 So, we're rounding the corner, so my job is to set a little bit of context before we go into the conversation when we were putting this together. We thought about looking at the notion of transformation and the people side of transformation through three lenses, an artistic lens, a scientific lens, and a design lens. So, we don't talk about time or agendas, we talk about flow, and so we're roughly thinking that the flow will go something like, Inamar will talk a little bit about his experience in dynamic transformation, working with and through human beings in his role as Executive Director at Pilabalus, then Neil will come in and talk about his experience in applying science to really deal with this dynamic transformation of human capital that we're seeing, and then Susan will talk about how empathy and this whole notion of how we really have to be human-centered in all our approaches can move beyond product and service and into design for change. Then we have a hypothesis that whatever they talk about there'll be some synergies and we'll start to think about how do we actually pull themes out of this that could be instructive for us as we think about incorporations, how we go about doing that. And then finally we're going to have a lightning round where we say, well, how does this land back on top of the people manifesto which Rick just alluded to? Because it is all about people, I think that's been something we've been talking about all day long and just to look at where we are today, this got stolen. I had this all set up with a quiz and everything else, but that is Jack Welch back in the year 2000 in the annual report said, if the rate of change on the outside is faster than the rate of change on the inside, the end is near. If you can't maintain synchrony with the environment within which you operate, you will kind of regress to amine and mediocrity. And so those are the top 10 global companies in the year 2000. And so a little thought experiment for you is how many are left and what patterns do you see? The pattern is oil, seven out of ten of them have to do with making oil or putting oil into products that use them. And what's happened over the last 6,800 days of creative destruction is number one, the tenure of a company has gone from 60 years down to 18 years on the indices. Since 1919, when there was 30 companies on the Dow Jones index, 54 have flipped in and out, so one flips every two years. And this is actually Martin Reeve's work, but the average lifespan of a company today has gone from 50 years down to 31.6. So the average human being in the United States lived until 78. So the idea of staying with a company for your whole life doesn't quite work anymore because companies are dying faster than humans. And so then if we look at the list today, we've kind of migrated from kind of oil to data being the new oil and the top seven of these companies are all about data and platforms, which you heard a lot about today. The key thing, though, is what's underneath all of this is human beings. And we are paradoxically, Inamar and I, we're talking about this earlier, we're paradoxically kind of the most flexible part of the system because our routines can allow us to adapt and evolve. But at the same time, we're all, I think, feeling the collective crush. So what we want to do is we want to kind of stand back a little bit and be a little bit more anthropological and take a look through an art lens where Inamar is going to talk a little bit about a dance company, a dance company that's been around for 50 years, which is really, really hard to do. And if you want to talk about a competitive industry, you want to talk about creative industry, we have to just reimagine yourself over and over and over again. And some of the principles that they have adhered to since they were born, and that anybody who becomes a part of Pilabalist learns, and how those kind of activate this group creativity and co-creativity that allows this phenomenal enterprise to just keep on keeping on and moving well beyond dance. So for those of you who don't know Pilabalist, just indulge us for a quick minute, and then I'll turn it over to Inamar to talk about his experience as executive director. But hold on to your hats, here we go. What is Pilabalist? The official definition is a sun-loving fungus that lives in cow dung. But Pilabalist is also the name of a dance company that has mixed inventiveness with humor and thrived even with the name for more than 30 years. I don't think there's a choreographer going, none of them will admit it, of course, who hasn't been affected by the reach that Pilabalist has taken into what is possible in the shapes and forms of the human body. During this year's Academy Awards, a billion people watched as 12 performers tumbled across the stage to recreate scenes from Oscar-nominated movies. Didn't you love that? Yes! It was so fantastic. I think some of the pleasure people take from watching our work is this is not just a group of performers engaged in only a personal search. There's a psychological and social interaction that is somehow idealistic. Wonderful thing with Pilabalist is they really seem to know what they're doing, you know, so they have it kind of together and they know that one way or another, my god, even if Spiegelman gets lost, we'll just drag him back and we'll just keep walking, you know. Working with Pilabalist is really great. I mean, it's sort of organized chaos. If someone has a solution, they feel comfortable as sort of a family calling it forth. There is nothing in this bit we put together with Pilabalist that the two of us could do. There's not one moment, there's not one trip. These people have become like family to me, but in the best sense of the word, the family that you choose because you just love their creative spirit and their minds and their brains and their bodies and it's just the best. That's kind of cool. I want to be you, man. No, you don't. We've talked about that. So, look, I've had the opportunity to collaborate with you a couple of times and if you want to experience what we're about to talk about, there is the strategy event later on today. But the first thing Edomar wrote to me is we don't like to plan in advance, we like to do it as we