable ai? It's not an emerging idea.

I think what's interesting is that some of it is about political will or just, you know, leadership will in general. We've seen other, I wrote about this for the World Economic Forum. , We've seen other countries like UAE or Iceland, or are two examples, and not the only ones, but who have in really in the tech space.

So artificial intelligence, et cetera, have committed to equity in tech, artificial intelligence being one of those aspects. Norway and Finland have also done, I mean, there's a lot of them, but those are just four examples and it, yeah, and it's been met with the commitment plus the leadership or political will.

And because of that, they've made huge [00:45:00] strides in equity. I mean, this is where it's really about commitment, not about possibility. Wow, that's fascinating. Is there, what can regular people do? I think one of the most important things we can do is stand up and speak out. Mm. I think holding power to account and doing it as a collective is really important.

It does do more than you think it does. Mm-hmm. It really does. It does have a bigger impact, than you overall. I know there are some initiatives around more equitable AI that have been announced, some big funds. I know that there are some companies that are definitely committed to it. I would not diminish the power of the people [00:46:00] to stand up.

Mm-hmm. And speak out. I think. That it feels sometimes like it's not making a difference. It does make a difference. Yeah. And if you do it as a collective as well, you can have a ripple effect. And I will just give you two examples just from my end, and I'm sure there's others that your listeners have.

But one obviously is the byline that I wrote, for M-S-N-B-C, which broke that news. There was a lot of. Conversation already happening within the black community and black women about that, but they didn't have mm-hmm. The numbers until I published my article about that and that took off like wildfire.

I mean, it ended up in the Boston Globe and s and p Global and on the Front Bank of the New York Times, and I was on a bunch of television shows and there's been more articles than I can count that have cited it and job fairs that have [00:47:00] happened and all sorts of things that have happened because of it.

And I'm sure there'll be even more so. Mm-hmm. That was one, right? That was, yeah. That's huge. That was one thing where I was like, this is a big deal. We need to be talking about this. And you don't really know when you publish a byline. I mean, I published, you know, over 200 of them. I think at this point you don't really know which one is going to take or when it's going to take.

And that one a few days later, I was like, oh, okay. So clearly this hit nerve. That's one. The second, example I would give you and this is a little bit tied to my personal story, but I think it does make a difference. So, in 2016, after, or right before Thanksgiving, my children's school, they were in elementary school at the time, was tagged with hate graffiti and my children's school, their elementary school had a newcomer program that supported immigrant and refugee children and their families.

Coming to the United States. And the reason why is because my [00:48:00] sisters were newcomer kids, right? Mm-hmm. So I am the daughter of an immigrant and a refugee. My father escaped from Hungary with my three eldest sisters. They walked across a minefield, arrived to a refugee camp in Austria, less than two months into their stay in the refugee camp.

President Eisenhower sent Air Force one to bring 21 hung refugees to United States on Christmas Day, 1956. And they were on that plane. By the way, that's also the first 21 people you said. 21. And so you think about, as a parent, you're a parent watching your children, you know, just imagine as a parent what it go, what it felt like to go from running, you know, risking your child's life for freedom, to watching them climb the stairs of Air Force One.

And by the way, that was the first time my family was on the front page of the New York Times, the second. Time was in August. And so when this happened, I thought, okay, well, you know, there's gotta be something I can do to help. Right? I had, my daughter at the time was in [00:49:00] kindergarten. I never again, wanted to have a conversation with her that was like, you know, I had to tell her, there's gonna be more police, there's gonna be more public safety, and if you're, she'd already been through drills, right?

The lockdown. So I was like, if your teacher asks you to come inside immediately or get in the closet, you gotta do it. And I never wanted to have that conversation with her again. Uh oh. And so I thought, there's some, there's gotta be something we can do. So I helped to organize this coalition, everyone from the White House down to the local school safety around keeping our kids safe.

Wow. Because a very specific segment of kids were being targeted. Right. And that was, and so I received a letter from President Obama thanking me for standing up and speaking out. Wow. And one of the things that he said in that letter, this is why when you say like, I dunno, if it makes a difference, it makes a difference, is that, and I'm paraphrasing what he wrote to me, but one of the [00:50:00] things he said in that letter is essentially that inclusion is not a straight line.

