# About Name: OrgAcuity Description: If you’re looking for smarter ways to listen, lead, and deliver impact at scale — check out OrgAcuity. URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog # Navigation Menu - Home: https://www.orgacuity.com - Search: https://orgacuity.superblog.cloud/search # Blog Posts ## The Hidden Infrastructure Behind Organizational Culture and Performance Author: Unknown Published: 2025-09-05 Category: Employee Listening Tags: employee experience, employee listening, people analytics, leadership, management URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/the-hidden-infrastructure-behind-performance ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/infrastructure-1757185903593-compressed.png) I’ve always been fascinated by relationships: how they are formed, maintained, unraveled, and repaired. Relationships have been central in both my personal and professional life. My parents and siblings gave me the support and encouragement I needed during formative years and that set me on a positive trajectory, and my wife and kids give me a sense of meaning and purpose far beyond work. Professionally, relationships have opened doors to opportunities I never could have secured alone and provided critical mentorship and feedback that shaped me at every stage. Years ago, I created a simple “relational capital” scoring system to track the strength of my key professional relationships. I still use it today. Think of it like a bank account. Significant conflict and misalignment counts as withdrawals, while productive trust-building interactions count as deposits. A negative balance signals work to do; a positive one means the relationship is strong. Withdrawals are inevitable from time to time, but my goal is to do what I can to move the balance of each to the black over time. This may sound a little excessive (and perhaps it is), but here’s the point: relationships matter, and they are worthy of the time and effort it takes to build and sustain them. Supportive relationships can elevate our potential, while unhealthy relationships can steer us in the wrong direction. Relationships sit at the core of much of our success as well as our struggles. Relationships play a more important and influential role than we may wish to give them credit for, and they’re performance multipliers when leaders know how to harness them. Beyond my personal anecdotes, there’s a large and growing body of evidence showing how important relationships are to our happiness, health, work, and even our communities. **What the Research Shows** --------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/happiness-1757186084120-compressed.png) * **Health and longevity:** A meta-analysis of 148 studies covering more than 300,000 participants found that people with stronger social ties had about **50% higher odds of living longer** as compared with those with weaker ones.a It is not just about how many connections we have, but how strong they are. * **Happiness across life:** The Harvard Study of Adult Development, which has been running since 1938, consistently shows that **good relationships are the single best predictor of lifelong health and happiness.** The people most satisfied with their relationships at age 50 were the healthiest at age 80.b * **Work outcomes:** Harvard’s SHINE research reveals that when people feel a sense of belonging at work, they are **2.2 times more satisfied, 1.5 times more productive, and 1.6 times mentally healthier.**c Relationships with managers, peers, and cross-functional colleagues all play a role in shaping this experience! * **Flourishing globally:** The Global Flourishing Study, spanning 22 countries, found that **relationships, community, and prosocial character are stronger predictors of flourishing than financial stability.**d As VanderWeele and colleagues explain, our flourishing is tied to the flourishing of our communities.e **Our Intricate Web of Relationships** -------------------------------------- Depending on your role and life stage, you may have relationships with some or all of the following people: * Immediate family * Extended family * Friends * Neighbors * Direct reports * Skip-level reports * Peers * Manager * Skip-level Manager * Cross-functional colleagues * Customers * Vendors * Community connections Some of these are vital while others are more peripheral. Each relationship serves a different purpose and requires deliberate effort to nurture. They grow stronger with consistent attention, open communication, trust, empathy, and shared experiences. When effort is not reciprocated, they weaken. Holding all of these relationships in a delicate balance is challenging. If you overinvest in one area, such as work, other areas like family, health, or hobbies may break down. Eventually that neglect undermines the very performance you were chasing. This is sometimes called the _dark side of engagement:_ when an extreme level of engagement over an extended period becomes unhealthy and counterproductive. **Workplace Relationships** --------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/team3-1757186239904-compressed.png) We spend more waking hours with colleagues than with family or friends, so how we experience those relationships affects every other part of life. The reverse is true as well. Our personal lives shape how we show up at work. (Unless you have undergone the “Severance” procedure from the 2022 psychological thriller, in which case none of this applies of course.) Workplace relationships are especially complex. You might have a strong connection with your manager but none with your skip-level manager. Or you might be tightly connected cross-functionally but barely interact with your formal team. These dynamics matter. They can help explain why employees vary in their levels of engagement, performance, and retention. In 2025, most of us understand that social networks are not the same as relationships. Many people have large networks, but most connections are weak and transactional. True relationships are defined by quality, not quantity. We can be surrounded by people and still feel disconnected, and a handful of strong ties often matters far more than a vast but shallow network. Take onboarding, for example. You may sit in a room with 30 new hires, but initially those ties are surface-level (you know names, titles, and locations). Upon joining, you sit on the periphery of the organization with weak connections but over time, people make introductions, engage you in projects, and pull you into the center of the network. These _connectors_ help you access relationships that are critical to success but may have otherwise remained out of reach. Each of these relationships impacts our experience in important ways. **Relational Experience** ------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/team1-1757186285802-compressed.png) I’d like to introduce a concept to capture the critical role relationships play in shaping the employee experience: **relational experience**. > **Relational experience** is how people perceive and experience their workplace relationships across teams, projects, and organizational communities. It reflects not just who people are connected to, but how those relationships influence engagement, culture, well-being, and performance. Most coaching and nudging approaches ignore the complex web of relationships influencing perceptions, experiences, and intentions in organizations. The powerful dynamics across cross-functional projects, informal groups, and social networks that I wrote about [in this article](https://orgacuity.com/blog/modern-management-unlocking-influence-in-networks/) are critical to influencing change. When organizations integrate employee experience data with relational