Welcome to The Chemical Show, the podcast where Chemical means business.
I'm your host, Victoria Meyer, bringing you stories and insights
from leaders driving innovation and growth across the chemical industry.
Each week we explore key trends, real world challenges, and the
strategies that make an impact.
Let's get started.
Victoria: welcome back to The Chemical Show Where Leaders Talk Business.
Today I am speaking with Milan Taylor, who is a partner at Mercer, one of the
premier consulting firms focused on people and talent, and that's a bit of
what we're gonna be talking about today.
Milan is also one of our key speakers at the Chemical Summit this year,
which is on September 30th and October 1st in Houston, Texas.
Visit the chemical summit.com
to learn more and to register because you do not wanna miss the opportunity
to attend the Chemical Summit.
Meet Milan and other great speakers and guests of the Chemical show and
just change your view in terms of how you're growing, leading, and
thriving inside the chemical industry.
So Milan, thanks for joining me today.
Milan: Oh, thanks for inviting me.
Uh, looking forward to the conversation and looking forward to the, uh,
the conference in September.
Victoria: Absolutely.
So what's your origin story?
I always love to ask people, how did you get where you are and
how did you get interested in this space of people and talent?
Milan: Uh, I think like so many other people, you, you fall into it.
I don't think you, you, you, you six years old say, I wanna be in people in talent.
So, uh, I was, running a division for a large, multinational organization.
And, uh, I saw it firsthand just how effective having strong people strategies
led to better business results.
And so that's the, my introduction into, to people and talent
and, uh, very effective.
So aligning business strategies with people strategies can drive significantly
better outcomes for organizations.
Victoria: Love it.
Love it, love it.
And tell us a little bit about Mercer, because people may not
be fully familiar with Mercer.
Milan: Yeah, Mercer is, uh, part of Marsh McLennan, uh, New York stock,
exchange listed organization, and at an enterprise level, marsh McLennan.
Manages, some of the most compelling risks.
So we have four organizations within in the family, marsh, uh, which is,
in essence looking after asset risk.
Mercer, which is the organization that I work for, looks after people risk,
Oliver Wyman, look after business and strategy risk, as a management
consultancy group, and then Guy Carpenter look after reinsurance risks.
So together it's about how do organizations manage.
In a holistic manner, their risk profiles.
Victoria: So I would not necessarily have thought of Mercer as helping
to manage risk, but of course people are a big, a company's biggest
assets, opportunities, and exposure.
Milan: Absolutely.
It's, it is so critical to organizations success.
And it's, uh, often under, under underlooked or undervalued.
Victoria: Yeah, so obviously you're talking to companies across the industry.
What are companies and leaders talking about and asking Mercer about today?
Where's the focus?
Milan: Yeah.
And, and this is with a, a lens on the chemical, uh, industry as well.
I, I do a lot of work in that, uh, in that sector.
Look, there's a, a consistent theme.
It's, it's cost, cost, cost.
Growth.
And then simplify, simplify, simplifies.
So I guess enterprise wide across the chemical industry.
From a challenge point of view, it's all about optimization.
And I think given that we weren't surprised to see that from Mercer's Global
Talent Trends 2025 chemical industry cut.
The number one HR priority was getting line managers to drive performance.
Set up their people manage this to deliver.
And so you can start to see that how do we drive costs?
How do we drive growth, and how do we ensure that we get the productivity gain?
So, uh, across all industries, bar one that we, researched, getting people,
managers to do what they need to do around driving towards, went to number one.
So it's kind of tied in with the current economic, uh, geopolitical
volatility that we're seeing.
Victoria: Is that an implication, that there's a view that managers
haven't been managing effectively?
Or is this a function of where we are in the 2020s with work from home and not work
from home and the whole workplace dynamic?
What?
What's driving that?
I.
Milan: I look, I think it's being driven by the need for organizations
in in, in tough times or, or.
The industry having a lot of headwinds, really needing to drive
with a laser-like focus performance.
And, and you can only deliver that business performance if
you've got strong alignment all the way down to the organization.
So we've been doing a lot of work with firms in the industry, ensuring
that the KPIs are actually meaningful, measurable, and deliverable and
strongly aligned to the organization's.
Business plan strategy and, and in essence, what they're saying to the
market of their stock exchange listed.
So if you don't have that alignment, it can have some pretty, you
know, challenging consequences.
