Naji Gehchan: Hello, leaders of the world. Welcome to spread love in organizations, the podcast for purpose-driven healthcare leaders, striving to make life better around the world by leading their teams with genuine care, servant leadership, and love.

I am Naji, your host for this special episode in partnership with MIT Sloan Healthcare and BioInnovations Conference, an event that brings the Healthcare Ecosystem Together.

Jami Taylor is joining me today for this episode. Jami is Vice President of Corporate Affairs at Protagonist Therapeutics, and a Global Justice Fellow at Yale University, working to design new models to improve access to medicines in the world’s poorest and most challenging settings. Earlier in her career, Jami held global leadership roles at Johnson & Johnson across key divisions and was a founding member of Johnson & Johnson Global Public Health. Jami has served as a member of the National Academy of Medicine Forum on Microbial Threats; the Private Sector Delegation to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria; the Chairman’s Circle at the Center for Global Development; the Global Health Advisory Council at Harvard Medical School; and on many other committees and forums addressing priority issues in medicine and society. In 2014, Jami was named a Cross-Sector Leadership Fellow at the Presidio Institute, a program created by the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation to advance the work of leaders addressing society’s most complex challenges.

Jami – it is such an honor to have you with me today!

Jami Taylor: Thank you so much for having me, Naji. It’s great to be here.

Naji Gehchan: Before we dive into accessibility in a global health setting, which was the topic, uh, of your panel at, um, S H B C, I’m eager to hear a little bit more about your personal story. What brought you to healthcare and this inspiring journey of impacts you have.

Jami Taylor: Sure. I’d love to recount it. It, um, it’s something that I reflect upon a lot really. It’s the tension between innovation and access that’s defined my career and in many ways my own personal life and even my childhood. I grew up in Washington, DC and both of my parents worked on key legislation affecting the business model of the pharmaceutical industry, namely the Orphan Drug Act, and later Hatch Waxman known for really creating that split.

Between the innovator industry and the generic drug industry, which really defined that tension between innovation and access, and in some ways defined responsibilities between those two sides of a coin, so to speak. And so the innovator industry was. Tasked really with the work of innovation, uh, and the work of r and d and investments therein, whereas the generic industry was seen as sort of taking the baton on access after a particular IP period had expired.

And I think there was a satisfaction with this model, despite all the tension that remained within it for a long period of time. But ultimately, when we think it globally, and think about how the models played out. It’s fair to say that there are imperfections in it and the waiting period between the, the innovation as it comes forward.

And the medical sphere and accessibility, especially when we think about the world’s po poorest and most remote communities. It um, it strikes me that there, it always struck me that there were solutions that needed to come to the fore more quickly. And thinking about that sense of urgency, my childhood was really incubated in the crucible of the H I V crisis in the us.

I had an uncle who contracted h i v via blood transfusion in the early 1980s, and that sense of urgency and real desperation for innovation and for access was very much, uh, formative as I observed that as a child, and it imprinted itself upon me that experience. You know, well after his death many years later and is really a guiding light for me when I think about and knew that desperation at the time as it was experienced by my family.

And then now that I’ve traveled the world and spent a great deal of time in frontier and emerging markets and communities and all kinds of situations socioeconomically and other, economically and otherwise, you know, seeing that desperation as it manifests its itself. In many different contexts across many different disease states really drives my passion for expanding both innovation and access and looking for ways to innovate for access in the context of the innovator industry in which I now sit.

Thank you so

Naji Gehchan: much, Jamie, for sharing part of your story. Uh, let’s first, uh, talk about ACC access, right? You shared about accessibility and healthcare specifically. Can you share with us, how do you define this?

Jami Taylor: So, I define access, uh, pretty broadly. I use the term healthcare everywhere. I think healthcare really should be something that is integrated into every aspects of our lives.

Healthcare treatments within arms reach the ability to access physicians or train healthcare providers within a moment of need whenever that moment might arise. Thinking about healthcare very expansively and very ubiquitously helps us, I think, to set the mindset around access that we need to then drive innovation for access.

So if we

Naji Gehchan: take this into a global health setting, as was the panel, uh, discussion during the conference, uh, what are your thoughts, uh, as of today about ACC access accessibility in global

Jami Taylor: health setting? I think we remain in an urgent state where access falls far beneath the levels at which it should.