It is not a given. It relies on people like us to stand up and speak out and fight for it. Yeah. And that you can make a difference. And that's, you know, my family's story is why I do what I do. But this was just like a mom and a neighborhood in Denver who was like, I don't ever wanna have this conversation with my daughter again.

I gotta figure out what I can do to fix this. Oh my gosh. That's a great story. That's wild. Yeah, there, my, I, you know, I have kids in these different schools throughout the years and they're all kinds of things that happen, related to hate or just really obvious bias or things that are more like [00:51:00] subtle exclusions that happen just again and again and again and again.

And because of what I do for a living that my kids are like my informants, they'll come home and tell me like, yeah, you won't, won't believe what happened here. You won't believe what happened today. And it's one of those things that people think they don't see it very much 'cause kids don't often talk about it or report it.

And 'cause adults, especially with young kids, think they don't engage with those things. They don't understand them. It flies under the radar a lot and it's just unfortunately creating cultures where people are being excluded day in and day out. And it's not the isolated incidents of hate. It's like the everyday stuff.

Yeah. It's by a thousand paper cuts. Well, and also, you know, also I would add it's not like people get to the workforce. Right. And think, and then bias magically shows up [00:52:00] this, these are learned behaviors that start in school. Yeah. And before, I mean like, I taught my kids to recognize bias and to stand up against it, and not to internalize it.

That's a very conscious effort though, like you have to really teach your kids like, you know, that it happens, that it's not about them and what they can do about it. Yeah. And , I think the research is pretty clear that w especially white parents do not wanna do that. They do not wanna talk about race with their kids at all.

Well, even gender though, I mean, my daughter, you know, like, I would say yes, race, absolutely. But gender plus race and ethnicity, I mean, that matters, right? So, mm-hmm. , You know, , white girls also experience, you know, girls Yeah. Experience, gender bias. And if you're a girl of color, right? If you're a Latina or you're black, et cetera, you will experience more bias and different kinds of bias.

[00:53:00] I'm curious to hear also a little bit more about how you think about. Solutions, like individual people standing up? Yes. And like, what is, what's your vision for the, a future? A future with more gender equity, with less bias? Like tell me about that world. What does it look like and how do we get there?

I think about equity not as the right thing to do. Obviously I believe that to be true, but I don't think about it in those terms. I think about it as a massive economic opportunity. So when I think about the narrative that we talk about these things, right? So there's been conversations this year, in addition to my research, there was some other research that was released around moms leaving the labor force.

And the issue is that. Often, and this [00:54:00] happened during the pandemic as well, is that we tend to describe why that's happening in ways that are gender biased. I'll give you an example. When people hear that moms are leaving the labor force, there's, and we heard about this during the pandemic too, there's often an assumption that moms can choose not.

To work. Work. And that's not true in the majority of US households with children under the age of 18, in 71% of US households with children under the age of 18, mom contributes to the economic wellbeing. And in 40% of US households with children under the age of 18, mom is the breadwinner, right?

There's 16 million breadwinner moms. They support 28 million children. So it should alarm us that when we look [00:55:00] at that data, whether it was during the pandemic or now that we're not going, what is going on? Because we have this bias, it's called the myth of secondary income, which is that moms, it's just for purses and shoes.

It's not for things like housing and healthcare and food and you know what have you. So we need to change the narrative when we're talking about. Gender equity. One of the ways is that the inherent bias that exists in how we describe and then we talk, oh, well, it's the, because of the cost of childcare or it's return to office.

When you look just at the pandemic, one of the things that we know is that it's not, it's for a very small percentage of women, mothers who were in the paid labor force, left because of the cost of childcare, because, schools were shut. The majority of [00:56:00] women who were impacted, it was two reasons. One, the majority, the of sectors that were impacted during the pandemic were female dominated sectors.

That was the first reason, and the second was inequity in the labor force. Right. That says, like, so when you have an incorrect narrative, you then look for incorrect solutions. Yeah. So that the first thing is I would like to see us change the narrative around why the happening, and I would second would like us to have every single conversation.