analytics, they unlock insights that reveal hidden and insidious drivers of engagement, performance, and retention. Leaders often lack visibility into the quality of these relationships, but understanding and influencing them is critical. Managers may not see the developmental opportunities that manifest in the interactions beyond their immediate team. And if those cross-functional relationships are weak, employees may miss out on feedback from these critical partners and the growth that needs to follow. Relationships are the connective tissue of organizational life. They influence whether employees flourish, whether teams thrive, and ultimately whether organizations perform. I’d love to hear your perspective: * If you had insight into the relational capital scorecards of your team, would it change how you lead? * How could relational intelligence be integrated into your performance management practices? * How would the employee experience change if relationships were seen as the foundation of engagement? Drop your thoughts in the comments. I’m curious to learn how others are making relationships a lever for performance! ### **References** a [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2910600](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2910600) b [https://hsph.harvard.edu/health-happiness/news/the-good-life-a-discussion-with-dr-robert-waldinger](https://hsph.harvard.edu/health-happiness/news/the-good-life-a-discussion-with-dr-robert-waldinger) c [https://shine.fas.harvard.edu/2022/02/16/new-paper-building-flourishing-work-communities-to-build-a-better-society](https://shine.fas.harvard.edu/2022/02/16/new-paper-building-flourishing-work-communities-to-build-a-better-society) d [https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/measuring-a-life-well-lived](https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/measuring-a-life-well-lived) e [https://www.nature.com/articles/s44220-025-00423-5](https://www.nature.com/articles/s44220-025-00423-5) --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Early Experiences with Employee Listening Vendors: Necessary Evil or Differentiated Value? Author: Unknown Published: 2025-09-02 Category: Employee Listening Software Tags: employee listening vendor, employee listening software, employee listening platform, employee survey software, employee listening URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/early-experiences-with-employee-listening ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/4391945d-7f9f-43ed-983c-a282b330b3b9-1756821549989-compressed.png) Quick point about employee listening: the goal isn’t to “run surveys.” The goal is to make better decisions, improve how work gets done, and create a better employee experience. When the partnership is right, an employee listening vendor can absolutely help you deliver real ROI and sharper insight. If you’re looking for the broader case on **how** and **where** listening adds value inside a business, I covered that in my last piece, [link to previous article](https://orgacuity.com/blog/employee-listening-is-the-juice-worth-the-squeeze/). This article stays focused on the early experience of working with vendors—how to set yourself up well from the first conversation to the first launch. A story I still think about: a colleague once described how a vendor treated clients as “criminal.” Not just in service moments, but in how the product and its features were built. That line stuck with me. Any time I work with, consult for, or review listening and experience tools, I come back to one clarifying question: **Who are we doing this for—ourselves or the client?** The answer should be obvious: **the client.** Most vendors would agree they aim to build for their target customers. But here’s the catch: what happens when _you aren’t_ their ideal customer and you buy anyway? What does that experience look like day to day? How many hoops will you jump through? And, most importantly, are you getting the kind of value that actually moves your strategy forward? Over the years, I’ve watched some vendors expand their ideal customer profile beyond the product’s original design and intent. You can speculate about why that happens, but the impact on clients the product wasn’t built to serve is rarely positive. Sometimes it looks like an opportunistic revenue grab. Whether it’s a strategic decision, a motivated AE trying to hit a number, or a little of both—the intent may not be malicious. I’m not here to judge motives. My goal is to equip prospective buyers with a practical way to approach “getting started,” so you can recognize good fit early, avoid painful mismatches, and set up a win-win relationship instead of a slow-motion headache. Phases to Plan for with a New Employee Listening Vendor ------------------------------------------------------- When I say “new,” I mean you’re either buying your first platform or you’re switching vendors. If you’ve done this before, much of what follows will feel familiar. I’ve worn several hats in this space: internal SME implementing solutions, provider building and packaging them, consultant selling and delivering them, and partner accountable for realizing value. Based on those experiences, I organize the early journey into three practical phases: 1. **Identify the right solution** 2. **Vet the solution** 3. **Set up for long-term success** Think of these as stages in a funnel you actually control. You decide what matters, you decide who gets your time, and you decide what conditions must be in place before you sign. Phase 1: Identifying a Potential Solution ----------------------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/8e4501a0-03b2-4463-ab9d-c03a618e548f-1756824138793-compressed.png) A little pre-work before your search goes a long way. It saves time, keeps you grounded when the demo sizzle starts, and helps you avoid getting “hoodwinked” by a talented rep who has mastered Cialdini’s influence principles. The internet is full of generic checklists. Instead of trying to boil the ocean, narrow your prep to a few essentials that keep your organizational reality front and center. ### Name the problem or opportunity in stakeholder language. Start with how your people experience the current state. Capture it plainly, in their words—not in vendor jargon. What feels slow? Where does decision-making stall? What are managers struggling to do consistently? Write it down in a paragraph you could hand to anyone in the company and they’d nod along. When you later evaluate features, you can ask a simple question: “Does this capability help with that?” ### Collect narratives and context. Don’t stop at your own view. Talk with employees, managers, HRBPs, and leaders who will live with the outcomes. Look for patterns and friction points. Your goal isn’t a novel; it’s enough texture to avoid treating a symptom while the root cause keeps humming along. Listening software won’t fix a broken meeting cadence or a manager who never follows up—but it can make the real work visible so you can address it intentionally. ### Tie the solution to execution. Spell out how listening will translate into decisions, behaviors, and routines that create business value. It might be as simple as: “Every team reviews results, picks two focus areas, and logs one concrete action per quarter.” Or: “New hires get a 60-day pulse and HR reviews themes monthly.” Keep it observable and specific. If you can’t see it happening, it won’t. ### Map metrics to owners and work.  Who will do what with which signal? Keep this mapping simple enough that anyone can follow the chain from feedback to action. Avoid piling on “nice to have” metrics just because a dashboard offers them. Focus on the handful of indicators you can actually influence and that someone is accountable to address. ### Reverse-engineer your ICP.   