When we think about healthcare everywhere as a goal, as an ultimate aim, we fall far short of that. And I think obviously the recent pandemic laid bare many of those inequities, but those inequities. Are constant and I think we find too much satisfaction in the status quo. I, for example, find it completely unacceptable even when we’re able to scale old and toxic drugs and this sort of self-congratulation that accompanies that often on the part of, of, of companies in the industry.

It, it’s, Always important to scale. I mean every possible medication, but where we allow these sort of waiting games that I referenced prior and where we tolerate the absence of innovation, where unmet need is so clear and urgent. I just truly believe that there’s more that we can do and that sense of dissatisfaction is very much a driving force in, in my day-to-day work.

Naji Gehchan: So I love that you talked about dissatisfaction more we can do, and you really come from this, uh, place of, uh, urgency to ask, right? With the desperation that you shared. So can I double click on this and hear from you? What do you think we can do and we should do to improve accessibility?

Jami Taylor: Oh, absolutely.

Well, I mean, I could probably spend all day, you know, you know, a relative soapbox on this one, but I’ll just offer some perspectives just based on my own experience. One, it starts with the belief that we can do something about it. I know that’s many times, especially sitting in the pharmaceutical industry, we feel really almost straight jacketed by.

The systems in which we operate. There are legal frameworks, regulatory frameworks. There are just business models that in some ways have so deeply entrenched the status quo that I described, that it drives that sense of. Complacency around access to medicines. Uh, we’ve heard many times, at least in past years, even top leaders in the pharmaceutical industry accept that sort of bifurcation of responsibility that I mentioned, which I believe is a false dichotomy.

Innovation versus access with. Really generic industries responsible for access. I think we’re all responsible for access and frankly, I think we’re all responsible for innovation. And so driving an innovation for access MI mindset, grounded in that sense that we can do better. There’s, there are gaps that we can fill.

The status quo is not necessarily where we need to remain. I think there’s, I think it begins there. I feel very strongly that even. Where we feel like those deeply entrenched business models are, you know, sometimes insurmountable. There’s a role for advocacy and that can happen not only outside of our organization and the context of the policy and legal frameworks and regulatory frameworks that I mentioned, but it can happen in inside even large organizations and even small cap companies like where I sit, we can ad advocate for investment.

That has innovation and access as twin concepts and as pillars and priorities for how we allocate r and d dollars. We can advocate with our benefactors and shareholders for those who invest in our companies, we can push for an innovation for access mindset. And I’ve seen that kind of advocacy where it’s built upon, I think genuine intent.

And then of course, certain capabilities that can un unlock and realize a goal. I’ve seen that kind of advocacy really move mountains. Uh, early in my career, I worked with a group, kind of a ragtag group within Johnson and Johnson at the time. There was an attempt within j and j to turn around the pharmaceutical sector of the company, which wasn’t its high performing sector in the early two thousands.

And there was a huge profit margin imperative. A massive transformational INF innovation imperative, but less so at the time, an access imperative. And this was an observation that a few of my colleagues and I recognized. And so what we did was we created on our own an access and affordability team. It had three people, actually four, but one defected very quickly when he realized maybe this was radioactive from an internal political perspective.

But we, we began to really advocate around this idea of access and affordability and building into the priorities and the strategic, strategic pillars at a really critical time for the, for the company in this particular segment of the company. You know, at the looking back, it really was a risk in many ways, but in some ways we were seizing upon an opportunity of the moment where there was this appetite to shift a whole collection of innovators.

And it was a time when. Jansen, which is com comprises the pharmaceutical companies of Johnson and Johnson, was really begin to getting to brand itself and really understand itself as a single entity underneath the Johnson and Johnson umbrella. We seized upon, uh, a lonely asset that had been a development very quietly in our labs in Belgium for, uh, that appear to be very clearly effective against multi-drug resistant tuberculosis.

Certainly that would not be, uh, a sort of, Big win blockbuster by any stretch, but we were able to really craft a narrative thinking about the ad advocacy angle as entrepreneurs where we were able to elevate this M D R T B asset as a driver of business model innovation a means of. Reaching communities and driving new access models that could help support our, our aims in terms of global expansion across the company’s portfolio of products and where we could push and test these new models.

In what, what, because there was no real profit to be had. That where we could test these models in ways that would confer reputational, gain, help to build rapport within new markets or markets where we had a lower footprint and where we could, where we could develop relationships and new public-private partnerships with governments in ways that constituted its own sort of innovative model.

