Clover ERA

Chief Engagement Officer (CEO) | Driving Neuroscience-Backed Employee Engagement | CLOVER ERA
Championing the Future of Work Through Science & Strategy
As the Chief Engagement Officer (CEO) of Clover ERA, I’m on a mission to revolutionize workplace engagement—one brain at a time. Grounded in neuroscience and behavioral science, CLOVER ERA provides organizations with the tools to optimize performance, enhance connection, and create workplaces where people don’t just work—they thrive.

With a deep understanding of how brain chemistry drives motivation, resilience, and collaboration, I help leaders shift from guesswork to science-backed strategies. Engagement isn’t just an HR metric—it’s a trillion-dollar opportunity for businesses to unlock untapped potential.

Chief Engagement Officer

Front Porch Agility

Enterprise Lean-Agile Tranformation Consultant & Product Coach - Front Porch Agility

ICON Agility Services

Agile Transformation Consultant and Trainer

Enterprise Agile Transformation Consultant

Nymble Consulting

Senior Transformation Consultant

Publicis Sapient

As a Scaled Agile Program Consultant (SPC 5.0) Clive provides consulting, coaching and training in the ways of Lean Agile to clients in retail, energy, tourism & hospitality, agriculture.
Clive is an experienced Scaled Agile Trainer, both in the classroom and online environments - comfortable running courses for Leading SAFe, LPM, APM, POPM, Scrum Master, Teams.
In addition to this Clive has developed digital transformation systems for businesses, value acceleration programs and training programs for Agile.
Additional skills and experience include product management, delivery lead and program management.

SPC - Senior Manager Program Management

Sendcustomer

Championed the rollout of the Scaled Agile Framework and the launch of three Agile Release Trains as a key member of the Lean-Agile Centre of Excellence (LACE) with ownership for leading Value Stream Mapping Workshops and providing  coaching to scrum teams as Scrum Master and Product Owner

Agile & Product Consultant

Onsite Business Generator

Successful development, adaption and implementation of Agile and Lean business methodologies in stagnated business looking to take the next step in their growth cycle.  Through effective use of PI Planning, Daily Stand Ups, Retropsepctives and Continuous deployment, with Local and Indian teams the business transformed into an effective delivery machine

Director of Product Management

Hygiene Solutions

Director of Product Management - delivering on aggressive growth targets for the business.  Growing the business from zero to $multi-million company within 3 years and on to sustained year on year growth rates of more than 20%.

eCompany Ltd

Director and Delivery lead for development of Computerised Accommodation System (CAS) – automated property management system (PMS) allowing establishments from 1 to 30 rooms to make their real time inventory available to the world.  The year 1999! The era of dialup internet.  Through partnerships this ultimately formed part of the concept of Booking.com.

Director Travel Technologies

HA Hospitality Staffing

Banqueting Management. Training and Supply of waiting a bar staff.  Employing over 250 people.

MD and Owner 

Employee Engagement Specialist | Organizational Change Coach | Empowering Organizations to build a competency for ongoing change | Lean-Agile implementation expert with 30+ Years of Innovation | SPCT | Candidate ILM

Why do 85% of employees feel disconnected from work?

Not because they lack perks. But because they don't feel safe. They don't feel seen. They don't feel like they matter.

I believe in a world where people wake up inspired, feel safe at work, and return home fulfilled. This isn't idealism. It's biology.

The Human Truth:
When people feel psychologically safe, their brains release oxytocin - the trust chemical. When they see growth paths, dopamine drives them forward. When valued, serotonin stabilizes wellbeing.
I co-authored "The Neuroscience of Employee Engagement" and "The Trillion Dollar Problem" to start a movement where leaders understand engagement isn't about managing people - it's about caring for them.