Every platform is built with a target customer in mind—size, complexity, security posture, budget, admin model, culture. Your job is to describe \*your\* ICP and use it as a filter. If you’re a mid-sized company with lean IT support, you want a product that fits that reality without special pleading. If your org structure changes often, you want easy hierarchy updates. If you’re privacy-sensitive, you want clear guardrails. The more honest you are about who you are, the better your shortlist will be. ### Use ICP as a filter, not a funnel. Most software is built for \*someone\*. The wrong move is to contort yourself to fit a tool’s convenience. Let your ICP remove poor fits early. That’s not “being picky.” That’s protecting your people from a tool they’ll resent six months in. Do this prework and you’ll know what you’re solving, how it connects to strategy, and where to focus. You’ll walk into demos with a steady hand, a clear ask, and a shortlist that looks like your organization—not someone else’s. Phase 2: Vetting the Solution ----------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/88877f1b-d955-4f6e-8bb5-454f4e7ca143-1756822660867-compressed.png) With the essentials in hand, start outreach using your ICP to guide who you contact. Build your initial list from multiple sources so you’re not stuck in a bubble. And resist the urge to over-index on legacy names simply because they’re familiar. Technology has evolved; founding dates and product histories matter because they hint at design assumptions. A balanced slate helps you see different paths to the same outcomes. As you engage, pay close attention to behaviors in the vendor’s control. That’s where the signal is. Demos are theater; behavior is the tell. ### Responsiveness (and respect). How easy is it to get connected to a real person who can actually help? You’d be surprised how many vendors don’t respond promptly to a thoughtful inquiry. That’s not a scheduling hiccup—that’s an internal systems and priorities signal. If it’s hard to get time when you’re a prospect, consider how support will feel when you’re a customer. ### First touch quality. Is the first person knowledgeable and helpful, or are you being shepherded through a script to reach “the next step”? Curiosity is obvious. So is going through the motions. A strong first touch restates your problem in your language, clarifies what good looks like for \*you\*, and offers a sensible plan for what to show and when. ### Likeability vs. competence. We all form an impression of likeability fast. Don’t confuse charm for fit. Competence and helpfulness matter more for what comes after the signature. You’re looking for people who teach while they sell, not performers who keep you clapping. ### Tailoring vs. templating. Was the process shaped to your needs, or did they pull you into a preset path to prove your process fits their system? There’s nothing wrong with a well-run sales motion, but you’re trying to learn whether the product maps to your workflows without gymnastics. If everything is “we’ll customize that later,” pay attention. ### Config vs. customization. SaaS prefers configuration. If a team is proposing customization early to land the deal, you may not be the ICP the product truly serves. Custom work can be the right decision for specific, high-value needs; it shouldn’t be your answer to basics. When essentials require special handling out of the gate, the future cost—time, dollars, attention—usually finds you later. At this point, you’re looking for a clean read: **If it’s easy to connect, the first interaction feels genuinely curious, and the experience is tailored to your specifics, you’re off to a good start**. You’ll have what you need to assess whether the product can address your problems and opportunities. If you’re not getting that signal, **add another vendor to the pool**. No drama, no hard feelings—just better fit elsewhere. A final note for this phase: pace yourself. It’s tempting to rush through vetting because the need is real and your calendar is full. Build a simple checklist from your pre-work and stick to it. Ask to see the unglamorous parts that make or break adoption in your context. Keep notes on what you saw, who showed up, and how each conversation _felt_. Process memory fades fast; written notes keep you honest. Phase 3: Being Set Up for Long-Term Success ------------------------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/4bf37253-369d-4192-b0be-e7df727ba16f-1756825073252-compressed.png) The goal is a **win-win partnership**. If it doesn’t start win-win, it usually ends lose-lose. (_Miller Heiman’s Conceptual_ and _Strategic Selling_ trace that arc well.) Both sides should see an equitable exchange—money for value in product and services—so you can say, with a straight face: **we got what we paid for, they did what they said they’d do, and we’re a better organization for it.** Getting there takes a few conditions you can verify early in the relationship. ### Change management is shared.   The vendor actively works with you to think through and manage the implications of change—manager conversations, employee expectations, timing, and the basic “who needs what when” cadence. This isn’t extra credit; it’s where adoption lives. If the assumption is “we’ll turn on the tool and you take it from there,” you’ll carry more load than you planned. ### A credible approach to managing change.   Look for a clear, proven method for sponsor and manager enablement, employee FAQs, and communications. The content doesn’t need to be flashy; it needs to be accurate, timely, and easy to use. Bonus points if the vendor can explain why their materials are structured the way they are and how other clients adapt them. ### Define near and long-term success together.   Identify the immediate metrics that signal a healthy start, and the longer-term outcomes that prove the investment. Agree on owners, checkpoints, and how you’ll report progress. “Consistent updates” doesn’t mean weekly novels; it means enough transparency that leaders trust the process and employees see the loop closing. ### Transparent pricing mechanics.   Pricing should be easy to understand in year one and beyond. Seats, modules, distribution volume, services—whatever moves the number should be plain. Surprises at renewal erode trust and force defensive conversations. Clarity builds confidence and displays kindness. One more note on pricing because it surfaces often: I’ve seen terms of service with passive clauses that lift price year over year without incremental value. I've seen leaders actively avoid SaaS software at all cost because of the passive YOY lift on pricing. Have these honest conversations early. Ask what changes the price, when, and why. Listen more to _how_ the vendor answers than _what_ the rate is. The tone of that discussion tells you a lot about how the relationship will feel when you’re renewing under pressure. Pulling these elements together, the pattern is simple: * **Vendors lean into shared change management** * **Align with you on success metrics and a simple plan** * **Talk pricing transparently** You’re laying a solid foundation for a win-win. If those elements are missing or vague, consider looking elsewhere before the sunk costs pile up. Bringing It All Together ------------------------ Buying and launching an employee listening platform should feel like progress, not roulette. The path is clearer when you center your process on your organization first, vendors second. * **Start with clarity.** Put your problem or opportunity in plain words your stakeholders recognize. Decide what decisions, behaviors, and routines you want to influence. Keep the list short enough to manage. * **Filter with honesty.