go. And when you're organizing an event like this, it's like, okay, because it's emergent and it has to happen. And that comes from a number of these principles that kind of are core. They're in the DNA of Pilabalist. Could you just tell us what you've been dynamically transforming for 50 years the organization has? How does this come to life for real every day on the dance floor up in Connecticut? It's interesting. I think innovation for us, the margins are so low. It's a non-profit arts organization. There really is no padding. So innovation becomes an absolute necessity on an ongoing basis for survival. And the brand basically is associated with innovation and our jobs working for the brand are to make sure that we keep coming up with good enough ideas to make it seem like the brand is still doing what it's supposed to be doing. And it turns out that the best way to get there is not to sit and have a tremendous far horizon in terms of what it is that you're doing. But to put people in a room for very short periods of time in order to kind of come up with things that are very different from anything you've seen before. So that iteration and improvisation become hugely important in terms of quick innovation and lasting innovation because you really have to come at things from very different points of view. And it's very hard to do that when you do that by committee. Committees tend to tend to trend toward the known, not toward the new. And so in a funny way, I think what we've realized from a management leadership position is that you kind of have to encourage a certain degree of chaos. And it's so anti-intuitive to try to manage through the encouragement of chaos. But in some sense, you want things to be loose enough for people to be able to have what you might think of as a wild idea. And then you want to have a room that allows those wild ideas to be recognized and for people to actually pursue them. And the core I think to that is that the investment of pursuing an idea is always much cheaper than an American Enterprise generally makes it. So what generally you find in the American Enterprise is when someone has an idea that everyone thinks is a good idea, an enormous amount of planning and work and evaluation and research and all of these things are put into it. It turns into committee. It turns into approval fictitious budget spreadsheets that don't really mean anything. But somehow, everyone has to prove to everyone that it's a good idea on paper as opposed to saying why don't we take three hours and a bunch of cardboard and just do it in three hours and we'll know so much more about whether this is a good idea or isn't a good idea in three hours with cardboard than we would if we actually spent an enormous amount of time putting it through all of the stress testing and market justifications and everything that we want in order to initiate something new. So somehow letting go looser hold, less control, less clear planning, more response, more alacrity allows for a much better survival in today's climate, which is our experience for 50 years, but it feels like it's like the revenge of the nerds. We've been saying this for 50 years and finally people are like maybe we should do it this way. So it's been very interesting to sort of see the world turn toward a process that we've been cultivating for a long time and to understand that it's actually applicable in many ways to a very efficient process of innovation that can be applied to other fields. Cool. Thanks a little more. We'll come back around, but so we saw a little bit of you showey you doey, more do less talk. So these all become essentially rules of thumb kind of farmer's almanac kind of ideas that everyone lives with that allows that process to end up generating lucky accidents more reliably than not having them. That's cool. So you brought up this organized chaos. It's like it seems in this world that we're living in. The rate of change is the problem. It's not speed. It's the rate of change and anybody who's a physics masier, it's speed. The next derivative is acceleration. The next derivative is jerk. The next derivative is snap. The next derivative is crackle. And the next derivative is pop. So when we talk about the rate of change, we're actually talking about a much more exponential degree than just things speeding up. And on the other side of the equation is the more connected we become. You go from kind of a simple, predictable outcome to a complicated one that might be multivariate, but you can statistically figure out probability paths to complexity where the minute you interact in the system you change the system so it's hard to predict ahead of time to chaos. So roughly speaking the trajectory of uncertainties heading towards chaos and pop, right? And then we're kind of on this journey in trajectory. And so in a way leaning into chaos and kind of working back is what I'm hearing from you. What does it mean today in a world where we're thinking about there's a huge unemployment and yet there's not people to fill the jobs. That if we start thinking about the human side of this equation and the fact that the world's moving so fast and we say well gosh we can't do the upskilling as fast and now we'll just do you know an annual income, a basic income for everybody and that should be fine. This is something that Neil really is dealing with with Allegious, one of the largest staffing companies in the world. And so beyond just the kind of the mundane of oh we need more bodies in the in the company to do work etc. It's how do we get the man machine interface correct? How do we leverage technology in the best way possible? These are all the challenges that you're dealing with Neil and and with your permission I wanted to show a little bit of what a company really looks like because we tend to think about hiring and headcount and where will they fit and what group will they be in and who's got headcount and who doesn't and who should hire and who doesn't. This is a fantastic rendering I think Autodesk is really good at kind of visualizing data and what I'd like to do is just show this to you. This is a you can find it online it's called org or chart and essentially a couple of the data scientists at Autodesk they took the human