We should be talking about the economic cost to everyone, right? Yeah. We should talk about this, not just like a, oh, now moms get to see him with their kids. But like we should talk about the economic cost to everyone. We should be talking about what's happening in men, with men and boys. We should stop talking about gender equity as a synonym for women's rights.

Men and boys are impacted. 58% of all college [00:57:00] graduates are women. That means that only 42% of men are college graduates. That is not good for our economy either. It's great that women are making strides, but we should be concerned about the downward trend of men, and that starts in elementary school. 'cause our schools are not designed for boys.

And I speak as someone who has an 18-year-old son who has experienced this first. So we have to stop talking about, this is like we all, and the other part of that gender conversation when we equate that is we look at it as a zero sum game. If women win, men lose. And so we have to stop doing that. The second is like, yeah, it's solvable.

We keep on talking about equity as like it's this ethereal, hard thing to quantify or in a fix. That's not true. It is just not true. We had the [00:58:00] solutions in place, as I mentioned, where we could reach equity in 10 years, which is a benefit for everyone in the United States. That's a $3.1 trillion opportunity globally.

It's over $13 trillion. It's a huge, massive opportunity for us to fix. And so we really should be talking about that. And by the way, we should have a sense of urgency about it because the birth rate is dropping not just in the United States, but globally, which means that if you don't have enough women and participating in the labor force, you're not gonna have enough people to actually continue to grow your economy.

So we gotta change the way we talk about this stuff. Like we got to start looking at this data through, through gender plus race and ethnicity and age. We need to start talking about it's an economic opportunity and we need to stop sidelining this stuff to like, oh, that's a women's issue. Yeah.

Oh my gosh, that 10 minutes was so amazing. I'm gonna clip that and it's just so many good ideas and , I mean, how do you stay [00:59:00] sane looking at all that being so solvable and yet we're not doing it. Like, I, that's so frustrating. It feels like so many of the issues that are plaguing us right now are that way.

They're so solvable. If we could really use the data, really understand what's happening, have solutions that make sense to fit the problems and then do it well, we have to keep talking about it because it won't get better if we don't keep talking about it. I mean, this is one of the reasons why I do the work that I do because the more people are talking about it, the more those solutions will come into play and the more that they'll actually be solutions.

One of the things that I've seen pop up lately. Our solutions where I'd say they're, and I didn't coin this term. I first heard it from Arlan Hamilton, but she's like, and I think she talked about it in her book. It's like, I didn't ca come for the crumbs, I came for the cake. For a lot of our equity solutions are like [01:00:00] crumbs, not cake.

Like we're not actually shifting economic power. We're not actually, I mean, we saw this obviously in 2020 after the killing of, George Floyd. Like a lot of the solutions, like for instance, just in venture capital, were like crumbs. They weren't cake. Yeah. And so we have to think about those things differently.

Yeah, for sure. But I know I've heard you mention that you've had to fight a couple times for your own equity. Yep. Do you have advice for women, like, until we solve this on a big, you know, global scale, do you have advice for women? In terms of what they can do to make sure that equity is happening for them?

Okay. Well, let me talk about that and then I'll tell my story as a woman. One of the things we know, if you're a woman or you're a woman of color in [01:01:00] particular, we know from the research that if you speak up for equity, and we've seen this, um, in the EEOC, reflected in the EEOC data, you are more likely, to, receive retribution, right?

So I'd be careful that, I mean, I just, I know that's not what people wanna hear, but the idea that's real. Yeah. Strategically, it would be better if you can find a man, to help advocate for you, or you could use like some sort of amplification technique, which is what women did in the Obama White House.

So you've got, there's power in numbers. So I just, I share that because I think, so this goes back to, and then I'll tell my story, but this goes back to the, fixing the narrative. So we fix the solution and at the right solution. So historically we've focused on fixing women. Not fixing the system that undervalues them.

So we say, well, women don't, we would only apply for jobs if they have a hundred percent of the qualifications and men apply when they have 60%. Well, what we don't tell women is [01:02:00] that people sitting on the other side of the desk that are deciding whether or not you're qualified are actually using that same criteria.

Right. Or women don't negotiate as often. Well, actually the research shows that women negotiate as often as men. They just don't win as often, and they have a negative perception of them because who does she think she is to advocate for herself? So it's really important that we tell the whole story and stop trying to pick kids.