** Reverse-engineer your ICP and use it to say no early. A high-quality “no” in week one is better than a painful “maybe” in month six. * **Vet behavior, not just brochures.** Responsiveness, curiosity, tailoring, configuration—these are the tells. Demos can be polished; day-to-day partnership shows up in how people behave now. * **Set conditions for success.** Shared change management, a credible enablement approach, defined success metrics, and transparent pricing create the container for results. Without those, even a good tool can stall. If you’re switching vendors, the same guidance applies—just with more data. You already know where your last program stumbled. Use that insight as a design constraint. If you lost momentum because managers didn’t engage, build manager enablement into the plan from the start. If your last tool made simple admin tasks tedious, ask to see the unglamorous workflows you run every week. If the reporting was noisy, decide what not to measure. Upgrading platforms won’t fix an unclear operating model; clarity about who does what, when, and why will. And if you’re buying for the first time, don’t let the category overwhelm you. You don’t need to master every feature or memorize every buzzword. You need a vendor that can meet you where you are, help you earn trust with employees and managers, and give you a straightforward path from data to action. You’ll learn the rest as you go. **Final thought:** Tools do not create value on their own—people do. The right platform can make better conversations easier, faster, and more consistent. It can help leaders see patterns they’ve been missing and give managers a way to turn feedback into small, steady improvements. But the heartbeat of any listening program is the promise you make and keep with your workforce: _we will listen, we will consider, we will act where we can, and we will tell you what we’re doing and why._ The earlier you build your vendor relationship around that promise, the better your results will be—and the more confident you’ll feel that you chose a partner, not just a product. If you walk away with nothing else, take this: identify with honesty, vet for behavior, and design for a win-win. Do that, and you’ll know quickly whether you’re engaging in a necessary evil—or building a differentiated source of value for your people and your business. --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Modern Management: Unlocking Influence in Networks Author: Unknown Published: 2025-08-23 URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/modern-management-unlocking-influence-in-networks ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/collaboration-1755962667692-compressed.png) A former colleague recently told me that despite going through multiple reorgs over the past several years, he’s been largely unaffected. As he put it, “If you change where I sit, it changes very little for me.” His projects are highly cross-functional, and he doesn’t rely heavily on his formal teammates for success. Since this conversation, I’ve been thinking a lot about what _team_ really means in today’s organizations, and how the role of people management is evolving as AI reshapes work and teams become increasingly cross-functional and matrixed. When you hear the word _team_ or _group_ in a work context, you probably think of at least a few types: * **Formal teams**: your peers who also report to the same manager. That’s the team as defined in the HRIS (the one you’ll find on the org chart). * **Project teams**: the cross-functional groups that form to deliver something new. For example, a team tasked with bringing a product to market may include people from Product, Engineering, Research, Marketing, Sales, Legal, Finance, and more. They report into different leaders, but must all collaborate toward a common goal. * **Social groups:** the informal circles that form naturally in the workplace. These are the coworkers you grab lunch with, chat with at the coffee machine, or turn to for a quick gut check. These aren’t assigned or documented anywhere, but they shape perceptions, spread information, and influence how people experience the organization just as much as formal or project teams. **Why Management Must Evolve** ------------------------------ Each of these project-based teams and informal work groups has its own personality, skills, and dynamics. Influencing decisions here is tricky. Authority is less clear, and the mix of assertive and passive, technical and non-technical, objective and subjective personalities makes it more art than science. How do you capture the perspectives of everyone when no single leader holds the reins? This complexity means people management must evolve. Managers don’t typically have authority over project teams and social groups. Instead, their role shifts from exercising direct control to empowering their people to thrive and succeed in cross-functional, networked environments. But here’s the challenge: if the overall group experience is poor, how much influence can a manager really have? In my experience, it’s tough. I can coach a direct report, but I can’t always shape how the _other_ members of that project team or social group show up. So, what if we could identify the _key influencers_ in these groups? You know the type… the people everyone turns to for guidance, the _unofficial_ leaders who set the tone. If we can engage these influencers (or even better, their managers), we meaningfully increase the chances of improving the experience for everyone involved. **Enter Network-Based Employee Listening** ------------------------------------------ ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/b64-1755962857354-compressed.jpeg) This is where **network-based employee listening** comes in. It’s a new frontier designed for how work actually happens today, which I define as follows: “Network-based listening is a next-generation approach to employee listening that integrates feedback with network analysis, uncovering the influencers, hidden communities, and collaboration patterns that shape experience, culture, change, and performance.” It’s a direct (and more cost-effective) answer to the managerial challenges described above. The best part? All of this can be done through **surveys**. Survey-based ONA (often called _active ONA_): * Avoids the complexity of plugging into email, calendar, or messaging tools for passive/ambient data * Sidesteps the “spyware” or “Big Brother” optics those approaches carry (even with the best comms strategy) * Surfaces influencers whose impact happens in person… that colleague sitting right next to you probably isn’t sending you many messages via digital channels when they need to chat! **Identifying Influencer Types** -------------------------------- So how do surveys go beyond traditional engagement questions? By identifying archetypes like these: * **Advisors**: _“Who is most important for you to have greater access to?”_ * **Mentors**: _“Who plays an active role in your professional development?”_ * **Subject Matter Experts**: _“Who do you turn to when you need deep expertise?”_ * **Culture Carriers**: _“Who consistently demonstrates the behaviors we expect?”_ * **Support Anchors**: _“Who can you count on most to support you in your role?”_ With AI top of mind for nearly every organization, it’s equally important to uncover who’s shaping AI adoption, enablement, and understanding. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/b64-1755963010683-compressed.jpeg) **AI Power Users & Innovators** * _Who do you see using AI in the most innovative ways?_ * _Who introduces creative AI-driven solutions or ideas?_ * _Who helps you discover new AI tools or methods?_ ### **AI Guides & Educators** * _Who helps you apply AI in your work?