 Thank you, thank you very much and thank you for having me. I think this has been a topic that ever since I started my work career, and actually even before I'm an engineer background has been a topic fairly close to mind. So, coming from the private sector because I think that's probably slightly different reflections then then then some of you have even though both from what you've on and Jeremy said I can see a lot of the same topics are aligned between both public and private sector. But in the private sector we always start with some background around and just need to make sure that yeah, that why are we doing this. And I think multiple studies have shown that we just start with the first one that what we get from a diverse background is better results. You can always argue what are the, what are the reasons behind it. My personal view is that if you get a more broader range of perspectives on a thing. You can take slightly longer to make a decision or come to an agreement, because you do actually come from different perspectives, but you actually end up with better decisions. It's more robust, and I think particularly in fast pace changing environment, having a robust 360 degree view rather than 180 degree view is extremely important. Also, I think it's been pointed to that diverse teams actually produce more innovative results. And then finally I think it was a point that both Jeremy and even pointed to is that when you fix a gender diversity or when you start working on a more inclusive working environment. It actually becomes better for everyone, not only for the gender balance but also for the other diversity challenges that we might see around skin color around sexual orientation, simply around nationality and background. So actually starting to address the gender diversity issues will also just create a more inclusive working environment where a lot of other people also will feel included. Where do we start and how does recruitment play into this process. Just make sure that we actually change and what are some of the barriers that we see for it. I think the first perspective is just make sure we're on the same page here. The difficulties come from several things. And I think clearly, and that's been pointed to also in Yvonne's presentation. The talent pipeline is an issue and I think you need to start working on the talent pipeline across from actually all the way from university choice of university and maybe even before already in high school and I think especially coming from a stem company. It's important also to address that women are actually very qualified and quite necessary in order to do good it. And I think that's something that's now slowly starting to change also in the universities we start seeing both at the technical university and the IT universities, that women represent 30 plus percent, not quite there sometimes 27 but sometimes up to 40% depending on the specialization of the university so work on the pipeline I think is an extremely important one. And as Jeremy was pointing to the work life balance and the prioritization. And I think that's another key one to work on. And then finally, as Yvonne was also a lot pointing to was the hidden biases. There are biases we all have biases to some extent, and you need to start addressing them also in recruitment. So being extremely practical and I think that's what noon and I talked about was, what are we doing for this. And I think sometimes it's something where you will meet resistance as Jeremy was also pointing to you will meet resistance and why we're trying to do this. And especially a lot of the people already in the company will start saying oh we want to just recruit for quality. So what is to do is always insist on diversity in recruitment. So if I see a short list of maybe eight to 10. Essentially, a Danish speaking white males. I'll push it back and say guys, that might be the most qualified you found but you've only been fishing in part of the lake. So go back and, and, and, at least in the first list here represents a list that start more largely around the job and the requirements for the jobs and get diversity into it. And it's not for not thinking about it but when you're a leader that needs to recruit somebody where a, let's say 45 a year white male just walked out the door, and you want somebody who can fast fill that spot. It's fairly natural that you'll think about somebody who is a clone of whoever just walked out the door. So I think it's, it's not by any kind of a by any kind of disrepresentation. A lot of times, especially in the IT world a lot of this recruitment happens by network, and our network also seemed to be biased a little bit against people who look like us. So I think from a recruitment perspective you need to insist on seeing diversity into the both first shortlist and second shortlist. The second thing we've been doing quite systematically is getting several set of eyes, both on the advertisement. So that's kind of how does it read for somebody from the outside, but also in the interviews. And again, that's something where we often get a lot of pushback because it takes time. It takes time when you insist on somebody either from a different part of the organization, or from a different gender needs to see that person and actually have really input. And oftentimes, again, like when you take decisions early on, getting several different set of eyes on it sometimes make the process longer because you discuss more. So that's part of the issue, but if you're a leader who needs to fill a vacant spot that can be rather annoying or seen like a waste of time. And in the job interviews we actually insist on trying to see at least one day diverse profile that doesn't mean we necessarily give the job to the most diverse candidate, but we actually also leverages to push our thinking a little bit. Because the next time you might be looking for somebody like that. The next time you have to write a job interview, you might think back about saying to learn something from that interview seeing somebody who was just slightly different from what I was looking at. Maybe I'll try to include that in my next interview. And then tracking tracking tracking what you measure is what you get. So we try to track it, we try to compare internally who are good at getting both diverse candidates into the recruitment pipeline, but also getting the through the recruitment funnel. And that in itself is actually a great lever just start tracking and say who can actually do that, because once people start saying, Oh, this is actually something that the senior leadership is looking at, they actually start also doing something about it. Now, when you look at the flip side, recruitment cannot stand alone. And I think that's extremely important diversity is not a topic you can recruit your way out of. And I think you need to start working also on some more general perspectives about managing your career and taking responsibility for that career, both in the company so mentoring, helping women think through how their career should develop. How can the company support and I think Jeremy you had some great examples from what Cambridge is proposing and supporting that. And then finally, this is something you need to talk about at home and also that your career is part of the equation and needs to go up so sharing at home of the additional workload that is part of having a family and having a home career, which is both about parental leave at childbirth, but also during the child's sick days, all through life. So I think this is something where you need to do quite a lot of things. And my perspective is always that this needs something that happened from everywhere. I think there's a legislation part of this about what government can do. And certainly in Denmark, we have been probably not as fast forward as our Nordic colleagues in terms of legislation