That kind of advocacy proved to be very, very powerful, and I’m proud to say. That despite lots of obstacles along the way and a huge amount of internal and external skepticism, because we believed it was possible because we brought a mindset that said, access and affordability is a priority, and innovation for access is a meaningful direction.

Even for a major company with all of its pressures from shareholders and other stakeholders, we were able to, at this point save many, many thousands of lives around the world to prove out and new treatment regimen for multi-drug resistant tuberculosis and potentially TB more broadly. And we were able to, uh, elevate what has now become from a three person team, what has now become many hundreds of people engaged in the formal work of global public health within that organization.

Naji Gehchan: Wow. Thank you so much, uh, Jamie for sharing this, and I love it. It’s a concrete example with impact, uh, that, that you’re sharing here and along with a lot of entrepreneurship that you know, I believe in. And obviously you’ve done it in, in large organizations, uh, and you talked about. I love how you framed it.

It’s belief innovation and access advocacy, and there’s the piece of access and affordability. So if I wanna double click on affordability, you know, especially in the poorest and most challenging places on earth, do you think cost is the only challenge? Or is, is it one challenge and there’s other pieces?

I’d love to get your perspective about how you think, uh, through affordability for the poorest spaces on earth.

Jami Taylor: One, I believe in models like the Global Fund to fight aids, TB, and malaria, where there’s. The opportunity to collect funds together in sort of a massive way even, and use that as a driver of effectively subsidizing costs for access as a priority for communities that otherwise could not afford innovative medicines or even generic medicines for that matter.

So there’s, there are models out there that I think offer us real guiding lights. But if, but as, as I’ll probably say through, through the course of this whole discussion, there’s more that we can do, right? We can never be satisfied as long as healthcare isn’t everywhere. And so to that end, one of the, one of the observations that I’ve made, you know, climbing mountains and Rwanda and, and trudging through, you know, banana plantations and Ecuador and really moving in lots of places in between.

Touring hosp TV hospitals in Chenai India. One observation has been this sense of absorptive capacity, where you have limited infrastructure. How can you bring some of our most sophisticated technologies to the market to really, uh, achieve the health health outcomes that you’re seeking everywhere. And that’s where that real innovation for access mindset can come in.

And where we can make palpable gains in that direction, we can obviate the need for heavy infrastructure for that so-called absorptive capacity. And one example is it comes from the company where I am right now, protagonist Therapeutics. It’s a moonshot company really taking areas of medicine or disease areas that are typically treated through heavy infrastructure treatment modalities.

Doctor’s, office based infusions, for example, of monoclonal antibody bio, large molecule biologic drugs. There are, um, diseases that are treated as first line with phlebotomy, for example. Where patients have to go in and have complic, it’s sometimes complicated procedures carried out, or even simple procedures are out of reach in some of these markets.

And so where you can look at those barriers and ask, how can we traverse those barriers through the power of technological innovation, harnessing a lot of human ingenuity along the way, that kind of creativity coming down to new drug formulations, new drugs that can. That can essentially displace and replace heavy infrastructure.

That’s the aim of the work that I’m engaged in right now. Really excited about the gains that we can make in that direction. Helping to solve for last mile problems and helping to keep some of these communities where. I mean even, uh, an an in reach healthcare clinic is out of reach. Putting ourselves in a position where we can scale medical therapy that can be used conveniently at home and preferably in pill form or even, or in long-acting injectable form or some way that keeps patients from having to go into, into experts to receive expensive medicines.

I think that innovation for access. Perspective and companies built around. It will really define the age of access, which I hope is very much upon us. So,

Naji Gehchan: Jamie, the, these are great example and really thanks for sharing what you’re doing daily, obviously to improve this, uh, this important, uh, issue we face, uh, since decades.

I, I wanna bring also this, you know, there’s the access piece. There is also a lot on the trust. Of the system, the trust of those companies. Um, everything around, you know, misinformation, miscommunication, which is becoming like even countries that can afford treatments. Unfortunately, we’re seeing people dying because they don’t believe in those treatments.

So I’d love to get your perspective, how you would, especially that you’ve gone through places, uh, that are underserved, uh, you know, countries where you have. Poor challenge to access. How do you see this fit in and how can we solve also this piece? Is it only about getting those drugs, for example, to this market or to this population?

Or is there more to be done also from, from a trust, from a communication standpoint, from any other aspect you, you think would be needed for us to solve this problem?