Victoria: That's really interesting.
And so I guess this ties into this whole theme of how work gets done.
And I know one of the things I, as I was doing some research before our call,
that Mercer has been talking about and working on is work redesign, right?
And work, I guess workforce redesign.
So how does that play into this?
Milan: So I think if we, if we pivot and talk about agility for a moment.
So, so everybody wants, I shouldn't say everybody, business leaders want
their organizations to be far more agile so they can pivot, far more quickly,
uh, to external challenges, that the industry or, or the economy faces.
So, agility.
Productivity and efficiency are really key, focus areas for, for C-Suite.
And, and I think the thing about agility through, um, through the lens
of people is it's not just about speed.
We'd like people to think about agility being about speed and precision.
So, skills gives you that map of where your capability is so you
can redeploy your talent quickly.
Think of it a little bit like a Formula One team doing a pit stop time change.
You need to do it with precision, with speed and with intent.
And so work we design from, from our perspective in the work we do
with clients in the industry is about improving workforce agility.
And that's really key at the moment.
So it's the continuation of the optimization story.
and there are quite a lot of sort of areas to reflect on when
you think about work redesign.
And probably, the first one is where, where does work actually get done?
Right?
And, and so we are seeing a trend in, in more organizations offshoring.
To Global Capability Centers.
Some have done it for many years, some have been piloting and are scaling.
Some are new into that.
And that's both for enabling roles, you know, finance, hr, but also for
technical roles and engineering roles.
So more up the value chain, and that that meets the cost, cost, cost mandate.
but in terms of, what work will be done in that work redesign,
the di direction of travel is, is broadly moving away from jobs.
To skills and, and skills we like to think of as that, as the currency of agility.
And this sets up firms to drive far more quickly that efficiency they want,
uh, from their workforce, and they can staff up new projects far more quickly.
They can respond to external market factors more quickly.
And also I think enables intentional cross-functional mobility so uh,
employees can get different experiences.
As well, so what's in it for them is important.
Victoria: So interest.
So two things on this.
Number one, I, I love this idea of skills because as a Gen X kid, no longer a kid,
alas, but I mean, I always viewed my career as transferable skills, right?
Like what is my next role?
I don't know, but I have skills that are gonna take me to the next place.
Um, and certainly when I was incorporated it was like,
when say what job do you want?
Well, I can't tell you the title, but I can tell you what it should compose of.
So that's, that's one piece of it.
The second piece on this, this is my cynics hat, comes
onto this workforce redesign.
'cause I spent a big part of my career at Shell, and.
It was like every 18 months we reshuffled the deck chairs, threw them up in the air
and said, Hey, go post for your job again.
And that doesn't feel very agile, or encouraging for the employee.
I'm, I assume the company got out of it what they wanted to get out of it.
But I guess maybe the question then is, and, and I don't wanna, you
know, I can point fingers at them.
I'm not asking you to point fingers at anybody else, but.
What's the characteristics of a good workforce redesign and how
should it feel to the organization and to the people involved?
Milan: So there's, there's two things here, Victoria.
One is, how does work get designed and what is the composition
of your workforce, right?
So organizational, restructures and corporate life.
I'm sure many of the listeners or views will be familiar with the,
the cadence of how that flows.
I'm gonna pivot a little bit to how do organizations change the way that work
gets done to drive better outcomes?
I'm gonna give you an example, 'cause I think this will clarify this.
So it is some work, uh, that we did for an oil, gas, organizations.
So, um, uh, an aligned industry.
To, to chemicals that petrochemical end.
And so we went in and then we, we deconstructed jobs
to their core tasks, right?
So we said, this is the job, but here are the tasks and here are the skills.
And then we worked through what the impact of centralization of
technology meant to those tasks.
So think, increased use of sensors and remote monitoring.
And then we said, right, where could those tasks be done?
So in this organization, maintenance moved from, um, permanent on staff, on staff
site to a shared services team that drove flexibility and efficiency tasks that were
repetitive or transferred to automation or, or robotics that got the work done.
Then we then reconstructed those jobs, through the lens of, of tasks and skills.
Uh, and in this example of how you, you redesign No, no roles were eliminated.
But instead the workforce was upskilled.
and for me it was in the results, right?
So it, it, it's, it sounds like great HR consulting, right?
But what's the business benefit?
And in this instance, that firm saw a 45% improvement on profitability
driven by reconstructing their jobs and thinking about how things
could get done in a different way.