_ * _Who explains AI concepts in ways that are easy to grasp?_ * _Who’s your go-to for AI learning and upskilling?_ ### **AI Champions & Change Agents** * _Who inspires you to experiment with AI tools?_ * _Who advocates for AI adoption in ways that influence you?_ * _Who encourages you to think differently about AI’s potential?_ ### **Responsible AI Stewards** * _Who ensures AI is used thoughtfully and ethically?_ * _Who raises questions about fairness, risk, or unintended consequences?_ * _Who do you trust most to guide responsible AI use?_ ### **AI Integrators** * _Who connects AI use cases across functions?_ * _Who helps you integrate AI into daily workflows?_ * _Who bridges the gap between technical and non-technical users?_ From there, responses can be weighted by priority (the first person listed for each question carries the most weight, the second a bit less, and so on). Network algorithms can also surface **derived** influencer types based on how people connect. For example, “information brokers” emerge as the individuals bridging clusters of close collaborators. These cross-community influencers are critical to driving efficient, scalable change! **Why Managers Still Matter** ----------------------------- ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/management-1755962954656-compressed.jpg) A study conducted by OrgAcuity found that respondents who did not list their manager as important to their success (across a number of questions like those provided above) reported statistically lower scores than those who indicated that their manager is important to their success on at least one. * **14 points lower** on Manager Feedback: “_My manager gives me actionable feedback that helps me improve my performance._” * **10 points lower** on Manager Effectiveness: “_I am satisfied with my manager’s overall performance as a manager._” * **10 points lower** on Career Growth: “_I have good opportunities to advance at this company._” Interestingly, the study found **no statistical differences in scores** based on whether peers on the same team were considered important to success. Having led employee listening programs for over a decade, I’ve consistently observed that the top reason people leave companies (according to exit surveys) is career growth opportunities. On the surface, this might seem at odds with the old adage, “People leave managers, not companies.” But, great managers make career pathways feel real and achievable through consistent and constructive development conversations, which directly influences perceptions and whether employees stay. These findings suggest managers remain critical to team success, but their role is evolving. Whether a respondent mentions their manager across these influencer-oriented questions can serve as a strong proxy for overall manager effectiveness and the quality of the employee-manager relationship. When a manager isn’t mentioned by any direct reports, it may warrant a closer look—or perhaps a rethink of the org design. In today’s organizations, formal team structures matter less than a manager’s ability to help shape the dynamics of informal networks and communities of work… where real collaboration, influence, and growth happen. **Managers Need Network-Based Listening** ----------------------------------------- “Work reinvented itself, but listening never got the memo.” The companies thriving now are the ones updating both. Organizations that cling to legacy listening approaches risk flying blind while competitors move faster, retain talent, and shape culture more intentionally. Network-based listening offers the level of insight required to lead effectively in this new era of human-AI collaboration and increasingly interconnected teams. --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Employee Listening: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? Author: Unknown Published: 2025-08-21 Tags: employee engagement, ROI, ONA, Employee engagement survey, employee listening URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/employee-listening-is-the-juice-worth-the-squeeze More than two decades after “First, Break All the Rules” by Marcus Buckingham and colleagues put employee engagement on the map, we’ve become very good at asking people how they feel—and we’ve proved it matters to business results. But while work sped up and reorganized itself, those engagement lines have barely budged. An annual check‑in can’t keep pace with modern reality or catch the moments that make people stay, leave, or go the extra mile. Employee listening is the upgrade: a continuous, structured approach to capturing employee feedback, perceptions, and behavioral signals; analyzing them for insight; and acting on the findings to shape decisions, improve the employee experience, and drive business performance. Layer in organizational network analysis (ONA) and you stop guessing how work flows—you can see the connectors, bottlenecks, and overload risk that make or break execution. This article traces the evolution of employee engagement to employee listening, discusses ROI, and makes a simple case: if you want more juice, don’t just squeeze the survey—listen continuously, map the network, and act. ### First, Break All the Rules I can still remember the business presentation on employee engagement: “People leave or stay because of their managers.” I’m citing this from memory, but you get the point. The scale of the research behind that observation—introduced by the book “First, Break All the Rules”—was massive: over 1 million employees and 80,000 manager interviews collected from 1975–2000. With numbers like that, everyone paid attention. The book popularized the term “employee engagement” and made it a business priority, showing that engagement linked more strongly to business results than the traditional measures of satisfaction used at the time. ### Before There Was Employee Listening, It Was All About Employee Engagement However, it wasn’t entirely clear what “employee engagement” meant—there was no universal, unifying definition. That was more of an academic concern, because the market mainly needed proof of a connection to business performance—and it had that. Consulting firms leaned into the opportunity, building different (but not wildly different) models and declaring each one “best in class.” If you asked a consultant for a preference, you’d likely hear, “Well, that’s a good question—it depends.” Selecting engagement tools soon felt like choosing your next meal: a series of tradeoffs based on budget, time, and utility. Since 2000, employee engagement surveys have become the standard for most organizations. Gallup reports that over 90% of organizations conduct some form of engagement survey. Across the 25 years Gallup has measured engagement, scores have ranged from 13%–24% globally and 26%–36% in the U.S. The Emergence of Employee Listening ----------------------------------- The annual engagement survey provided valuable insights into how employees felt about the organization and their jobs. In a predictable, stable environment, a yearly checkup might be enough. But the 2000s and 2010s were anything but stable. In HR (and beyond), “VUCA” became a staple descriptor—volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity. Our systems needed to realign with that reality and adopt a more comprehensive, intentional approach to capturing the employee voice. To attract, retain, and develop talent, we had to manage information channels and feedback loops more deliberately to adapt, understand, and address employee needs. Ultimately, we moved to an “always on” approach centered on listening. The tactics and essence of employee listening are not new—we’ve been experimenting since the Hawthorne studies in the 1920s. What’s new is the consolidation, intentionality, coordination, and scale: a more systematic approach to understanding employees’ voices.  