The CLOVER Framework:
Communication - People need to feel heard
Learning - Growth is a human need
Opportunities - Everyone deserves to reach their potential
Vulnerability - Trust begins when leaders go first
Enablement - Tools create empowerment
Reflection - Wisdom comes from looking back

What We Built at Clover ERA:
Not another survey tool. A daily practice of caring. Managers ask: "How can I serve my team?" Employees share their reality in 30 seconds. We close the gap between leaders and those they serve.
When you lead with purpose, income follows:

67% less burnout
People feel genuinely cared for
Companies save millions while saving their people

A Story That Matters:
Last month a manager told me: "My team member thanked me for seeing them. Not for a raise. For seeing them."
That's why we do this work.
The Invitation:
If you believe:

Every person has value beyond output
Leadership means serving
Trust is everything
Work should add to life

Join us.
Connect With Me:
🤝 Message me about what work should be
📖 Read our research on leading differently
🌱 Try Clover ERA - daily caring in action
🎯 Share the mission

The Circle of Safety Starts With You.
Engagement isn't a business problem. It's a human problem to care about.
When leaders eat last and vulnerability becomes strength, work transforms from obligation to opportunity.

We're building workplaces worthy of the human spirit.
Follow if you believe work can be different.
Message to start a movement in your organization.
Together, we'll build workplaces where everyone belongs.
That's not just good for business. It's good for humanity.

Clive Hays

An engineering director told me last week her top architect quit with zero warning. "Probably cost us $150K to replace him," she said. I ran the math. $380K.

"Did his behavior change in the weeks before?"

"Actually yes. He stopped pushing back on my decisions. Stopped questioning timelines. Just said 'sounds good' to everything."

"And you thought..."

"I thought he was finally maturing. Getting easier to work with. Becoming more of a team player."

That's the signal most managers miss.

When your biggest critic stops criticizing. 
When your detail person stops asking for details. 
When your "why are we doing it this way?" person starts saying "whatever you think."

It doesn't mean they trust you more.
It means they've already decided to leave.

They stopped fighting because they stopped caring.

Who on your team got "easier" in the last 60 days?

JSESSIONID

li_at

Talks about #agile, #leanagile, #productdevelopment, #agiletransformation, and #leanportfoliomanagement

Your best people won’t threaten to leave. They’ll just leave. I help you see it coming | Co-Founder, Clover ERA

Akshay Jalali

She won Employee of the Year in January.
Resigned three weeks later.
$430K to replace her. The award cost $200.

Her CEO asked me how that was possible.

"What was she like in the months before?"

"Easier, honestly. She'd stopped pushing for that product lead role. Stopped raising concerns in our 1:1s. I figured she'd finally bought into the direction."

I asked how many times she'd requested the product lead role.
"Three times. March, April, May."

After May?

"Never brought it up again."

I asked what they told her each time.

"That the timing wasn't right. That we'd revisit it."

I asked if anyone followed up when she stopped asking.

He pulled up her 1:1 notes. Scrolled through five months. Looked up.

"We thought she'd moved on."

She had. To a company that said yes on the first conversation.

Three asks. Three "not yets." Then silence. Her manager read that silence as acceptance.

It was the opposite.

The award showed up four months after she'd already decided to leave. They gave her a plaque because it was easier than giving her an answer.

Who on your team used to push for something... and then just stopped?

I asked a senior engineer why he never told his manager he was thinking about leaving. He said: "I did

Four months before I resigned."

His manager didn't hear it that way. He heard a question about promotion paths. Replied with "we'll figure it out."

The engineer heard something different. He heard: "You're not a priority."

He stopped pushing. Started taking recruiter calls instead.

His manager found out the day he resigned. Asked if there was anything that could change his mind.

There wasn't. That conversation happened four months too late.

I asked: "Why didn't you push harder? Make it clear you were serious?"

He said: "What was I supposed to say? 'Take me seriously or I'll leave?' That's a threat. That changes the relationship. If they only care because you threaten to leave, what does that tell you?"

He's right.

The best people don't threaten to leave. They just leave.

By the time someone asks "what can we do to keep you?" the answer is nothing.

How many people on your team are waiting for a conversation that isn't coming?

A VP asked me last month why 3 senior engineers quit within 6 weeks.
"Zero warning," he said.
I talked to their managers separately.

