Listen to how Arcadis’ Experience Designer, Paul Conder, uses agile principles to rapidly test and validate his design work, bringing deep customer insights to target the needs of the market. Paul believes the more inclusion is demonstrated to be viable, to design with everyone and not for, the more inclusive design will become the norm with Industry and government.
Manisha: Will we ever get to a place where the world is designed for all of us, meeting our diverse needs, addressing environmental changes and challenges, and creating sustainable living environments? There’s one company, a mainstream company, that is planning to improve our quality of life every day. Welcome to With, Not For, a podcast from the Centre for Inclusive Design. My name is Manisha Amin speaking to you from the lands of the Cammeraygal people here in North Sydney, Australia. My guest today is Paul Conder. He’s the Experience Design Services Lead at a global design company, Arcadis. Paul is based in New York and explains his job as leading a global team that choreographs the built and digital environment to deliver inspiring human experiences. Welcome to With, Not For, Paul.
Paul: Thank you very much. It’s great to be here.
Manisha: I love this idea of you choreographing the built environment and digital experiences. How does that word relate to what you do every day?
Paul: Experience design is really about helping really big complex organisations figure out how to design a great experience or deliver a great experience.
Manisha: Now, can you give us a quick background on why you chose to be a designer? What inspired you?
Paul: I first heard about it from the horse’s mouth. I met Arthur Erickson who’s a great Canadian architect who designed my father’s office building when I was a kid, and I was really inspired by how beautiful it was, how you used it, how you navigated the spaces in it. It looked like science fiction but it also had a giant beautiful tropical garden in the centre of it. And my father toured me around the place when it was brand new. He even showed me the brand new IBM mainframe in the basement. And I was completely blown away that there was somebody who envisioned this thing. It didn’t just pop out of nowhere. And I was very excited about it and that’s how I learned the word “architect” and that’s how I learned about design, initially. And I actually got to meet him when I was in my mid-30s or something. And I actually told him that story.
Manisha: That’s incredible. But then how did you move from architecture to experience design, because it’s a bit of a shift.
Paul: I worked for an architecture firm, but I’m not actually an architect. My background is in industrial design which is product design which is actually a lot closer to experience design. I’m splitting hairs here but really industrial designers focus on how products and people interact, and to do that, they have to think through things from the user’s point of view and then map it out, understand how people interact with say for example something like a power tool or a calculator or whatever. Calculator; I’m dating myself there. Those things don’t exist anymore very much. And I think through all those interactions, map them out and then test them because human behaviour is so unpredictable, especially when you get into areas where the designer has different abilities than the person who is going to be using it.
And so you have to test it out with people, get their input, cocreate with them. All those different techniques come out of industrial design. The difference is that I’m now applying them to brands and organisations that have these enormous channels that they’re able to reach out to people with. So I came from industrial design. I designed furniture for about ten years. And after we did an early internet startup, I realised that the connection between the digital and the physical world is really a very interesting place to play in. And I was teaching for quite a while, and that’s where this came from.
Manisha: So what does furniture design teach you about what you do today?
Paul: When I was designing workplace furniture and I had some success with that, when we did it, we sent out prototypes out into the field that we knew were wrong, but they were a best guess for how they should work, and watched how people interacted with them, got their feedback on it, cocreated on what the thing should look like and how we could make it better. And we actually even had a truck that we drive around with and change these prototypes in the field. And they gradually would evolve into the finished product, something that I never would have predicted.
Manisha: That’s fascinating.
Paul: That’s actually very close to what I do now. It’s just as more likely I’m going to do with it an interior and app and a website and that kind of thing as opposed to something you sit on.
Manisha: That’s fascinating. Was that something that people were doing a lot of at that time, driving around in trucks?
Paul: Yeah, I mean, not necessarily driving around. We’re as far as apart as you can be on the Earth I think, actually, right now. The process is something that was built into industrial design for years before I got there, and I definitely didn’t make that up. But what has changed is that the – that process has been adopted by digital designers where – and they call it agile, where you have a problem and you try to solve it in a sprint. And you take it apart, try it out, try out a solution, kill it off if it doesn’t work very well, try it out with real people, get the users involved, iterate on it really fast, and throw out any ideas that aren’t performing.
That spirit came out of product design in the ‘60s and ‘70s. And it was applied to software. And then it grew in the entire design industry, and has taken it over. So that’s gone all over the place now and I’m just sitting in one little corner of it. I don’t claim to have invented any of that. It’s just the approach that came out of industrial design and wound up in the digital space.