So instead of just looking at your organization and the, well, we've been
doing this for five, 10 years, it's.
Take it down to the granular, understand what is repetitive, understand what
adds value, and then reconstruct that and create the organization to
drive that, and that that will drive flexibility and efficiency as well.
Victoria: Yeah, I could totally see that.
In fact, you know, within my own small business, I've been doing
this recently because I think this aspect of as a business grows and
evolves, you just add stuff on.
Like, oh, I can do that.
I, and the right person may not be doing the right thing.
Maybe it could be outsourced, maybe it could be shaped differently.
Even to the extent that it's like.
The business processes we were following four years ago may not make sense today.
Or the tool that we're using has evolved.
Have we evolved in terms of how we're using that tool, uh, and that technology.
Milan: and and that's upskilling and reskilling.
Right?
And can you think, you know, just think about doing that on an enterprise
wide level with 25, 30,000 employees.
And then think about the advances in AI and all the technology
that's being invested, right?
And that you have to keep up to date.
It's a significant investment.
That organizations are making and that upskilling and reskilling just,
it's not a one-off event, right?
You have to keep up with software, uh, releases and understand how
this all works together within your, your technology stack.
Victoria: One of the other pieces of challenge I see, especially when we
talk about a big organization, whether it's a thousand people or 20,000
people, is the work doesn't stop, right?
So.
Regardless of what I'm doing today, it needs to continue to be done.
Um, and I can't pause and say, okay, we're gonna take a day and we're all gonna swap
stuff around before we get going again because your plans will shut down, your
customers will be unhappy, et cetera.
How do you navigate that aspect of evolution?
Milan: Yeah.
So look, I think, I think it's about strong project management and also a,
a, a strong dose of realism, right?
There are, probably certain times in the year where you wouldn't start
doing these types of transformation programs, and there are probably
certain environments where you wouldn't.
I'm a big fan of piloting, uh, and, and taking, discreet areas of the
business, and, and driving through.
To see, you know, how easy or or otherwise, uh, a transformation of
of, of something like work design.
I think what's what's different though, in what, you know, could be perceived
as a a, you know, a challenging business transformation is, um, you've got,
you've got technology, which, you know, platforms that will do pretty quick
assessments of, of tasks, giving you a view of, of how easily they can be
automated, how much time is saved, what is the productivity improvement.
And a lot of data.
So for example, Mercer, my organization has a deep, rich skills library, that
has, skills and competencies, uh, and what qualifications are required.
That just allows organizations and our, our own consultants to really
navigate very, very quickly, what makes sense and what doesn't is you're
looking at this type of work redesign.
Victoria: Yeah.
What's the role of technology in all this?
So you started referencing it and I think about, the workforce of the future is
certainly different than the workforce of the past and the way we do it.
Um.
And, and when I talk to companies, they're struggling a bit with
how and where to adopt technology appropriately, particularly ai, right?
So, I mean, I think AI is scaling quickly.
Nobody even knew how to spell it two years ago, and now we're
worried about it replacing our jobs.
I don't think they're ever, it's ever gonna actually replace jobs
because people still need people to think, create, et cetera.
But how does that participate in this and what are you seeing and hearing
from companies and clients and leaders?
Milan: Yeah, it is still an emerging.
It's still an emerging technology.
Organizations are still working through how best that they can
drive that technology into their workflows and their processes.
But I'm, I'm not sure that you can just throw AI at a team
and go figure it out yourself.
Right.
I think, I think there needs to be about a bit of discipline there that goes
well, if we look at our workflows, uh, and the way that this team delivers.
Where does it make sense to insert AI as part of that workflow?
A and what sort of due diligence or peer reviewed do you need to do
to ensure that, that the AI is, is giving you that right data as well?
So I think it, it, you, you, if you want to really drive those,
those levels of productivity and efficiency, you've got to really
again, embed it in a pretty granular.
Way.
And, and you know, I still think, you know, I speak to a lot of organizations
and they say, yeah, we are using ai.
We, we've got copilot.
And, and that is a true statement, but I think the evolution of AI will,
will, will lead that statement, you know, to dust in the next, you know,
x number of months as organizations start to figure out how they can really
drive the power of this technology for their commercial benefit gain.
Victoria: Yeah.
Well, and in fact, I, I spoke with or had a, member of Marsh.