Engineering manager: "He started taking calls during standups. Didn't think much of it."

Product manager: "She stopped volunteering for the architecture discussions. Figured she was just busy."

DevOps manager: "He was silent in retrospectives. Thought he was finally listening instead of always talking."

Each manager saw ONE behavior change. None of them connected the dots.

When I showed the VP the pattern across all three departures:

Calendar blocks appeared → 42 days before resignation 
Stopped volunteering → 38 days before resignation
Went silent in meetings → 29 days before resignation

Same sequence. 3 people. $960K in replacement costs.

The VP stared at the timeline. "Each manager only sees their own team. They had no way to know this was a pattern."

Here's what's actually happening: The 67-day early warning system exists. But it's fragmented across managers, skip-levels, and peers. Each person sees 20% of the picture. Nobody connects it.

How many patterns are invisible in your company because no single person sees the full picture?

A CEO told me last week: "It's cheaper to replace people than to invest in retention programs."  So I asked him: "What did your last replacement actually cost?"

"Recruiting fees, maybe $25K. Training. Some productivity loss."

I walked him through the rest.
The work that didn't get done while the role was empty. 
The projects that slipped. 
The client account they lost during the transition. 
The overtime the team absorbed. 
The institutional knowledge that walked out the door.

By the time we finished:
Recruiting & hiring: $25K 
Training & onboarding: $40K 
Lost productivity: $65K 
Project delays: $30K 
Client impact: $80K 
Team overtime & morale: $20K

Total: $260K to replace one person.

Then I asked him: "How much would you have spent to keep that person from leaving?"

He went quiet.

Because the answer is probably $15K-$30K. A promotion. A raise. A project they actually cared about. A manager who listened.

Here's the problem: he was asking the wrong question.

"Should we invest in retention programs?" is too abstract. It sounds expensive and vague.

The real question is: "Would you spend $20K to avoid losing $260K?"

When you frame it that way, the answer is obvious. But most companies never frame it that way. They compare replacement cost to "retention programs" instead of comparing it to the specific investment that would have kept one person from leaving.

That's not a math problem. That's a framing problem.

What would change if you stopped asking 'should we invest in retention?' and started asking 'what would it cost to keep this specific person?

Doug Noll

CEO at a 320-person company asked me last week how much turnover was costing them. I said probably $4 million. She laughed. Said maybe $800K tops.

We spent 20 minutes doing the math together.

Replacement costs. Lost productivity. Training time. Project delays. Client impact -- $5.7 million.

She stopped laughing.
The problem isn't that companies don't care about turnover. The problem is they're measuring the wrong number.
Turnover RATE doesn't show up on your P&L.
Turnover COST does.

When's the last time you calculated the actual dollar cost of turnover at your company? Because if the answer is 'never,' you're managing a multi-million dollar problem without knowing the number.

Tech CEOs Think Turnover Costs $800K. It’s Actually $5.4M. I Show Them the Math—Then Help Them Prevent It | Co-Founder, Clover ERA

An engineering director lost her best engineer last year. Senior guy. Built half their core product. She had no idea he was looking.

He'd asked about a promotion path four months earlier. His skip-level said "we'll figure it out." Then nothing.

He didn't push back. He just started taking recruiter calls.

His work didn't change. He updated his LinkedIn. Nobody noticed.

But something had shifted. "Good" became "okay" in his head. Then "okay" became "why am I still here?"

She found out the day he resigned.

No warning. Just a resignation letter.

$280K to replace him. Nine months to backfill. The person they hired still hasn't shipped what he built in his first quarter.

She told me: "I keep thinking about what I missed. There must have been signs."

There were. She just couldn't see them.

How many of your managers are finding out the same way she did?

I asked 40 managers when they last flagged a flight risk to leadership. 34 have stopped entirely.
But 6 never stopped. Why?

Same companies. Same pressure. Same risk of getting blamed.

I asked them what was different.

Engineering manager: "Most VPs only ask about flight risks after someone resigns. Mine asks every week. Not as a gotcha. As a standing question. That's why I still speak up."