Manisha: It’s really interesting and I’d like to come back to agile if we’ve got some time at the end of this process.
Paul: You bet.
Manisha: But I’m also really interested in how the sector has moved. I mean, you work for a large global organisation that looks at design in a whole range of ways for a whole range of different products and services, and places. How have you seen the inclusion movement, if you like, intersect with the way designers now think?
Paul: I guess it depends how you think about inclusion. Architects got ahead of this a long time ago when they started thinking about accessibility and how you make spaces accessible for people. And that got embedded in the legal code of most industrial design – most industrial countries as far as I know: certainly, Canada, US, Europe, Japan. And it changed the way buildings are made. In fact, I’m in an apartment that was built in the 1970s and you wouldn’t be able to build it as it is right now because you can’t get in here with a wheelchair and you can’t navigate the shower if your legs aren’t helping out with it. And the form of this building that I’m in would actually be very different if you built it now, even though it was built in my lifetime. So architects in a lot of ways have gotten a long way ahead of this.
The digital design world; just look at your iPhone and you can see all the features that are built into that right from the ground up. Not everybody has to use them. That’s the nice part of it is that you can have a different experience based on what people’s abilities are, and you can set that to choose your own adventure based on what works best for you. You can’t do that as easily with buildings. And the industrial design world has been doing it for years. There’s a designer by the name of Victor Papanek who was writing in the ‘60s and ‘70s. And he has written all sorts of great books around the ethical imperative for product designers and later digital designers to become more inclusive in their approach, cocreate with people that are actually going to wind up using them, and other people that are involved in the ecosystem creating.
And then also – sustainability was another one of his areas that he spoke about a lot that overlaps with this, I think. So it exists in different forms in different areas of design. And as we get closer and closer and those grey zones start to become a little bit more permeable between all the different fields, I think you’re going to see better ideas moving around between different people and different approaches to becoming more integrated in the day to day practice.
Manisha: We can see the benefits of doing things this way. It’s good for business. It’s good for people. It’s good for humanity. What do you think some of the challenges are when we think about the way we create, because if this was working beautifully, we’d be there now. The theories, the concepts, the ideas you’re talking about; they’ve been around for a while now. And yet, we’re still designing buildings that are inaccessible for people. We’re still designing apps, digital systems that don’t work for some groups, or work for some groups better than other groups. What are some of the things we can either do differently, or what are the challenges that you see working within the system?
Paul: Interesting question. First of all, I didn’t mean to imply by what I said earlier that we’re done.
Manisha: Oh, no, I totally agree.
Paul: [Laughs] We started a journey. It’s been useful. But just because there’s some things built into the building code that change how we do things, that doesn’t mean they were taking it far enough. There are always going to be designers that are pushing the front edge of this, and their success is really what will drive the market. If they’re able to sustain themselves and they build successful businesses out of this, there’s going to be value that’s shown. And the industry will just move naturally. That has to be supported by regulation on the other end. And that applies to the – it also applies to the sustainability thing that I mentioned earlier. So there’s a push and a pull that has to happen. And the pull tends to be a little faster, so if there is a market that’s underserved and there’s an enormous number of people who have different abilities than a 25 year old designer who just got out of Stanford.
So if you can build it into your process to think more in terms of all the other people – just a really, really simple example, really simple example: I will stay – I wear glasses. I will stay at a hotel that has a shampoo bottle with large text on the side that says “shampoo” as opposed to the name of the brand just because I would make that choice. And I would spend a lot more money at that chain just because I would be able to see the difference between the shampoo, the conditioner and the bodywash in the shower. That’s a stupid example, but it’s a small one that affects an enormous number of people in the population.
And if you take that and scale it up and think through all of the different levels of ability that people have, and how you can actually use that to be able to create a better experience for everybody; that’s one thing that I learned about industrial design. If you create a better product for people with limited abilities in some ways, you’re going to create something that’s probably going to be better for everybody. Doc Martins are a good example. The LAMY pen is a good example. You’re just going to make things better. A shower with no kerb on it, that’s better for everybody. So there is going to be this natural pull and you’re always going to have these outliers at the front of it that are going to be better. And they’re going to be pulling the whole industry forward. And then the last resort is the government is going to pick up the rest of it and regulate our way to it when they realise that it’s a moral imperative. But the front edge of it, I think I believe that commerce can actually drive a great deal of this because we’re talking about a heck of a lot of people.