capital data and they basically said each little circle is a human being if an employee leaves they add it on if an employee moves it moves over and here you're going to see Autodesk from 2007 to 2011 just to give you a sense of what an organization looks like so there in the middle is the CEO and every node there is a human being and this is day by day okay so so if we think about permanent static hierarchical org chart I mean nothing could be further from the truth and all these human beings carbon-based life forms that are represented in these nodes here it's not static right it's not static and and we're about to see here an org shift so you'll see acquisitions come in and they come towards the center and they get pushed out boom there was another acquisition that just came in you'll see a real org here and there's another acquisition that came in and got rejected this is culture in action and it's almost like a biological cell and Neil's job is to kind of help not just Autodesk but all of their suppliers and everybody else to actually bring the human capital into a system that we might perceive to be really static but it actually looks like that so how could he possibly run his organization it's a good thing he's in charge of digital transformation when his client operates this way my heart is palpitating just thinking about your job but the good news is you you've applied science and you've you've looked at how you're going to do this and you've created something really cool meal I think called center teams would you would you care to share a little bit of your journey of the center team incubator story and yeah you deal with this reality absolutely I'm happy to share some of our stories so we actually live this change and I think the first thing we needed to do before we could help our clients is as we say eat our own dog food and change our own organization first so a little bit of our journey we were doing quite well that we're in the staffing and recruiting business it's it's not rocket science I mean we call it get a wreck fill a wreck it's been the same thing for about at least 35 years of existence that we've been in and then after the financial meltdown we've been on a growth trajectory that has been unprecedented for us so we were doing just fine and about seven years into it we tend to be a paranoid group and we kind of looked at each other and said something's not right we're way too happy where we're getting real fat and something something just doesn't feel right and as you look at the industry we're in in the last five years we've never been as a services company we've never been more disrupted by technology ever so in our industry technology helps create a closer I guess relationship between the candidate and the hiring manager and for years we were the agent in between and if you can create and take the friction out of that relationship you can imagine we were feeling pretty marginalized and squeezed out so in 2017 we kind of looked at ourselves and said we really got to figure out how to change you know not just digitized our processes I mean the digitization effort was way underway but most of what we were doing was very internally focused and it became about operational efficiencies and not really transformation and those are great if you want to maintain profit margins and if you want to maintain profitability but your customers and clients don't really care you're not bringing any value to them just because you're making more money per head if you will so we needed to create new ideas we needed to create new new products new services and we needed a better way to do that so we did what any great organization does is we basically went out and read everything we could read on the planet and basically settled on two management models one was Accelerate by John Cotter it's a great book we needed to figure out how to re-energize the entrepreneurial spirit and entrepreneurial organization against the hierarchies to make them equal on the playing field and get back to our roots the other was Zone to Win by Jeffrey Moore so it was very that was probably the most inspirational book to me because it really taught me how to figure out how do we innovate in all the sectors of the organization I'll channel Ray Dalio a little bit here and hopefully we can kind of have thoughtful disagreement but he believes you can't disrupt yourself disruption happens by using your strengths and going and focusing in somebody else's business and creating new businesses for yourself and fighting inertia can be very very difficult trying me trying to tell seven presidents that you need to change it's a very difficult process so we settled on those management models but we basically realized that it doesn't really matter what kind of strategy you have if you don't really understand who the champions are in your organization who the change agents are and to be very honest who the real leadership is like who gets s done in your business you're never going to change and so we we owe a lot to Tony and another consultant who actually opened her eyes to this but he also recommended he said hey why don't you put a little science to this and he recommended a consulting company called CL advisors and they're here and they have a great scientific model called an organizational network analysis and ONA and that was kind of the movement that you saw before and then this is a mapping of us of how work or how things actually get done in organization so we surveyed the top 900 leaders we mapped the organization completely and we really identified the people that could actually drive change through the organization and really make it more transformational than operationally efficient we then took that data and we still use it today because I run the incubator and as we kind of developed new digital business models we're using those people that we identified in the ONA and they're actually leading the center teams and do running very small sprint based experiments for us where we can actually try a lot of things we used to make really big bets and probably your organizations do like we would say all right we're going to put $3 million towards this and hope to God everything was going to work out now we run hundreds