So one of your sister companies, I guess, um, talking about AI and uh, and the risk
of it, and so it was around this aspect of, um, companies need clear policies
actually in terms of how to utilize that.
Where do you see this fitting?
Where do you see kind of the decision on how to use I ai, how to, organize
those policies fitting and aligning?
When I think about hr, is it in.
It.
Is it someplace else in the business?
Is it a combination thereof?
I mean, when you know what's the best practice here?
Milan: yeah.
I mean, again, it is still emerging.
Um, my, my view would be that it's, it is probably owned by some senior.
Stakeholders on, on executive committees.
I think, uh, HR teams hold an inordinate amount of sensitive personal data of
their employees, uh, and you would want to ensure that that is kept, safe as well.
So, I think a lot of organizations, that I work with, consult with, uh, have got
their own proprietary, uh, platforms.
That creates that level of security.
But we have data also that suggests that, you know, HR leaders still see
the use of AI as, as increasing the risk in their organization and, the
industries, chemical oil and gas, traditionally, you know, quite cautious
industries for very good reasons.
And so I think they're probably adopting a, you know.
A thoughtful introduction of the technology.
So more on that.
I mean, we, we, as part of the research that we've currently engaging
in the market for energy and, and chemical HR leaders, we, we are
asking the question of, of their personal usage of ai and then also,
where their HR teams are in terms of.
Proficiency of using, AI and, and what they think that looks like, and also
their confidence in the responses they're getting back from external platforms.
So I, I can share that with you in, in Houston and September
at the conference as well.
It should be interesting to see
where
that, uh, where that lands.
Victoria: Yeah, that'll be great.
'cause I do think, uh, you know, I'm not sure anybody claims to be fully
proficient, but maybe somebody does.
Um, and, and what's even interesting, I've spoken with, leaders at some of
the biggest chemical companies and energy companies and, and had this
conversation probably about a year ago.
In fact, the one that I'm specifically thinking about, about the use of,
for instance, chat GPT, right?
That's our our thing.
In fact, I've talked to a number of leaders who say, well, I can't use
it on my corporate computer, but I'll pull it up on my personal iPad to do.
Research on a company or do whatever, whatever tactic it is.
And so I think it's an interesting, um, it's fast moving, but
companies need to figure this out.
In terms of, you know, there's this whole control aspect.
You certainly, hopefully people know not to put corporate data in a public system.
But again, not everybody knows and recognizes that.
But this whole alignment of, okay, we, you know, get with the
program or you're gonna miss out.
Um, and, and that's a little bit of where it feels like from an AI perspective.
Yeah, so, so you're doing, you've talked about doing this survey with,
um, of HR priorities for energy and chemical leaders, and I'm super excited
to hear more about that at the summit.
What about employees?
What are employees asking for these days and what's, because I feel like there's a
little bit of misalignment at the moment, but I don't know what you're seeing.
Milan: Yeah.
So, Mercer conducted, a US survey called Inside Employees Mines.
And we cut the data by roll holders across all industries in the us but those
that were involved in manufacturing, construction, skills trade, and the
top factors, that attracted them to their current employer, right?
So this is about how I get that talent through the door was pay
Victoria: Hmm.
Milan: probably no surprise.
And then.
Victoria: pay me.
Milan: Then, then healthcare benefits in US perspective, no surprise.
But there was quite a significant delta between those two.
So pay was strongly number one.
So it's, it's all about, the, the salary, the remuneration.
And I think that still holds true, but when we asked that the same
group, uh, what aspects of the work package they found attractive,
so I guess that's as they were.
In the organization rather than joining the organization.
The top three by rank were pay and number one, healthcare benefits, number
two, and retirement number three.
But what we did notice is that huge, significant lead that pay had as they
were coming into the organization dropped quite significantly.
So I think there's probably something there about organizations where
they're attracting talent emphasizing.
What the value is of their healthcare benefits and their retirement
programs as well as the base salary.
And then just to finish this one off, we then ask that group what would cause
them to leave their current employer.
And no surprise, number one, pay number two benefits.
But number three, and I think this is really important, it speaks to what
it is that that employees across.
Industries are thinking about was being burnt out because of demanding workload.
And so there's something here.
So remember we went right back at the beginning.
We talked about the importance of line managers driving performance,
performance management being key.
Simplify, simplify, simplify, grow, grow, grow, cost, cost, cost costs.