Jami Taylor: Naji, this is such a great question and I really appreciate it. It almost brings me to a very vulnerable place, reflecting upon the case study that I shared around M D R T B and the work that we did to bring Baklan now under the brand name curo to markets all across the world.

We really believed, I think, in our naivete that the moment we received F D A approval and were able to unlock that access to this drug, And given that, of course, that this was the first innovation in tuberculosis in more than 40 years, that there would be this organic outpouring of praise and celebration and uptake that we would be embraced as a company, that the drug would be embraced quickly across every community where it was needed, that we would have partners pouring out their own resources to, to support and shore up, and scale up all of that effort.

We were very surprised and frankly, at a personal level, I was very. I mean shocked and, and hurt at the time when we actually received quite a bit of criticism with the rollout of the drug. Much, much of that criticism looking back, was well placed. I mean, we struggled with the pricing model and attempted to be as innovative as possible and the pricing model around what we called equity-based tiered pricing.

But we did a really poor job of explaining the rationale there, and it almost looked like we were placing artificial limits on access. We’re trying to force a pricing model. Uh, in, in markets that where we hadn’t primed it, so to speak, we hadn’t done the work of patient intimacy in achieving that, that sort of deep listening to your customer to know all of the hurdles that they face, we were so engaged with the biology of the drug and, you know, understanding how it operated, you know, in that sort of physiological sense.

And so proud of that, that there was a lot of community engagement. That needed to happen pre-approval that we just didn’t even perceive as a requirement. And so when criticism came in, and I should say there it, there was that sort of organic that that slice of organic celebration, but there was also a fair amount of criticism in print and otherwise we took it very, very hard.

But in ways, in some ways, I’m glad that we did because. We taking that criticism so seriously, really prompt us, prompted us to reflect and reset and understand community engagement, stakeholder engagement at a whole new level. And from there, I think we were able to set a foundation for what would later become, as I mentioned, Johnson and Johnson Global Public Health set a foundation of intensive partnerships.

Intensive government engagement, intensive community engagement. We began to dispatch our teams into some of the most far flung areas of the world. We were camping with hippos in Uganda. We were touring hospitals, as I mentioned, TB hospitals throughout Southeast Asia. We were really beginning to understand the settings in which we were working.

Well beyond what our preclinical work in Petri dishes could indicate for us. And it takes both. It takes that scientific excellence, but also that stakeholder engagement excellence. And that’s really the lesson from that case study and certainly a lesson that informs so much of the work that I do today.

Naji Gehchan: That’s great. And really talking about this combination about science and underground, what people need in population. We’ve heard it several times during, during the discussion, uh, in the conference. W w with all that you’ve seen, you’re learning, you’re an expert in this field now. Uh, are you hopeful for the next decade that we will get there as a society?

Jami Taylor: I’m hugely hopeful. In fact, I’m, you know, with this sort of driving understanding that there’s so much more that we can do. I think that perspective helps to unlock a huge amount of optimism. On the research side, we’re seeing accelerating drivers of new research. New research timelines effectively where r and d can be compressed so that we’re not waiting 20 years for a drug to come to market, but rather through the strength of new regulatory pathways and certainly even new discovery modalities and lots of new tech being applied across the board.

I think we’re seeing our ability to move from bench to bedside. With a whole new, I mean, to use a term that’s become its own catchphrase, warp speed, and I want to see that, as I’m sure you do, and many in the audience here want to see that applied to the access space and the innovation for access space.

I think we’re seeing lots of other factors outside of healthcare proper that are coming into view, transportation and logistics, innovations that from drone delivery, for example, and, and so forth. Those innovations are helping us to traverse that last mile, which for many years just felt like was, it was such a firm barrier to access that we would never jump over it.

But by engaging some of those other actors in that space, we’re seeing some whole new ways of getting healthcare. Everywhere. We’re also seeing, uh, remote monitoring and telemedicine taking hold all across the world. I mean, even for some of the momentary quarterly earnings calls that suggest a decline in the usage thereof, maybe here in the US or other high income markets in in low and middle income markets, it is taking off like wildfire in ways that are very encouraging and hopefully we can continue to stoke that momentum.

We’re also seeing non-traditional actors, like I mentioned, like tech companies, seeing some of these longstanding gaps and creatively considering ways that they could help to fill those gaps in equity. And I think there are some powerful roles that some of those actors can play in ways that, uh, will emerge the benefit of, of everyone across the world.