My personal story was, so I'm the breadwinner mom who fought to be paid equitably twice and won. I, studied women's, I have three degrees, but undergraduate, I, part of what I studied was, women's rights and women's issues and I got to the workforce and I was like. I don't think this really applies anymore.

Like I think that was kind of like a 1960s kind of thing. And I was like, I don't think my gender's gonna have anything to do with any success I have. And so fast forward quite a few years and when I returned from maternity leave with my [01:03:00] daughter, I had a team that I was managing and a day, and my boss had been optimized when I was on maternity, which is basically a fancy word for fire.

So I came back and a day after I returned from maternity leave and I was asked to take on a second team, and then two weeks later I was asked to take on a third team. So now I had three teams that I was managing, which is great. Right? Super happy, breadwinner mom, family of four. Awesome. Happy to do it.

Like this is great. My male colleague was one pay grade higher than I was. He took on one additional team and also received additional compensation for that new team. And so I went to my manager and the HR business partner and I was like, awesome, this is like super happy. How do you wanna make me whole on my compensation?

And it was like two months of going back and forth and I was like, I don't think they're gonna do, I think they're just gonna think that I'm gonna give up. And so my first job outta college was as a litigation paralegal for one of the top law [01:04:00] firms. 'Cause I was thinking about being a lawyer and I was like, there's gotta be something that makes this illegal.

And so I found the Lily Ledbetter for Pay Act, which is the first piece of legislation that President Obama signed into law. And what it did was change the statute of limitations for equal pay from when the decision was made to every time you receive inequitable pay, that statute of limitation starts over because you might not know for a really long time.

That you're, and then you have no restitution, no redress for fixing that problem. So I called the HR business partner and I was like, this is a lily ledbetter issue. Every time you pay me the statute of limitation starts over. What do you wanna do about it? And then I just shut up. And then, so within a month, they increased my level, increased my pay, and gave me back pay for the [01:05:00] whole time that I had been doing that job.

And so, you know, certainly it was a source of success, but it also got me thinking like, why did I have to research my rights in order to be treated fairly? Right? We really have a system and I just happen to have enough legal training to know what to look for, right? And so I thought, well, if we have a system whereby you, as someone who is experiencing inequity, has to speak up.

That's not an equitable system because by definition, if you are experiencing inequity, you don't have power, because why would you do that to yourself? Right. Right. Yeah. So like, just as an example, the equal, we don't have an equal, a true equal pay law in the United States, right? The Equal Pay Act was signed into law in 1963 by President Kennedy, but it still relies on you as a woman.

To speak up is one example for equal pay versus [01:06:00] countries like Iceland where companies have to prove that they're actually paying their employees equitably and then fix it. That's true. Yeah. Equitable pay, so that sounds good. It's not that you can, but I just, and then I had a similar situation the second time, where I just, you know, was like, this is, I've done the research this, it was, that one was a little different.

It was, in a job offer situation, where I had been committed to by my hiring manager to a certain pay human resources who was handling the offer letter, decided that was too much money, even though it was equitable and it was market based. I'd done all the research and gave me an offer that I think it was a lot less.

It was, I don't remember what it was, but it was a lot less. And I was like, I just went to my manager and I was like. I wanna work for you or the hiring manager. I was like, I wanna [01:07:00] work for you. I'm not working for that. It's not fair. So it's up to you like, either we do what we agreed or I'll just go find another job.

And that worked. It did work. Yeah. That's good. But I'll say like, for me also, in that situation, and I think this is, I mean this is like a totally different issue, but if you think about hiring and talent as a market and you are a product in that market, I also knew my differentiated value and that it would've been very difficult for the hiring manager to go to somebody else to do the job so I knew that in that situation, I had power to walk away. By the way, it was scary, right? Like, I'm sure, yeah. I went, it was not without fear, but I thought, well, I'll kick myself. If I don't do this, I'll resent that every time I'm paid. And then, and I'll say like, if you do the [01:08:00] math, you know, I can't remember exactly what the difference in pay was, but let's say it was $50,000, just for argument's sake.