I think what you're starting to see in that is, is you know, that constant
transformation, that constant pressure, that constant change in organizations
as they navigate these economic times, is starting to be seen through that,
that sense of, um, workload, um, employee wellbeing, um, potentially
some mental health challenges there.
I thought, well, maybe there's something some other data.
So I, I, I looked into our data sets and there was a North
American healthcare, survey.
Mercer did.
And I looked at the North American Chemical data cut for that.
And, we asked the jobs, were these employees, uh, actively
looking for a new job, right?
That also speaks to how happy they are, what, what, what they value.
And only 30% of chemical employees reported that they were not
actively looking for a new job.
So, um, I think there's that
Victoria: So you're saying 70% are actively looking.
Milan: so yeah, 53, uh, were actively looking at and 17%
sat on the fence, right?
Victoria: That's a big
Milan: that, that is a big number.
Right.
And so, they, they join you for pay.
That's what they say.
They stay with you for pay and benefits and
retirement
Victoria: benefits, right?
The
Milan: There Retirement benefits.
Victoria: you there.
Yeah.
Mm-hmm.
Milan: they, they, they see in themselves, , that the, the, the
levels of pressure and overwork.
Could lead to burnout.
We, we see this in other studies that we do at Mercer as well.
And then you see this propensity, potentially to leave organizations.
Right?
We also asked that, that group from the Mercer, healthcare and Demand, uh,
so again, chemical Institute, we, we ask them, whether they felt stressed
most days at work, because that kind of gets to how big or not an issue
this is, and 53 agreed, or strongly agreed that they were.
And um, so again, over 50% were saying they were stressed at work.
So, The industry.
Has always been so conscious about safety, um, health and safety,
ingrained in the DNA and, and, but, but I, I do look at these numbers
around employee self-reporting.
The, uh, the likelihood.
They're not saying they're going to be, but the likelihood of being,
uh, burnt out or, or levels of stress on a daily basis, and all
the other things that are going on.
Plus, you know, the business as usual.
And I just wonder if organizations are doing enough to manage that
wellbeing and that health aspect,
Victoria: You know, there's, there's so much that we can unpack here and we
don't have time to unpack all of it.
But the couple of things that strikes me and, and I've heard the stories
recently, so first of all, I'm a believer that people leave people.
So you get attracted in, to the company for a variety of reasons.
It's the external lens that brings people into a company and it's pay, and it's
what that company looks like and what you think the value proposition is, et cetera.
And then you get inside and you're living it.
And pay may not be enough, especially if you can leave and get the pay.
So, you know, let's just assume those basic needs are met.
And then it is the people and the people are driving the
workload and the expectations.
, And I think this is so true across all industries, chemicals
and others, um, I was, uh.
Spent some time last week with a couple of my sisters and one of whom
was stressed out on work even though she was on vacation because her top
employee left because there's a sales role and the targets kept getting
so high and he was already the top performer and as the top performer.
What happens when you're a good performer?
They just set the targets even higher and higher and higher, and
it became untenable and he went to a company that wasn't gonna hold him
accountable to those same kind of.
Untenable targets, and was able to get his bonus without egregious sales goals.
And so I think that's an example.
And she's like, and I'm telling my organization this is what's going on.
They're like, that's okay.
Here's your new goals.
Go meet them.
She's like, you're not hearing me.
You're
Milan: so so work, work life balance is important, right?
And And that's a great example that you just gave, but also it goes
down to KPI setting rights and.
Victoria: Yeah.
Milan: That's something that we've been working with organizations
on, what are the right KPIs to drive the right performance?
What's the right KPIs that drive that bonus outcome, but also allow the
organization to meet its its goals for its stakeholders and shareholders.
So you've gotta get those things right.
Right.
It you just, it's not as, you just can't keep loading and loading you.
You have to think about how you calibrate this and how you.
You balance it and, and, and you know, again, it, you organizations
have a responsibility for the health and wellbeing of their
employees, um, in a holistic sense.
And look, I think the industry does a, a, a relatively good job of that,
but, um, I think it needs to keep on top of it, on a regular basis.
Victoria: Yeah.
So one of the questions I had for you, Milan, is around this whole talent
aspect talk about, the workforce redesign and driving people towards
skills and realignment, the, this whole aspect of agility and performance.