Product director: "At my last company, I flagged someone and got asked why I let it happen. Here, my boss helped me fix it. That one difference changed everything."

HR business partner: "Most leadership teams only want the wins. Mine asks for the worries too. So I tell them."

The 34 who stopped didn't stop because they don't care.

They stopped because speaking up backfired.

The 6 who kept going didn't have more courage.

They had leaders who didn't punish them for honesty.

Same people. Different environment. Opposite outcome.

The cost of a culture of silence: invisible and compounding.

The cost of changing it: one question, asked consistently.

"Who are you worried about this week?"

When's the last time your managers heard that from you?

A CEO at a 320-person company asked me last week how much turnover was costing her. I said probably $4 million. She laughed. Said maybe $800K tops.
We did the math. $5.7 million.

She stopped laughing.

14,706 other C-suite executives read that story because they're making the same mistake.

They're tracking turnover rate. That doesn't show up on the P&L.
Turnover cost does. And most CEOs have no idea what that number actually is.

This week in The Intersection, I break down the three visibility layers that keep you blind to your actual turnover cost.

When's the last time you calculated the actual dollar cost of turnover at your company?

Tech CEOs (200-500 employees): Turnover costs $5.4M, not $800K. I show you the math, then help you prevent it | Co-Founder, Clover ERA

The Question Last Monday I asked a simple question on LinkedIn: "When's the last time you calculated the actual dollar cost of turnover at your compan

Open article: Why 14,706 CXOs stopped scrolling at the same question by Clive Hays • 3 min read

Why 14,706 CXOs stopped scrolling at the same question

CEO - "You could have told me, 
everyone knows my door is always open."
VP - "That's why I couldn't."

His VP had been interviewing for four months. The CEO found out from HR the morning she resigned.

He called me that afternoon.

"I've always had an open door policy. Always!", the CEO told me.

I asked him when she last walked through it.

"Maybe her first few months? I don't remember. But I took that as a good sign. No news, no problems."

I talked to her the following week.

"I walked through that door once. My first month. Then I watched three people do the same thing my first year."

I asked her what happened.

"One got labeled 'not a culture fit.' One got dinged for 'struggles with positivity.' One got thanked publicly and passed over quietly."

She paused.

"Same door. Same result. I never went back."

I asked her what she told HR in her exit interview.

"That there was nothing leadership could have done."

Was that true?

"By the time someone asks that question, the answer is always no."

The door was always open. The outcomes never were.

Open door. Closed mouths.

How many people are walking past yours right now?

"They left for money."
I've heard this 21 times in the last 60 days.
CEO tells me they lost someone. Good person. Hated to see them go. "But what can you do? They got a 20% raise. We couldn't match it."

Then I ask to see the exit interview.
"Left for compensation and career growth."

Okay. Now let me show you what that same person said in anonymous check-ins 67 days before they resigned:

Day -67: "My manager doesn't listen to my ideas anymore." 
Day -52: "I asked about the promotion timeline again. Got a vague answer again." 
Day -38: "Third project in a row that got killed. What's the point?" 
Day -23: "I've stopped bringing up problems. Nothing changes anyway." 
Day -9: "Got a LinkedIn message. Taking the call."

The exit interview says money.

The 67 days before the exit interview say something completely different.

Here's what actually happens:
Someone gets frustrated. Feels unheard. Stops caring. Updates LinkedIn. Takes recruiter calls. Gets an offer.

Then they write "compensation" on the exit interview because it's easier than writing "I tried to tell you I was unhappy for 67 days and nobody listened."

Money is the socially acceptable reason to leave.

It's rarely the real reason.

How many people on your team wrote "compensation" on their exit interview but were actually telling you something else for months before that?

The manager who lost 4 people last year?
She was the 5th. Nobody counted her.

Her VP called me after she resigned.

"I don't understand. We talked about her team's turnover in every monthly review. She knew it was a problem."

I asked what those conversations looked like.

"I was direct. Told her the numbers weren't acceptable. Asked what she was doing to fix it."