Manisha: So I’d like to dive into this a little bit more, and with an example of some of the work that you’ve done. And I’m thinking about the work you’ve done, particularly with the Ponce Bank. And can you tell us a little bit more about that because I think what’s really interesting is exactly what codesign can look like, how this worked for you, and the Bank, and the people involved, and some of the things that worked really well and some of the things that you’d probably do differently now that you have the benefit of hindsight?
Paul: Yeah, you bet. The thing with that project is that we didn’t really start it thinking of it as being about inclusivity specifically. It was just part of the mix for how we should approach it. So it wasn’t – we weren’t coming at it from the point of view of we have to open up this new market of people who can’t access services now or something like that. It wasn’t coming from that. It was coming from a general sense that Ponce Bank, which is a great little community bank managed locally; they’re about 15 branches. They’ve done some really great work in the community. They support local businesses. They support the Hispanic community. They have a lot of Spanish resources for people. So you don’t necessarily have to come in there and have perfect English to be able to get access to banking. And they will also – they loan into the community and all that as well. So a great bank.
But they were in the 1970s when it came to the customer experience. Part of that is that the front end of banking experiences happens with larger banks usually. The only reason for that is because they’re able to build these huge digital departments that – and IT departments that can create the experiences that we’re used to in banking: the level of security that you need, the ability to access everything online and in apps, and streamline things so they become more effortless, and all that. That’s easier to do if you’re a big bank that can afford a massive IT department.
What’s happening with a lot of these smaller community banks are still – they have the bulletproof glass in front of the teller and they have people stuffing paper underneath and people counting paper in the back, and huge lineups out the door and all that stuff. And so it’s harder for them to be able to make that change. And the change that’s happened technologically is that there was a lot of new off-the-shelf systems that are able to be deployed at a smaller scale that don’t require that huge IT department to be able to run a better, more modern experience.
They originally came to us and said, “Hey, can you design the interior of this future branch?” And we said, “Well yeah, but how are you going to actually deploy these services? How are you going to get this right for the people that are there?” They have a lot of older customers, people who still use passbooks, for example. Remember the old analogue passbook? You stuff it underneath the glass and a little laser printer outputs your balance and stuff? And they were concerned that they would alienate the older customers, that they would make something that’s less personal, that we’d get them all using apps and things that they weren’t ready to use, and that their business would suffer as a result. So that gets back to that commercial side of this. It’s not just because it’s the right thing to do.
And so this didn’t start as an inclusive design project, but it became one [laughs]. And it’s always that way. It’s better if it’s something that’s just built into the experience plan as opposed to being something that’s just focused – it has a commercial reason for you to do it, too. And that makes it a lot easier because then you can measure the output of it against the business, and you can have a reason to scale it up beyond it just being the right thing to do. And that happens almost every time. So it’s like we’re burying it in there, and then in the process, we make a little more money, and you open up a new market. And when that happens, you wind up with something that’s better for everybody. That’s my little conspiracy.
Manisha: Look, that’s the way we talk about it as well. We want inclusive design to be baked into design, not to be something we do on the side.
Paul: Absolutely. So they – we came to them with a different plan. As opposed to starting on the interior, we started on let’s rethink the end to end experience, the whole journey of going to the branch and how that works, with this technology. So we set up a lab space that was in a former bank branch that was still licensed but it had been gutted. So it was just an open space. And a big part of this was making it so that it’s not just thinking about the customers in a way that’s inclusive, but also thinking about the staff. So staff in environments like this can teeter between boredom on one end or burnout on the other if you give them too much to do, if there’s just too much work, too much cognitive load. And it’s easy to set these things up where they wind up tripping over each other if you get it wrong.
And so we deployed all of the new technology that came from these vendors and forced them to set it up in this lab environment so we could try it out and make sure that it worked. It never does. Everything that comes from the IT department you know 20% is not going to live up to the brochure. And so there’s things that you can do if you anticipate that where you can change the way the service is deployed or change the staffing or set it up so that you can work around it or whatever. So we did that first.
And then we had the staff in to cocreate the future journey for the customer. And the reason we did that was that they knew the customers better than we ever would. No matter how much research we had, they’d spent years with these people. They know them. They can empathise with them. They really want to give them a really great experience. And in the back of their mind, they’re thinking, “How can I be enabled to be able to create a better experience for people? How can I be enabled to do my best work?” And so they cocreated the journeys. We facilitated the conversation. And when I say “we” I should definitely include Steve Hamilton who is their Chief Experience Officer there.