And then from a people perspective, one, I do believe people wanna continue to, most
people wanna continue to grow, develop, improve their skills, achieve the next
level, whatever that looks like for them.
sometimes it also feels like the opportunities, the o the development
opportunities, the ability to go from, to develop these skills or to get promoted
or to get cross-functionally trained, et cetera, really favor the big companies.
And yet we know the vast majority of companies across the chemical
industry are small to midsize.
So.
Milan: Yeah.
Victoria: However you wanna categorize that, but you know, there they're
less than a thousand employees or less than 2000 employees.
Milan: Yeah.
Victoria: How do companies who have a smaller number of employees, a
smaller platform, a smaller scope, really get the same results for
themselves and for their employees?
Milan: Yeah, I mean, it is a challenge, right?
But I think, if organizations, with a smaller number of employees,
I think they have to be far more intentional in this space.
They just cannot leave it to chance, right?
So I think they should, emphasize, uh, skills growth, thinking about
judiciously, adding on additional responsibilities to the role.
Look for ways to allow for cross team collaboration, um,
short term rotations, right?
So somebody in finance might be interested in health and safety.
Is there a role there?
Can they move in one day a week for a couple of months, help on a project, get a
flavor of, of what that, , can look like?
. And that also can allow for some agility.
You've gotta get that balance right, but you can team up for
short term projects, that way.
I think being purposeful around mentoring and also reverse mentoring.
So, just because I guess my, my point of view is just because organizations
are small, doesn't excuse 'em from developing and nurturing their staff.
Right?
So, I, I think it's about intentionality.
You may not have these big.
Full scale programs of an organization that has 50,000, but that doesn't stop
you from creating something that's quite unique for your organization.
So I guess, look, small companies, they, they can't, by their very nature promise
the next, uh, rung up the ladder, right?
But what's the next best thing they can probably do?
I think they can help, uh, their employees by offering them the, the
hammer, the nails, and the freedom to build the next rung themselves, right?
So it is about that collaboration between employer and employee
and, and, and making it.
Very granular and very real in a small organization.
I'm, look, I'm not saying it's easy, but I think with that purpose and
that intent, you can drive some, some good outcomes for employees.
Victoria: Yeah, makes sense.
I, and I agree a lot with that.
I think this whole, I like your idea of even just one day a week,
working in a different space.
Because frankly, um, you know, you can give up that person, the
other group can use the support.
Um, it's a manageable construct.
Milan: Yeah.
It, it, it, yeah.
It, it, it, it is pragmatic,
Victoria: yeah.
Milan: is always important.
Victoria: Absolutely.
So, okay, I've got two final questions for you, Milan.
So, number one is, you know, if, if.
Somebody's listening to this.
If you're a leader leading people, hopefully all people are leading people
in one way, shape, or form, right?
Whether it's a formal or informal.
What's one thing that leaders can be doing today, to improve
agility, workforce, et cetera?
Milan: I would suggest two things.
One is if you are not doing, uh, employee engagement surveys, if
you're not getting that real and raw feedback from your employees, get onto
that, uh, and get onto that quickly.
Because I think organizations that create, programs based on what they think,
, rather than what the data shows them.
Could be misguided in, in, in, in how they spend their money
on developing their people.
So I think that's number one.
And two, if they're seeking that agility, think about, piloting, uh, some of
those, jobs to skills that I referenced and unsurprisingly, Mercer is, is
big in both those employee engagement spaces and, and through the work of
our transformation teams, uh, helping organizations move from jobs to skills.
Victoria: Good.
Alright.
And then my question number two is, um, I love to ask people, you
know, the leadership question, which is a little bit more about you.
So Milan, if, um, you were advising a young Milan Taylor
just early in his career about.
Some keys to success to help you get from where you were to where you are today.
What's your advice?
, Milan: Authenticity.
Number one, always be true to yourself.
People will see through you if you're not.
Two, always be honest because people will not forgive you if they find that
you've been, uh, anything but that.
Uh, and third, take the time to understand the people that you work
with and the people that you work for.
It'll pay you back in dividends throughout your career.
Victoria: Love it.
Perfect.
Milan, thank you so much for this.
I appreciate your time today and I'm really looking forward
to seeing you at the Chemical Summit at the end of September.
Milan: Me too.
Thank you so much.
Victoria: Thank you, and thank you everyone for joining us today.
Keep listening, keep following, keep sharing, and we will
talk with you again soon.
I.