I’m thrilled with the level of innovation that we’re seeing right now in diagnostics. I remember years ago listening to the president of Tanzania saying that the crippling aspect with of healthcare, the weakest link within their healthcare system there in Tanzania was lack of reliable and accurate diagnostics and access to diagnostics.

And here we’re seeing tests that are now reliable, accurate, and diffused. Everywhere and the power of some of those, those, those, the MedTech innovations that I mentioned to carry diagnostics forward at new levels across all kinds of disease areas. So absolutely thrilled about that. I think we’re seeing.

If not with the warming of the capital markets to this direction, we are seeing a lot of innovators jump into innovation for access. With access as an explicit priority for an innovation agenda among small cap players, your garage biotechs, some of your publicly traded biotechs, and I think we’re seeing large pharma really begin to set the tone.

I think. The industry is an entirely different place from a values point of view and how those values are expressed. When we think about, say, 1999, big pharma versus the large pharma actors today, and we see increasing evidence of this access imperative. All the time. And that advocacy within those organizations and outside of them can continue in ways that I think will really, truly bring us a new golden age of biomedical innovation, innovation for access, and will help to realize this vision of healthcare everywhere.

And when I say everywhere, I mean everywhere. I will shift

Naji Gehchan: gears now and give you words, and I would love your reaction to it. Okay, great. So the first one is leadership


Jami Taylor: Can you share, so a word, a word back, or

Naji Gehchan: I, I have to get Oh, yeah, you can, you can share more if you’d like. And, and I’m, especially when you talked about the values we have in biotech and in pharma, I think obviously leadership plays a big role on setting the tone and how you wanna drive this. So I’d love a little bit

Jami Taylor: more on this.

Oh, absolutely. Okay, good. Well, I’m glad you’re giving me more room too, to sort of opine. So, in leadership, I think there’s, there. Is something so powerful about that sort of fixed firm value system and how it evidences itself in every aspect of a of a, of a company or a movement. And I’ve seen that certainly in the case of Johnson and Johnson, where we were able to appeal to the fundamental credo values that hang on every wall in which are etched in stone at the company’s headquarters.

Think when it comes to leadership, there’s always something courageous about the best kind of leadership. And I mentioned early in our conversation all of these barriers that are deeply entrenched and systemic, right? I mean, where you’ve got, I. Uh, high regulatory bars to that, that dictate large timelines and large co or long timelines and large costs.

Takes a lot of courage to have a vision that’s often many years out. And to see that vision through many, uh, innovators today face, uh, lot of, uh, let’s just say heavy input. From investors, uh, the investors upon which they depend in order to carry out some of this, you know, more moonshot oriented work and sometimes, uh, whether it’s it, it’s shareholders of publicly traded company or early stage BC investors, what you find is that they can place pressure on you to adhere.

To the system as it stands and not to try to go against the grain in ways that, uh, potentially imbue more risk in the enterprise. And so leadership requires that courage and then that tenacity to see things through and to see a bigger vision through. And I think where the, where a vision can be expressed in ways that are deeply connected to values, then you can have the success of advocacy that we’ve discussed.

What about

Naji Gehchan: health equity?

Jami Taylor: I’m so glad we’re talking about health equity because, uh, years ago there really was almost wasn’t a place or a forum or even a, a, a phrase to really capture, uh, Inequality as it’s, it’s very clearly evidenced, uh, across either the healthcare access sphere, whether it’s in communities here in the US or, you know, certainly as those inequalities are present on a global basis.

And so simply the fact that we’re able to talk about health equity as this clear phrase and one that is familiar to probably everyone listening, I think it represents a leap forward in the dialogue that really governs the industry and where it should go. We talked about large cap pharma and MedTech companies, really setting the tone and leadership, setting the tone.

When I think about health equity today, I’m extremely encouraged and really enthusiastic over the number of CEOs that we see emphasizing health equity as a priority, and we see it not only in sort of you, I always worry about sort of glitzy social media posts or what I call the red carpet. The red carpeting of, you know, some of the, um, you know, some of the priorities that we’d like to see, you know, much more substantially connected to business models.

But we see health equity now connected to business models, and that’s evidenced in earnings call transcripts and, and. And the way organizations are being designed right now and the way leadership is being constructed across some of your largest healthcare players. And so I’m very enthusiastic about healthcare equity.

I’m, I’m extremely glad that it’s become such a familiar catchphrase and I believe that it is really is one that has teeth and will for the long term, and will be a driving force, you know, as it is a driving priority right now for many leaders of companies, large and small. Global justice. Okay. I love this word because it’s much more expansive than healthcare.