Now, if you work for a corporation and you, have, it's not just the $50,000, right? It is, if you have any 401k contributions, right? You're talking about substantively less money, right? Because your percentage of your 401k. Is based off your salary, right? So you're talking about retirement impacts, you're talking about, so direct, like your matching.

Then you're talking about your ability to put away money, and then if you compound that depending on your age and when you plan to retire over time, it's far more than $50,000. It's so much money over time that, yeah, that's why it was like, I will kick [01:09:00] myself, like I, I'll kick myself if I don't do this.

And you know, and I think that's also where there's powered numbers. Like if people do this as a collective. I think, you know, many years ago, I don't know that this is still happening, but there were. Spreadsheets that were created where people would anonymously and sometimes not anonymously talk about their comp.

And that was really helpful. 'cause now you've got a collective and it's really hard to fire a collective, right? Yeah. That's great. Yeah. And then there, there's so much for that. Of course. Then if every year, if you're gonna get a raise, that's a percentage of your salary, it, your raise is lower if you're getting paid lower.

So just everything. Right? And your bonus, if your bonus is a percentage, depending on your how your bonuses are, sometimes they're flat, sometimes they're a percentage. And that impacts it. Like one of the companies I worked at, it was a percentage. And then depending on your performance [01:10:00] rating, you know, you could get above that percentage.

So you're talking about tons of money that's just, yeah. That's being left on the table. Yeah. Oh my gosh. Kika, there's so much more to talk about, but I feel like we're gonna have to sort of wrap it up. It's like you brought so much. Wisdom and hard evidence to this conversation in such an amazing way, you know, as a social scientist, but a qualitative one.

I don't usually do research like that, but that those numbers are just music to my ears because it can back up the stuff we're finding qualitatively, and it can work in concert to really paint that picture. If people wanna, you know, read more of the things that you've written, obviously they could Google you, but is there a place they could go, a central place?

They can find me at Katica Roy, so K-A-T-I-C-A-R-O-Y, dot com [01:11:00] if they wanna reach out to me or read some of what I've written. The other way is on LinkedIn, so I'm very active on LinkedIn. Beautiful. You can't Google me too. Perfect. And final question, could you channel your inner teacher and give our listeners a homework assignment if they want one, if they're looking for something that they could, one thing they could read or do or consider or watch, what might you assign them?

You know? So certainly they can read my MS NBC byline. I'm sure you'll put it in those show notes in the New York Times and the Fortune articles. I would definitely, those are great. And there's a video that also my data was, for the New York Times that was used in that. I would definitely link all that and I can give you some of my television interviews.

There's a couple, they're short three to five minutes. That would be great. Yeah. Perfect. Well, we'll find those links and we'll put 'em there so people can check it out. Thank you so much. I know this has brought [01:12:00] tremendous value and just been really a really lovely conversation, so thank you so much.

You're welcome. Thanks for inviting me to be on the podcast. Right. Take care, Kaka, and take care everyone. Have a great week.

All right everyone. So there you have it. I don't know if your mind is blown as much as mine, but I bet it is. You know, one of the things she kept talking about, which I just love, was rather than inequitable by default, equity by design, right? And that's something we talk about a lot, whether we're talking about equity or inclusion.

It has to be done. Intentionally, the work has to be considered, researched, planned, the behaviors, the actions, the words, they're intentional or else we are going to get inequity and we are going to get exclusion if we don't [01:13:00] put in that time planning and effort. So. I just loved talking with Kaka. I am going to have lots of guests.

That doesn't mean I'm gonna have some episodes where it's just me talking, but I'll have lots of guests. I also am going to put up the video for this interview, so look for that on my YouTube channel, the Culture Advantage Podcast, YouTube channel. All right, have a great week. I will talk to you soon.

So that's it for today's episode and the Culture Advantage Podcast. Head on over Apple Podcast iTunes or wherever you listen and subscribe to the show. One lucky listener. Every single week that posts review on Apple Podcasts or iTunes, we'll win a chance in the grand prize drawing to win a $25,000.[01:14:00] 

Private VIP day with Michael himself. Be sure to head on over to culture advantage podcast.com and pick up a free copy of Michael's gift and join us on the next episode.