So we worked with him and ran the whole thing back and forth, and it went really well. That included a bunch of role play, figuring out the – how the experience would work end to end and trying it out in the space with the actual IT. And then when we got it all worked out, we just opened the doors and it was a bank. And it was a bank that was made out of cardboard. It was all mock ups of furniture and things like that, and everything had been put in place based on all these role plays. We’d iterated on it a bunch of times so it was ready for prime time. And we got feedback from the community in real time and changed it as we went based on that feedback, so the customers, who a lot of them were elderly, a lot of them weren’t able to communicate in English at a level that you’d want for somebody who’s talking about finances. And we created this completely different journey for them and let them give us feedback and tweak it in real time. And the feedback we got was fantastic. Sorry, go ahead.
Manisha: Sorry. I’ve just interrupted you there. I’m really fascinated. That first piece when you were working with the staff, what were some of the lightbulb moments for you as a designer when you were in that space going, “I thought this would happen but something completely different happened.”?
Paul: Well, it wasn’t really a surprise, but it was a real joy to see how engaged everybody was. They really connected and it’s a small enough bank that they could have most people in there at some point or another. So they felt like they owned it. And so what that process did was it meant that the change management was built in. So when we actually did it in the actual bank – and these are just getting rolled out now. So we don’t have a huge number of these that we’ve been able to show. COVID slowed things down a bit.
But when it came time to actually deliver the experience or do it in the mock up environment with the actual customers, they were really behind it, and they – I think they really liked it. The impact we got from it was great and they became the designers. Instead of me telling them, “Here’s what the solution is,” it was, “Here’s a process. Let’s go down this road together and see how it goes.” And the ideas really all came from them. So that’s what the cocreation thing is, and that’s part of why I was happy to join this podcast because that’s the theme of the whole thing at the time, with, not for. That’s really where it came from.
Manisha: When we think about designing with people, part of the reason is that we all have different biases and different assumptions. Were there things that showed up that either yourself or the staff weren’t really expecting?
Paul: We need to stop thinking about elderly people as being unable to change. That’s a huge one. And even – I don’t even want to generalise and say that they might not have the same tech savvy as others. A lot of them actually do. I mean, my father’s in his ‘80s and he’s had a computer on his desk for 50 years. This is a Gen X thing, I think, where it’s like, “People that are older than us, they don’t get the tech.” It’s different. We use it differently for sure. I mean, the – it might not have the same level of social media adoption for example or something like that, but for the most part, they’re not afraid of this stuff. And if they can see the value in it, they will adopt things.
The other one is: don’t put the tech in the hands of the customer. We’ve seen this over and over again. Put it in the hands of the staff to empower them. So if you give the – we used to call them tellers. They’re not. They’re now called bankers because they’ve got a completely different role in this where anybody is able to deliver any service anywhere in the bank. And the spaces in the bank are different too. As a result, there – there’s a lounge for some kinds of conversation. There is a small teller pod thing but it’s completely open and there’s no glass around it and all that for standing up. There’s a conference space for small businesses. There’s amenities for different community groups if you want to come in and use it, all that stuff. So the bankers’ roles completely changed.
And in the process of that, if you give them the right technology – and I’m not saying just give them a computer. I mean, give them the right connected technology so they get the information they need it to be able to serve the customer, you will create a better customer experience because you’ve created a better staff experience. I didn’t learn this from this project. It’s something I’ve seen throughout my career. If you can create a better staff experience, you create a better customer experience, and they will be more helpful and you will naturally have a more inclusive experience because it’s human to human as opposed to someone butting into some sort of rigid piece of technology. So the result was the customers there across the whole board said that the experience was actually far more personal. That was the Number 1 word that they used for it, which is a – that’s a hole in one for me because it means that they’re having a human connection with the technology out of the way, as opposed to the tech being a burden to the customer.
Manisha: I really like that because it’s more than just personalised. We often talk about personalised journeys that come from the digital world. But what you’re talking about is the intersection between personalisation and relationship.
Paul: We’ve worked with a bunch of bigger luxury brands, and every time where we’ve allowed for that better personalisation to happen for the staff, and then they serve the customer on a more personal level. That sounds a little bit abstract but if you think about how a really great tailor works; if you go to a tailor shop, they look you up and down. They know exactly how to make something fit. And if they get to know you, they know your taste and that stuff. That experience can only really happen at scale if you’re able to share some information.