I love this phrase, global justice. I mean, we talked about some of the fundamental sort of framing tools that can help to give us the lens. That can situate a value system around healthcare access, and that can help to orient innovations and allocation of resources toward innovation for access. Global justice is almost even deeper than everything that we’ve talked about here and certainly much more expansive as a frame.

It suggests that there is something wrong with lack of access. To medicines and it does so, or it prompts us to consider that conclusion in ways that force self-reflection as across especially high income countries that are in many and, and markets and players that are in many ways responsible or at least partly responsible for injustice as it applies to healthcare.

And it’s, you know, in a world of a lot of moral relat, and I’ll certainly, you know, concede that everyone can have different views thinking about healthcare through a lens of global justice. I think it just hits deeper and it prompts us to think harder and it really raises that sense of urgency for moral reasons that I think cascade.

Across many different actors at many different levels within the healthcare ecosystem, and I hope that that justice lens can come more firmly fixed into the collection of lenses that we use to explore access to healthcare challenges going forward. I

Naji Gehchan: certainly, uh, deeply agree with you on, on this piece, and coming from a country where w we felt injustice, where even being in the US in a country where depending on the community or on you feel there is no justice and healthcare is delivered.

So it’s, it’s really, I think, a great point on how you’re framing it. The last word is spread love in organizations.

Jami Taylor: So Naji, I love this because in some ways it’s the thread. Looking back through our whole conversation. Yeah, that really opens, I would almost say doors, but I think that’s too modest. It really opens the floodgates to progress in this area. We talked about stakeholder engagement and patient intimacy. And I mean, I’m almost emotional reflecting on some of the moments where I’ve had the opportunity to sit down with patients who have multi-drug resistant tuberculosis, patients suffering from severe head and neck cancers and places like, like Uganda.

Without access to any kind of sophisticated care and the pain that they have to sit with is so powerful. And in those moments, sometimes it feels like love becomes its own medicinal force, but also this driver to bring. Medicines and tools and resources and expertise to really conquer these issues. It prompts us this sort of spread love approach prompts us to relieve suffering.

And I think that’s what love entails so much. And I think that’s the essence of compassion, which is the essence of access to healthcare, access to medicines. And I’m glad you reminded me of that today.

Naji Gehchan: Oh, thank you. Thank you, Jamie, for sharing those, um, those moments that you’ve lived a and I think we all have this, um, this responsibility as leaders in healthcare to ensure a better just word in in healthcare.

Any final words of wisdom for healthcare leaders around the world?

Jami Taylor: I really believe that we are on the cusp of this healthcare everywhere era. I believe that we are entering a whole new era of biomedical innovation that’s ed up by. All these different factors that I mentioned. Diffusion of diagnostics, the leaps forward, innovation in transportation and logistics. The entry into the space of new tech players and MO technology modalities that can infuse with our work, whether it be on the r and d side or the access side and everywhere in between to really accelerate our progress.

I think it really just takes a pre. Prioritization of innovation for access, with access as an explicit priority of the work we do to drive new medicines. Technologies, medical care approaches forward. And as we think about speed and scale, as has been many times discussed in the context of climate, as we think of speed and scale in the context of healthcare access, and as we take that bigger lens of global justice and the even.

Bigger lens that you’ve mentioned here of really love, compassion, and relief of suffering. There’s no stopping us. I really believe the sky’s the limit as an innovative community and as a community of leaders in the healthcare space today.

Naji Gehchan: Thank you so much, Jamie, for being with me today.

Jami Taylor: Oh, I was thrilled. Thank you so much, Naji. I really appreciate the opportunity. Thank you.

Naji Gehchan: Thank you all for listening to Spreadlove in Organizations podcast! More episodes summarizing the MIT Sloan Healthcare and BioInnovations Conference are available on spreadloveio.com or on your preferred streaming app. Follow “spreadlove in organizations” wherever you listen to podcasts and spread the word around you to inspire others and amplify this movement our World so desperately needs.

Naji Gehchan: Thank you all for listening to Spread Love in Organizations podcast. Drop us a review on your preferred podcast platform

Follow us on LinkedIn and connect with us on spreadloveio.com. We’re eager to hear your thoughts and feedback. Most importantly, spread love in your organizations and spread the word around you to inspire others and amplify this movement, our world so desperately needs.