In the late 2010s, the market shifted from once‑a‑year feedback to shorter, more frequent mechanisms. Listening practices, tools, and roles evolved significantly, and organizations began integrating listening into leadership and decision‑making. Organizations that integrate employee listening with business objectives and strategic action show significantly better results—they are nine times more likely to make real progress on top business and talent goals. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/untitled-design-8-1755749328503-compressed.png) ### What Is the ROI (the Juice) of Employee Listening? A long time ago someone told me, “A question is an intervention.” The act of asking prompts a response—not just the answer, but the thinking it triggers. A question communicates interest and invites people to reflect on experiences they might not otherwise consider. That’s valuable to any organization. And when people feel heard—and we act on what we hear—performance moves. Gallup finds highly engaged teams are 21% more profitable and 17% more productive, with 59% less attrition and 41% lower absenteeism than low‑engagement teams. On the flip side, disengagement drains $450–$550B in U.S. productivity each year, and replacing a leaver can cost 50%–250% of salary—so preventing even a few exits matters. Organizations that listen and act continuously are also four times more likely to retain employees in the near term. The benefits of employee listening show up both as avoided costs and as better outputs. ### ONA, an Essential Tool Okay—what is an “ONA”? I get it: another acronym. But there’s a lot of untapped utility in organizational network analysis. We’ve all been taught how to do the thing… and then had to do the thing. When you need hands‑on guidance, how do you find the go‑to expert? During change and transformation, who are the influencers who spread the word and help put things into action? If listening tells you what people experience, ONA shows how work flows—who connects teams, where information stalls, and who influences adoption. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/untitled-design-7-1755749414961-compressed.png) When I first learned about ONA, I kept asking, “Does the added complexity really deliver incremental value?” After an in‑depth three‑day training, the potential use cases felt endless. It’s an essential tool that benefits any organization—and I’m not just justifying my personal investment. Every change‑management initiative should include an ONA early in the planning process. ### ONA, Extra Juice Today, while managers still matter, execution is increasingly about teams—the ones we form to get things done. Teams eventually disband, but the connections we make aren’t lost. We all remember that expert who could solve anything, or the person who coached us through a tough problem. We store those experiences in memory—useful to us, but invisible to the organization. ONA helps make those hidden connections visible. That visibility pays off: change programs that mobilize influencers see ROI jump from ~35% to 143%, and sometimes up to 300%. In practice, a European retail bank used ONA to fix siloed branches and lifted loan sales by 11%; a midsize biotech used ONA to design hybrid schedules that preserved 77% of critical in‑person collaborations while meeting 82% of employee preferences. And because a small group of informal leaders (often ~3%) can sway most colleagues, finding and engaging these influencers early prevents costly turnover and speeds execution. We use tools that help us build new networks and reinforce existing ones. Incorporating tools into your listening strategy that illuminate hidden networks unveils new opportunities for employees and enhances organizational capability. From Surveys to Systems ----------------------- Listening tells you what people experience; ONA shows how it spreads. Pick one upcoming moment (a rollout, reorg, or staffing change), map the informal network, and enlist influencers early. Then close the loop publicly. The squeeze isn’t the survey—it’s the discipline to listen, map, and act. --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Mid-Sized, Growing Fast? Here’s How to Stay Aligned Author: Unknown Published: 2025-08-07 Tags: HRtech, Organization design, employee experience, employee listening, people analytics URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/mid-sized-growing-fast-heres-how-to-stay-aligned Growth is exciting, but it can quietly strain alignment. As mid-sized companies grow, staying aligned becomes harder and more important. The informal ways teams once coordinated start to break down: * Teams multiply * Priorities diverge * Communication gets patchy ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/6251-1754588857273-compressed-1754588927319-compressed.jpg) Suddenly, it’s not clear who’s doing what, or where decisions are really being made. That’s where OrgAcuity comes in. Our platform maps real team dynamics - trust, influence, and collaboration, so you can spot early signs of misalignment before they stall your momentum. **OrgAcuity can make a big impact in mid-sized organizations, where fast growth often disrupts alignment, trust, and communication.** Why Mid-Sized Organizations Need Better Insight ​ ------------------------------------------------------ Most teams don’t struggle because they lack talent or vision, they struggle because work is increasingly networked, and traditional tools can’t keep pace with change. In mid-sized organizations, typically those with 500 to 5000 employees, things change fast. New teams form. Layers of leadership emerge. What once felt like a tight-knit culture starts to fragment as informal dynamics begin to shift beneath the surface. And while everything may look fine on the org chart, the early signs of misalignment often go unnoticed. You might start to see: * Projects taking longer than expected due to missed handoffs or unclear ownership * New hires struggling to assimilate into the organization and build relationships * High performers quietly burning out as unspoken dependencies build up * Teams operating in silos, without even realizing it But the signals are often subtle. They’re not captured in your annual survey. They’re buried in the day-to-day flow of how people really work and that’s exactly what OrgAcuity makes those invisible dynamics visible and actionable. What OrgAcuity Helps You Uncover (That Others Miss) --------------------------------------------------- OrgAcuity maps how work actually happens: through relationships, influence, and collaboration. We help leaders: * Spot overburdened connectors before they burn out * Identify hidden influencers who aren’t on formal radars * Understand how silos form and where they block progress ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/43121-1754589164159-compressed.jpg) These insights are most valuable when used early, before small misalignments grow into larger organizational challenges. **Why It's Important for Your Mid-sized Organization to Act Early** ------------------------------------------------------------------- You don’t have to be a global enterprise to run into complex organizational dynamics. In fact, mid-sized companies (typically 500–5000 employees) often feel the strain sooner because: * There’s less built-in redundancy * A few misalignments can ripple quickly * The “informal glue” holding teams together is often invisible The result? Burnout, miscommunication, and fragmentation can quietly take root, long before engagement scores show a dip. For mid-sized organizations, the margin for error is smaller. That’s