It can only – if you’re doing it at a very small scale, you’ll actually know your customers, but you’ll only have 200 of them. If you’ve got hundreds and thousands of customers, you need to figure out a way to be able to transmit that information at the right place at the right time. That’s so much better use of the technology than it is it to try to reduce the staff load by offloading something to an app, whether people want it or not. That’s old thinking. And AI throws a monkey wrench into all of this and I have no idea where that’s going [laughs]. It could go all sorts of different ways, but yeah, I’ll leave that off the table for now.
Manisha: It’s really interesting though when I hear you talk about this because it seems to me that when we talk to people who have been around for a little while, this work seems to be work that they’re very comfortable with. When we talk to young people who are just moving into the sector, it seems that intuitively, they think this is how design should be done. The people we struggle with the most or that struggle with this model the most are people who have been in the sector for maybe five to ten years.
Paul: Yeah, and I think that’s because – and this is “I think” not “I know”. But I think it’s because design education changed – has changed and the culture around design has changed. The younger people coming out of design programs now have a very different deal than what I got. And the people in my generation that changed, did it intentionally, like I did. We used to teach design based on manufacturing channels in an industrial system. So you learned to be an industrial designer because you designed products and you know about manufacturing. You learned to be an architect because you learned about construction. You learned about typography and things like that because you came out of a graphic design program and it’s all about printing.
And once you get rid of all that stuff, you realise that you have to deal with the human on the other side as opposed to dealing with just all the technical stuff on the back end that makes it – and it made sense why you would do that, say, in the 19th century, because it gave you exclusivity. It gave you ownership over that channel. You can’t build anything unless you have an architect. You can’t do product design unless you have an industrial designer or an engineer or whatever. And now I think a lot of that is starting to dissolve. Younger people are expecting that to just go away. And we’ve realised that human experience is more complicated than a 19th century industrial model. So you were talking over a digital connection right now. I’m using 1950s technology on my ears to hear you and I’m sitting in a space that was designed in the 1970s. And those things have to work together in the day to day.
Manisha: Absolutely, and so then when we think about that and we think about – going back to that conversation we had at the beginning around agile processes, agile works really fast. And when we think about where these gaps are particularly in people who have been trained in a very different system, which is quite process-oriented as well, sometimes when we work with diversity and people who don’t necessarily fit into that system, it takes a little bit more time. And in fact, when we think about speed versus time, certainly I’m not advocating for the two year approach. But I’m interested in the one month the bank provided rather than three days to run through a sprint, right. How do you ensure that you are hearing the voices that you might not necessarily otherwise hear who are either customers or potential customers at the right time and at the right place?
Paul: Oh wow. That’s a really, really good question. You can go very deep with this. On one end, there’s every individual is involved, and that’s what we got to actually with the employees at Ponce Bank. I mean, that’s pretty close to what it was. Or the other one is you segment it and you look at what the market actually looks like, look at what the user base looks like, look at particular outliers that might be in the mix, and also look at bumps in the population. For example, Ponce Bank had a lot of people who were elderly and a lot of people’s first language was Spanish. And there’s a whole culture that goes with that.
The other thing that we discovered when we were there, and it didn’t take much to put it together, but our test had to be run bilingually. We didn’t set that up initially. It’s like whoops. So part of it is trying to figure out okay, who are you catering to? Where are the bumps or the top priorities that you need to solve for. And then also having a – the end of it like, “No, there’s going to be lots of people that are involved in this.” I’ll make sure that we get some representation in the process. Don’t leave out culture is another one. That’s a whole end of it.
The industrial designer in me thinks physically first, so I think about ergonomics. So the first thing you want to do is create a product that people can use if they have stiffness in their hands or something. And a lot of it is actually cultural and a lot of it is actually cognitive. And it’s different for every project. You’ve got to think about it as far as the context of who you’re dealing with, where they are, what the business is about, where the best opportunities are to be able to make the most – the biggest change. It’s different every time.
Manisha: But this is really interesting because there is also a similarity here which is think about functional aspects, functional barriers. Think about the design of your process, but also don’t discount culture. And whether we’re talking about – well, whichever marginal group – or marginalised group we’re talking about, there is that cultural piece that you can’t get by testing something yourself, right, that you need to have people from that culture to do. So I think that that’s a really lovely summary of some of the things we need to think about as designers and in design. And following on from that then, where do you see the future? What do you think the next thing is that we need to think about?
Paul: I’m going to split that into two. The first one, where I think the future is going, and I’m very excited about this, is exactly what you alluded to earlier: the new people that are coming into design right now that are coming out of the schools are very different as far as how they approach problem solving than what somebody my age did or even somebody ten years older than them. And the thinking that we’re getting in the younger generations is really inspiring. It’s a different approach. It is more inclusive by all the definitions that we’ve talked about today. And it’s something that embraces I would say a lot of the time, a more optimistic future. I think that the younger people that I know – I’ll give you an example.