that actually supports gender equality. So it's a little bit up to a lot of the workplace also to make sure that this work, you need to build up the pipeline, you need to have role models need to put measures on it in terms of what you're looking at in terms of diversity and equal rights. And that can be about anything from sick days to parental leave to how you look at accomplishments. And then finally also, there is a big role for the women to do, because the talk at home, you need to take that, you need to take that throughout your career, and actually want to choose this. And then I'm trying to not make time enough for questions also from the audience. So, I think that was my key point, recruitment is a core vehicle. It's important because you can measure it, but it cannot stand alone. This is something where you need to look holistically at the career from a company perspective, and also work on retention. Also work on your biases also work on your policies. And now throw it up for questions. Thank you very much, Eva. I appreciate it. So Eva Banneker when you're so consultants get back to you with, you know, eight or 10 wide Danish speaking males and I guess it's not their criteria that are wrong but maybe the criteria as you gave them. And as you say there are hidden biases in the leadership and that goes for you as well you've told me you tend to prefer McKinsey consultants and why is that that is because you are a McKinsey consultant yourself. So how do you sort of challenge your own bias. It's clear that we all have biases. And yes, I have biases, which actually might make it easier for me to make sure that we have women included because I'm a woman myself, but I also have other biases. So what I do is that I then turn around and say, then help me address my biases. Okay, so I tell the search consultants. That's fine but then get me to candidates who might not match all my criteria is, but which of the criteria is that I put forward here are the ones that block you from getting me a very diverse pipeline. And maybe those are two criteria that are not that important for me, we all tend to want to have the perfect candidate. And then if we turn it around and say, which of the criteria is we need to ease up on, just as the sample before from Jerry's music saying, maybe we shouldn't expect quite the same quantity in terms of publishing. Is that the criteria you put up as a firm criteria, then maybe remove it and see what you get. Interesting. So there's a question in the chat for you. What metrics are you using. I think it's an interesting one. One of the things is that we are measuring on recruitment specifically is actually saying which of, of course we measure our intake in terms of what's the mix in terms of gender. We actually also measured on nationality, because we are heavily Nordic company, and we actually want to broaden our intake also to take non Nordic nationalities so it's not only on gender but it's also on nationality. Because we have a tendency to again recruit people who look like us. And so those are two of the metrics we measure, we measure it also on age group. We also look at, do we diverse, do we recruit a diverse age group or do we also tend to recruit the ones that are similar to ourselves. So those are the things we measure. And then we actually also measure both retention and also satisfaction on both gender and nationality. So do we see differences also in terms of what are my opportunities within the companies, what's the opportunity for internal recruitment. Okay, if I'd like to talk to you about job postings because as, as, as was mentioned in the beginning also university has amongst other things worked with with the job posting. And it was mentioned that you know words like analytical ambitious successful competence state of the end, a state of the art, etc. And I think it really appealed more to men than to, to women and I remember when it was launched it cost heated debate because a lot of women also said well you know, I'm also analytical and ambitious and so and so on and and these words appeal to me too. So that was, was being replaced with new or innovative or current to be appealing to, to women but what do you think about the words and job postings do they matter. I think it's now more or less general knowledge that there are also gender biases in how you work your job, your job postings. And several softwares that actually allow you to work through to put in your posting and say, What are some of the suggestions if I want to make this more gender neutral. It's not a hard thing to do it's actually fairly standard now that you can do this, then whether you want to do it or not is more question of willingness from that time. And it's clear that that both within men and women, there'll be differences, and I'm very happy that there are, but in general you just see that less women will apply for a job which has this very hard driven performance oriented. There's also quite a lot of hard criterias. I think it's also something you've seen quite a lot that if you list 10 criterias you'll as these are the things you need to do which is typically for job post posting, you'll see more male who match maybe five six or eight, and you'll see fewer men who actually, if they only match five or six or eight will actually apply for that interview tend to be a little bit more, but I can't do all of this. So I won't even apply for it. So I think those are some of the, and you will find some will. But again, it's a gender bias that that seems to eliminate a lot of the intake at the early stage of the pipeline. I mentioned earlier, I made interviews with with the four professors and one associate professor year ago and and they mentioned, you know, they really had to do to convince themselves to do the sales work when they applied for grants and so on. And it was a challenge to them because because they they weren't sort of, they just didn't like the process of selling themselves and I and I guess that's, you know, that's relevant to what you what you say so but but you know they got there and they and they it was a muscle that they could train. So I think that's something women will have to work on themselves as well. Okay, so that's a final question for you, even in the chat. What questions do a focus on diversity within recruitment race for leaders, several, and I think it's something that for leaders, I think it raises a real question of also how do I want to evolve my team. It's different if you already have a very diverse team, because then I think it's a, it's actually probably not even a non issue. If you have a team that always is very diverse from a gender nationality background thing, you tend to be quite open on that quite a lot when profiles can fit in. I think it's harder when you feel that you have a team with very specific and very narrow competences so let me say somebody who can program mainframe computers, you kind of narrow it into to a certain where it becomes more difficult, where I let it get a lot of questions on these quite narrow competences team to say, but there are no women's, there are no women in in in mainframe because it's all technology it's not sexy and it's it's like, well, go and find the one to get closest to it and see maybe if that will bring something else to the team. And I'm not necessarily insisting on that it then becomes the diverse candidate, but I think it actually moves a little bit the bearer you have in your own head around who can actually do this job, and what does it take. And sometimes we ask ourselves and that's something we do also in our graduate programs it's kind of, can we then train somebody into this role if we don't find that we need to take on a responsibility for actually training somebody into these kind of roles. So what can we do and train SAP consultants a good project program leads that come from a diverse background.