I asked when someone last checked in on her.

"She's a manager. That's not how it works."

I asked about her career goals.

"She never brought them up."

I asked if anyone noticed she'd stopped pushing back in leadership meetings.

"I thought she'd finally bought into the direction."

She hadn't bought in. She'd checked out.

Same signals her team showed before they left. Nobody recognized it because nobody was looking.

Six weeks after she resigned, two of her people followed. Then two more. Then two more.

6 of 8. Gone within 90 days.

They didn't leave because she failed them. They left because she was the only reason they'd stayed.

$1.4M in replacements. Her exit interview said "new opportunity."

The truth: she'd been raising the same flag about her own team for two years. Nobody was listening. Including to her.

Managers don't burn out from managing. 
They burn out from not being managed.

Who's checking in on yours?

Over 2,000 people let me know they saw themselves in my posts this week.
That wasn't the plan.

Three posts. Three resignations. Three different companies.

An engineer told his manager he was thinking about leaving. Four months before he resigned. His manager heard a question about promotions. Replied "we'll figure it out." The engineer heard: "You're not a priority."

A top performer won Employee of the Year. Asked for a project lead role. Got told "not yet." Quit three weeks later. $430K.

A manager lost 4 people in one year. Leadership blamed her. Nobody asked how she was doing. She became the 5th.

Different companies. Different industries. Same pattern.

People didn't engage because the stories were surprising.

They engaged because they weren't.

"The best people don't threaten to leave. They just leave."

Next week: the solutions that don't work. Open door policies. Exit interviews. The theater companies perform instead of fixing anything.

Full breakdown in the newsletter here.

How many people on your team have already decided?

Over 2,000 people let me know they saw themselves in my posts this week. That wasn't the plan. Three posts. Three resignations. Three different compan

Open article: Over 2,000 people said "this has been me" this week by Clive Hays • 3 min read

Over 2,000 people said "this has been me" this week

82% engaged. Top quartile. Culture award on the wall.
6 of 8 directors actively looking to leave.
Same company. Same month.

I talked to four people inside. Different departments. Different levels.

Same message.

"The director leadership team wants out. The only ones staying are the two who just got here."

"Everyone knows what to put on the survey. You learn fast what answers keep you off the radar."

"The scores look great because nobody's honest anymore."

Surveys measure what people are willing to say in writing.

They don't measure what people are actually thinking.

The gap between those two is where your best people disappear.

How confident are you in your engagement scores?

What 251 comments and 108 reposts revealed about the silence before resignation.

This week I posted about a VP who missed the warning signs before 3 senior engineers quit.

370,000 people saw it.
251 left comments.
108 shared it with their network.

I read every single comment.

Here's what I didn't expect:

Managers from completely different industries telling the same story. Engineering leads. Product managers. CTOs. Consultants. All describing the same pattern.

Someone pushed back. Got ignored. Stopped pushing. Leadership saw silence and assumed alignment.

Then they resigned.

One Managing Director called it "False Harmony."
A Senior PM said he'd been on both sides of it.
A CEO added the cost nobody tracks: lost opportunity.

I wrote about all of it in this week's edition of The Intersection.

This week I posted about a VP who missed the warning signs before 3 senior engineers quit. 370,000 people saw it. 251 left comments. 108 shared it wit

Open article: What 251 Comments and 108 Reposts Revealed About the Silence Before Resignation by Clive Hays • 3 min read

What 251 Comments and 108 Reposts Revealed About the Silence Before Resignation

A VP of Engineering told me last month he knew his top performer was leaving. Eight months before she resigned. He never told his CEO. I asked why not.

"I did tell him. Twice. First time, he said he'd look into it. Nothing happened. 
Second time, he asked me why I couldn't keep my own team happy."

So when she finally quit, the VP acted surprised in the all-hands.

He'd known for eight months. He stopped saying anything after month two.

Here's what's actually happening in your company right now:
Your managers see who's about to leave. They're not telling you. Not because they don't care. Because the last time they told you, you made it their problem.