There was somebody who used to work for me. We worked together during the pandemic. She hunkered down in her apartment in Brooklyn, ordered food in, basically didn’t go outside. And I was a little worried about her because she wasn’t getting any – that face-to-face social contact and difficult to work over Teams and stuff all the time. Anyway, we wound up on a trip to Europe for a client and when she got there, she had friends everywhere, all over the place. And I don’t think that way. But she just naturally created this network of – she’s an artist and she connected with all these different people in the digital world and the art world and wound up having a place to stay in Berlin and all that. And how these relationships that a lot of people my age wouldn’t necessarily leverage all these digital channels to be able to build. I might do it professionally, but I wouldn’t do it personally.
So that thinking applied to design, that natural, “Let’s get people involved, let’s connect. Let’s not let this whole work from home thing get us down.” All that stuff was just a real – it was an eye opener for me and it’s an example of how different generations approach creativity and relationships. And I think that’s the – it’s bigger than just how we teach design. It’s not just the schools. It’s a cultural shift that’s happened, and it’s happening right now for our younger people that are coming into our field. And I think that’s going to rejuvenate everything. And I’m all for it. It’s about time.
Manisha: Paul, when you think about the ideas in books that you’ve read in the last few years, what’s one that really stands out to you?
Paul: If there’s a book that I’d recommend, it’s called The Effortless Experience. And it is a group of researchers out of Harvard who put together – I don’t think Harvard, it might be Stanford – that put together the idea that you need to stop delighting users. Stop trying to create something when it’s all about surprise and delight and how wonderful it is and all these memorable experiences like it’s a theme park. Figure out how to reduce effort for everybody. Measure that. There’s ways of measuring it. And that will be a much better indicator of long-term loyalty to a brand. It’ll be a much better indicator of whether or not people churn and go to your competition. That’s in a competitive environment. Or it’s also how much people like and dislike the service. It’s really strongly related to that. It’s a great predictor and it’s a really useful tool for anybody that’s in inclusive design and wants to connect it back to business.
Manisha: Absolutely. Final question: and you’ve answered this once, but I’m going to ask it to you again anyway. And it’s that what-if question. So if you could change or redesign one thing to make your world a better place and easier besides shampoo bottles, what would that be?
Paul: I really want to take on healthcare, honestly. It’s different in every country. I’m Canadian and I was used to that version of it and that had its strengths and its weaknesses; had a lot of strengths. The American system costs roughly a fifth of the gross national product. It’s the Number 1 reason people go bankrupt here. It does not provide adequate service for most people and provides no service to a lot of people. It has a lot of the same problems that the socialised systems has and does it at more than double the cost. And the experience of being in that – if we can just unlock that part of it, think of it from the human point of view, I think there’s an enormous amount of opportunity. I know there’s companies out there that want to do it. I know there’s healthcare providers that want to do it.
I know there’s a lot of doctors that want to do it. And I’m not necessarily saying that its got to flip to a social system to be able to make it work. It could be something that’s done – what would Amazon do with healthcare? That would be a really interesting question and – or Nordstrum or somebody like that. It would be fantastic to be able to tackle that problem and I think I work at a company that could do it, honestly. The reach that we have now that we’ve merged with – we’ve merged with another company in Canada and another one in Ireland, and then all of us have rebranded to be part of a much larger firm called Arcadis which is consulting and management and sustainability and lots of different great services. If you mix all together – sorry, I didn’t mean this for it to be a pitch, I’m sorry. But I actually think that we could pull that off. We’ve got the reach. We’ve got the people. We could actually do something like that.
Manisha: Look, I really look forward to seeing that and seeing how that unfolds. Inclusion is a journey, as you mentioned before. And so in the next few years, let’s see what we can do for healthcare as well. So thank you so much, Paul. It’s been wonderful having you here, and thank you of your time in sharing your story as well.
Paul: And thank you very much. It’s been great to be here. Thank you for having me.
Manisha: And thank you everyone for listening to this episode of With, Not For. I hope you’ve enjoyed it as much as I have. If you’d like to learn more about how you can make your world more inclusive, contact us on www.cfid.org.au or see the show notes where we’ll also include links to Arcadis’s website as well as some of the books and resources that Paul mentioned. So until next time, this is Manisha Amin for the Centre for Inclusive Design.