why gaining visibility into your real internal networks isn’t a “nice to have”, it’s essential to growing with alignment and resilience. Helping You Lead With Clarity, Without More Tools or Complexity OrgAcuity delivers real insight without the heavy IT lift. Easy setup, immediate value. Our goal is simple: help you lead with clarity. You’re not installing another dashboard. You’re applying a new lens—one that reveals the invisible networks shaping your organization. Whether you're: * Planning a re-org * Rolling out a strategy * Trying to retain key talent * Navigating fast growth OrgAcuity gives you the data to move forward with precision, not guesswork. ### What Your Leaders Learn With OrgAcuity When mid-sized organizations use OrgAcuity, they often say things like: “This explained so much of what we’ve been feeling but couldn’t see.” Here’s what we help leaders uncover: * **Advisors:** Quietly trusted voices shaping priorities and decision-making. * **Subject Matter Experts:** Technical anchors that others seek out daily. * **Mentors:** People who build trust, belonging, and emotional glue across roles. * **Information Brokers:** The links bridging departments and sharing context. * **Support Anchors:** Often-overlooked teammates who offer steadiness and care. * **Informal Communities**: The real work groups, and the people who influence them most. Recognizing these influencers early allows you to: * Retain your best culture carriers * Prevent burnout before it spreads * Strengthen collaboration while growing * Design more equitable development conversations **So, Is OrgAcuity Right for You?** OrgAcuity is built for leaders who want clearer answers to complex, workforce questions, whether you’re growing, evolving, or simply trying to stay aligned. We often hear: **_“We don’t have formal org issues, we’re still small.”_** But that’s exactly when to take a closer look. OrgAcuity surfaces unseen challenges early, so you can prevent friction, overload, and misalignment from derailing your success. Even when things appear steady on the surface, the real signals, trust shifts, hidden dependencies, or quiet overload, often go unnoticed. OrgAcuity helps you map those invisible dynamics early, so you can lead with clarity before misalignment takes hold. If you’re navigating change, big or small, OrgAcuity can help you see the signals sooner, act with confidence, and lead with clarity. Curious how OrgAcuity could support your next chapter? Let’s explore it together. [Request a Demo](https://www.orgacuity.com/demo)[Download the Brochure](https://orgacuity.com/brochure) **OrgAcuity: Where employee listening meets real connection.** ​ --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## What’s Really Driving Your Team (Hint: It’s Not Just Survey Scores) Author: Unknown Published: 2025-07-17 Tags: HRtech, Organization design, employee experience, employee listening, people analytics URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/whats-really-driving-your-team In today’s workplace, teams move fast, collaborate across silos, and rely heavily on informal networks. But most legacy employee listening tools are stuck in the past. If you’ve ever asked: “Who actually drives collaboration on my team? Where’s trust breaking down? Who’s doing too much behind the scenes?” - you’re not alone. The Problem: Sentiment Isn’t the Whole Story -------------------------------------------- Most traditional tools still rely on annual surveys and engagement scores. They’re useful, but surface-level. They tell you how people feel, not how work actually gets done. According to MIT Sloan, employees now spend 85% of their time collaborating. That’s a massive shift in how organizations function, and one that can’t be captured by pulse checks alone. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/close-up-young-colleagues-having-meeting-1752863340908-compressed.jpg) These older systems miss the deeper signals: the flow of trust, the connectors between teams, and the early signs of burnout among top contributors. How OrgAcuity Listens Differently --------------------------------- OrgAcuity doesn’t just show you scores, it reveals the people and patterns that drive them. By mapping real connections, our platform gives you the network-aware insights traditional tools miss. It’s like turning on the lights inside your org to see the people who shape engagement and collaboration across silos, roles, and levels, even without a title. * **​****Advisors:** The influencers people need greater access to. They’re trusted by others for their insight and guidance, often quietly shaping decisions, priorities, and team direction behind the scenes. * **Subject Matter Experts:** The go-to authorities on specific topics. Their knowledge is frequently sought out by others, and they help anchor organizational know-how, problem-solving, and technical depth. * **Mentors:** The relational anchors who support growth and development. They invest in others, build capability, and foster belonging, playing a critical role in engagement and retention, especially across career stages. * **Support Anchors:** The steady, trusted individuals people rely on for encouragement, help, or steadiness in their day-to-day work, an essential but often invisible source of resilience and retention. * **Information Brokers**: The hidden connectors who bridge silos. They facilitate the flow of ideas, context, and coordination between otherwise disconnected groups—helping the organization stay aligned and adaptive. The Insights That Help You Lead Smarter --------------------------------------- **See Hidden Superstars - Before It’s Too Late** We spotlight the employees others lean on most, even if they don’t show up in top-down engagement data. _Example: One of our dashboards revealed a finance Subject Matter Expert with the highest number of trusted connections, but she had never been flagged in any previous reviews. She was holding her team together. Leaders saw her value just in time._ **Insights That Flex With You** Whether you’re managing a merger, launching a strategy, or addressing team friction, you can focus OrgAcuity’s lens on what matters most. _Trust, mapped in real time: See who’s building momentum across teams, and where collaboration may be stalling, so you can act early and with confidence._ **Act Sooner, Not Later** Traditional tools react after scores fall. OrgAcuity helps you see what’s shifting underneath, like when key teammates become isolated or collaboration slows, so you can step in before bigger problems surface. _In one rollout, OrgAcuity flagged a high-trust team where collaboration patterns were starting to fade. A previously well-connected teammate had seen a sudden drop in peer interactions. The leader reached out early, uncovered a misalignment in priorities, and realigned expectations, preventing the frustration from snowballing._ ### **Results Leaders Using OrgAcuity Have Experienced:** * Uncovered the most trusted team connectors to lead cross-functional initiatives with speed and alignment. * Spotted key contributors at risk of disengagement based on declining connection patterns, before it impacted team dynamics. * Used trust and influence data to guide more meaningful development conversations, grounded in actual working relationships, not assumptions. * Prioritized recognition and support for leaders who quietly drive collaboration, based on real feedback and peer networks. * And they’ve done it all through a platform designed to be intuitive, insight-rich, and adaptable to real organizational needs. **Why We Built OrgAcuity** -------------------------- Traditional surveys are individually focused, which is a good start, but not the whole story. They often miss the deeper and more powerful social and team dynamics that drive performance, engagement, and effectiveness. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/121336-1752776384674-compressed.jpg) OrgAcuity was built to make employee listening reflect how work actually happens—through relationships, networks, and collaboration. We believe leaders deserve better tools—ones that don’t just diagnose after the fact but help shape the conditions for high performance in real time. Too often, feedback loops are reactive. We set out to change that by empowering leaders with the signals that matter most, before outcomes are locked in. Our next-generation employee listening technology helps organizations: * Make the hidden dynamics - trust, collaboration, and influence—visible * Surface quiet drivers of team health, change, and success * Equip leaders with early signals they can use to proactively influence outcomes OrgAcuity listens where others can’t. We map how work really happens, across teams, functions, and people, so you can lead with insight, not assumptions. ​**See What’s Really Driving Your Team**​ Want to go beyond the survey? [Book a Demo](https://orgacuity.com/demo)[Download the Brochure](https://orgacuity.com/brochure) **OrgAcuity: Where employee listening meets network clarity.** --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Are External Benchmarks Hurting Your Employee Experience Strategy? Author: Unknown Published: 2025-07-16 Tags: employee experience, employee listening, external benchmark, survey benchmark, people analytics URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/external-survey-benchmarks ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/surveybenchmark-1752794535287-compressed.png) I’ve always been skeptical about the utility of external benchmarks for employee experience (EX) surveys. I’m even more concerned by how much some companies are willing to pay for what they see as a “must-have” comparison, often without questioning what they’re really getting. The two most common arguments I've heard in favor of benchmarks are: * _“How will we know if a score is good or bad without benchmarks?”_ * _“How will we know what target to set?”_ These questions rest on a set of assumptions we rarely stop to examine. The Benchmark Mirage -------------------- What’s rarely talked about: * **Opaque data.** Vendors don’t disclose which companies are included in external benchmarks. Even when benchmarks are segmented by industry and company size (e.g., Tech, 1,000–5,000 employees), the companies are often meaningfully different with respect to growth stage, business model, financial performance, and workforce composition (roles, functions, and geographies). * **Law of small numbers.** The more granular the benchmark (e.g., New Tech in the U.S. with 500 - 1,000 employees), the lower the number of contributing employers. Vendors typically don’t disclose how many organizations make up a given benchmark either, but five is often the minimum required to report a score. With a sample of this size, a single outlier can meaningfully influence the results. Are we comfortable letting our targets shift based on where the vendor's sales team happens to be most successful? * **Sample bias.** External benchmarks reflect the vendor’s customer base, not a representative cross-section of employers. Vendors often tout that their data aren’t collected from panels or synthetic sources, but that’s part of the problem. Are these companies truly your talent peers, or just companies that happened to buy the software? * **Messy tagging.** For companies with diverse subsidiaries, survey data are often tagged based on the industry or location of the parent company (as assigned by a CSM) rather than where or how the work is actually happening. Vendors often don’t know where individual respondents are based, so they assign the geography of HQ by default, even if most employees are elsewhere. * **They’re stale.** Benchmark refresh rates vary widely. Meanwhile, EX is shaped by fast-moving dynamics: RTO policies, geopolitical events, shifting administrations, and policy changes. By the time benchmarks are updated, they may no longer reflect current employee sentiment. * **They dilute strategy.** Benchmarks can crowd out the custom indicators that matter most. Do generic, benchmarkable items really provide more value than precise, high-impact measures tied to your culture, manager behaviors, or values? What’s the real cost? --------------------- * **Benchmarks Encourage Mediocrity.** If a score is “above benchmark,” leaders often see no reason to act, even when employees are signaling a clear pain point. It shifts the goal from _excellence_ to _adequacy_. * **Benchmarks Create Groupthink.** They push companies to fix the same things, chasing what others prioritize instead of what matters most internally. That’s not strategy—it’s mimicry! * **Benchmarks Are Politically Weaponized.** “At benchmark” is frequently used to deflect feedback or justify inaction, even when internal trends are moving in the wrong direction. * **Benchmarks Are Misinterpreted.** Scores may be skewed by low-response data, and most platforms don’t evaluate representativeness across attributes that explain variance in scores. Also, small differences of 2–3 points are often treated as meaningful in the absence of transparency around sample sizes and standard deviations. That’s shaky ground for decision-making. * **Benchmarks Flatten Complex Realities.** A score of 72 in “manager support” may mean very different things for a dev team vs. a call center. Benchmarks don’t account for that nuance. * **Internal Comparisons Are More Actionable.** Comparing across teams, levels, and time provides sharper, more relevant insight. That’s where real understanding (and real change) happens. ![](https://assets.superblog.ai/site_cuid_cmd5dlz1q0001ednfa7f4nyop/images/black-closed-sign-landscape-poster-1-1752795105942-compressed.png) **Let’s be honest: Beating the benchmark doesn’t mean we’re doing well.**  It might just mean we’re slightly _less bad_ than a group of struggling organizations that are actually pretty dissimilar from our own. If respondents rate a survey item significantly lower than they rate other items—or if a large, representative segment scores significantly less favorably—do we really need an external benchmark to tell us where the biggest opportunity for improvement lies? Better yet, if the survey item is a statistical driver of outcomes we want to influence (e.g., retention, engagement) based on “internal” data, would an external benchmark score change our perception of its importance? Probably not. What if we flipped the script? ------------------------------ What if we focused on being the **best version of ourselves**, tracking internal drivers over time, identifying statistically different hotspots, and measuring what matters most to our people? Most folks I talk to agree with this in principle. But in practice? **Benchmark pressure is real.** There’s comfort in knowing how “we stack up”, even when the comparison isn’t valid. **I’d love to hear from others working in EX, people analytics, or employee listening:** * Are external benchmarks central to your strategy, or a distraction? * How have you helped stakeholders shift toward a more meaningful focus on internal trends, distributions, and context-based insights? --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. --- ## Sample Page Author: Unknown Published: 2025-07-16 URL: https://orgacuity.com/blog/sample-page This is a page. Notice how there are no elements like author, date, social sharing icons? Yes, this is the page format. You can create a whole website using Superblog if you wish to do so! --- This blog is powered by Superblog. Visit https://superblog.ai to know more. ---