You trained them to stay quiet.
What would your managers tell you about flight risks if they knew it wouldn't come back on them?

A Fortune 500 just celebrated 82% engagement.
6 of their 8 directors are actively looking to leave.

Same company. Same month.

What is your survey not telling you?

82% engaged. Top quartile. Culture award on the wall. 6 of 8 directors actively looking to leave. Same company. Same month. I talked to three people i

Open article: 82% engaged. 6 of 8 directors heading for the door. by Clive Hays • 2 min read

82% engaged. 6 of 8 directors heading for the door.

Managers control 70% of employee engagement.
Get 0% of the tools.
Then take 100% of the blame when people quit.
That ends this week.

Marcus spent 8 years as a top performer.
Got promoted to manager.

His training: "You'll figure it out."

Six months later: Three resignations. Called into conference room. Shown engagement scores.
"What's your plan to fix this?"

Marcus had no plan. Nobody taught him one.
Marcus didn't fail management.

The system failed Marcus.
And it's failing you too.

You've tried the one-on-ones. The stay interviews. Being "more available."
None of it worked.

Because nobody taught you the actual systems:
The 6 behavioral signals that predict resignation 37 days before it happens
The 3-factor dopamine reset that fixes burnout without time off

The email clarity formula that prevents $47K miscommunication disasters
The anti-scapegoat playbook that protects you when leadership sets impossible goals

This coming week, I'm running 2 intensive sessions:
1️⃣Tuesday, 18 Nov, 11am ET (4PM GMT): How to spot resignations 30+ days early (and reverse them)
2️⃣Thursday, 20 Nov, 11am ET (4PM GMT): How to fix burnout by restoring dopamine (not reducing workload)

45 minutes. 6 managers each. No theory. Just the frameworks.

I'm not launching a program.
I'm opening access to the systems good managers need but never get.

Comment which session:
"TUESDAY" for resignation prediction
"THURSDAY" for burnout reset

First 6 comments per session get the session link.
After that, you wait for the following week.

You weren't trained to fail.
You were just never trained to succeed.
Let's fix that.

No alternative text description for this image

Managers see who's about to leave.
Most of them stopped saying anything about it.
Not because they don't know. Because they learned what happens when they do.
More on that tomorrow.

"Why did you leave? Your role was safe."
"That's why I left."

They cut 3 roles in December. By February, they'd lost 9.

Leadership called it "unfortunate timing."

It wasn't.

The CEO asked me to figure out what happened.

"The restructure was surgical. Three roles. Clear rationale. We communicated it well.", he said.

I asked what "communicated well" looked like.

"Town hall. Explained the business reasons. Thanked the people leaving. Moved on."

I talked to two of the six who left voluntarily.

First one:

"Were you worried about your job?"

"No. My role wasn't anywhere near the cuts."

"Then why did you leave?"

"Because I watched how they handled it. No warning. Eight years of service. Found out in a 15-minute call. I thought, if that's how it ends here, I'd rather end it on my terms."

Second one:

"Sarah had been raising concerns about leadership for a year. They said she was negative. Then they cut her role in the restructure."

She paused.

"Whether it was connected or not, I got the message. Speak up and you're a target. I started looking that week."

The restructure was 3 people. The cost was 9.

$1.5M in replacement costs. The restructure saved $340K.

A restructure isn't just who you let go. It's what everyone else decides the day after.

What did your team decide after your last one?

Sabine VanderLinden

Activate Innovation Ecosystems | Tech Ambassador | Founder of Alchemy Crew Ventures + Scouting for Growth | Chair, Board Member, Advisor | Honorary Senior Visiting Fellow-Bayes Business School

I don't just talk about innovation, AI, workforce or digital transformation— I build the bridges that make things real.

As Founder & Venture-Client Partner of Alchemy Crew Ventures, I run global R&D + Adoption Labs that connect Fortune 500 insurers and corporates with the most brilliant tech ventures on the planet. Think of us as the “fast lane” between startup brilliance and enterprise adoption. My themes include FinTech/ InsurTech and deploying AI at scale responsibly. 

What this looks like in numbers:
📍 Accelerated 160+ ventures and sourced 55,000+ startups worldwide
📍 Invested in 35+ early stage startups
📍 Delivered exits like FitSense → Zurich (2018), MyFutureNow → L&G (2019), and Tia Tech → Sapiens (2020)
📍 Created Insurer-led Acceleration and Scaleup programs that turned pilot purgatory into scalable commercial success

But the real story? I help founders land their first million-dollar client, build authentic personal brands, and help corporates cut through the noise to adopt tech that drives real growth.

My world revolves around:
📍 Venture Clienting 2.0 & Corporate Innovation Frameworks
📍 AI (ethics, adoption, emerging risks)
📍 Climate Resilience, Risk Futures & Sustainability Transformation
📍 The Future of Work (where humans + tech thrive together)

Beyond Alchemy Crew:
📍 Co-editor of the bestselling INSURTECH Book
📍 Wrote forewords for the Future of Insurance and Momentum
📍 Lecturer on Corporate Venturing at Bayes Business School
📍 Board + advisory roles across VCs, Scaleups (The CareVoice), foundations (Women to Watch), standards (ACORD Solutions) & global insurers
📍 Top 10 Business Podcast "Scouting for Growth" 
📍 Recognized with 10+ awards, including Most Influential CEO – Insurance Corporate Ventures (2024/2025)

My channels beyond LinkedIn:
x.com: @SabineVdL
instagram: @sabinevdlofficial
Medium: @sabine_vdl
Podcast: Scouting for Growth and Beyond Tech Frontiers
Newsletter: alchemycrew.ventures

What drives me?
Creating value where others see friction.
Turning hype into measurable outcomes.
And making sure technology becomes a force for good, not just another buzzword.

Award List (10+): Insurance Times-Tech & Innovation Awards Winner (2018), Grant Thornton-Face of a Vibrant Economy (2018), Business Insurance-Women to Watch Honoree (2019), Corporate Vision-Venture Validation Firm of the Year (2021), Finalist Women in Insurance Perseverance Award (2021), Awarded Perseverant Company to Watch in (2021), ACORD Awards (2020/2023), Most Influential CEO-Insurance Corporate Ventures (2024/2025).

Co-founder, Chief Executive Officer & Venture Partner

Delivering venture labs that accelerate, industrialize and democratize the way tech ventures engage with corporations. These labs apply acceleration, co-creation, and commercialization techniques to de-risk the way insurers and financial institutions collaborate, grow, and scale their venture-led growth initiatives.

Also, systematizing for a select group of growth ventures the way their engagement with corporations.

You can find out more 👉🏽 https://alchemycrew.com/

Join me for an insightful LinkedIn Live session with Marinela Profi, Global AI & GenAI Market Strategy Lead at SAS, as we dive into the future of enterprise decision-making with Agentic AI.

In this session, we’ll explore how Agentic AI is transforming how businesses approach decisioning, governance, and trust. Marinela will unpack the concept of Agentic AI — intelligent systems that not only predict but perceive, reason, and act autonomously — and what it means for enterprises striving for innovation in the age of intelligent autonomy.

We’ll discuss:
1) The rise of Agentic AI and how it differs from generative models like chatbots.
2) The critical role of governance, explainability, and human-AI collaboration.
3) Real-world banking use cases where Agentic AI is already delivering tangible results.
4) What business leaders need to know to leverage these technologies safely and effectively by 2026.

More on our discussion here: https://bit.ly/4ouB9TG

Don’t miss the opportunity to hear from one of the leading voices in AI on how we can turn the trust dilemma into an opportunity for responsible AI adoption.

Building the Trust Frontier with Agentic AI for the Enterprise

taplio

The Battle

Clive Hays

Sabine VanderLinden

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreClive Hays's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreSabine VanderLinden's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Clive Hays

Sabine VanderLinden

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Clive Hays's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreSabine VanderLinden's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreClive Hays's LinkedIn Performance