of experiments at I don't know 50 to $70,000 a piece and we fail fast we fail forward we learn we change we pivot and it's we're still in our infancy stages we've been doing it about a year but it's really changed the culture of our organization and there is a real strong grasp movement within within Allegious right now to try to find that next blue ocean if you will so we can go out and slay that billion dollar whale that everybody wants to go get so that's our story what I love about Neil is like he gets all the business aspects in but we got to I want to pick on one little thing there that the leadership one in the middle I think was a bit of a revelation for us where the question we asked was something like if you're really having to deal with transformation and change who would you follow yeah and you found some interesting stuff there that there were a bunch of people that the group identified as people they would follow that weren't necessarily in a succession plan is that right yeah that 50% of them weren't even in the succession plan so it was kind of an unintended outcome that we identified a whole bunch of new leaders were like we've got to get these people really switched on lit and kind of engaged in what we're doing it also did a wonderful thing by you know we were able to kind of take the hidden leaders and identify what we call the true believers and basically we whittled it down to there's about 55 people in our organization of 20,000 that really drive 80% of what we do which was amazing so those are the people I spend a lot of time with you know I'm on the phone with them I get them engaged I show them all the mockups we do because they're believers in change and it just is kind of viral how's it as it happens to the organization so it's been really cool the other thing it does is identifies the skeptics so you know who your enemies are and you know how to treat them you don't have to like eliminate them but you know you have to like you gotta work with them and you can figure out who the most influential skeptics are get to them before you actually start to launch something something transformational or change and it's made it very seamless and we're seeing a lot of success it's still new but we're pretty excited about it cool so moving right along Susan I mean I don't think idea needs much introduction but clearly a lot of what we were talking about today I was sitting beside Susan and it's like yes, yes, yes it's the it's the empathy part of the human system and truly understanding literally walking in other shoes and being the anthropologist if you will and so you're well known for you know Dean Hovey and company coming up with the mouse and the chair and you had your Leslie Stahl moment with the lovelace but so did you with your with your shopping cart if I remember sure yeah but Susan Susan's had kind of a strategy role working with Tim for quite some time and then has kind of stepped that up kind of again putting things into action not unlike Neil through something called the Colab and I've just got a little brief piece on Colab and then we'll go to Susan in terms of what her experience is is kind of how we deal with dynamic transformation it has been an extraordinary week we have all of these extraordinary member companies that are here really looking at how we can be re-envisioning the food system and applying circular principles to a regenerative future we're here to take a very audacious but also very intangible concept of circular economy we're trying to take that to the next level and actually make it much more tangible and concrete circularity is so closely linked with innovation and it's innovation that's the path forward for us as we face really daunting challenges in every aspect of our economy the huge light bulb was the build something build a prototype it generates so much more positive feedback than the distant idea which generally gets crushed or amazing traditionally talking is so much easier it's easier to sit around the table and we found ourselves doing that at several points and so breaking out of that and actually starting to build was kind of a revelatory moment for all of us so Susan I had the opportunity to come up to to Boston with you and CoLab and kind of I don't know think about redesigning government policy right and so we've gone from empathic design for products through empathic design for service and then even into empathic design for change you know for organizations but you're really with CoLab if I get it right it's almost an ecosystem application of empathic design to change systems am I overreaching there or no absolutely and it's it's very exciting to talk about this here today hearing a lot of the comments earlier on from Rita Marshall so many great folks that have inspired our thinking to get to sit on the stage with you all I'll start a little bit maybe in the here now Tony and talk about CoLab and what we're up to today and then if we have a couple of moments at the end I'll tell you a little bit about the journey of doing change work at IDEO and how IDEO thinks about dynamic transformation CoLab is a new venture inside of IDEO that's been around for about five years and our tagline is that we're a platform for collaborative innovation and what makes that special is that instead of working with an organization in a one-on-one capacity doing a consulting project for them we actually bring stakeholders to the table from startups, nonprofits corporations of all size and governments in some cases and they're willing to work together and they're willing to have for the most part open IP agreements and learn faster and so what's really phenomenal about this is that if you think about it so many of these systemic problems are so difficult to know where to start and there are very few places where groups can come together and actually make things and prototype things and try to make real concrete progress and so the COLA was almost an accidental idea IDEO forever in the 40 years it's been around has been asked to work on the future of something and at some point our two co-founders got kind of bored of answering that question they realized that all the technologies and things they were being asked to grapple with were getting ever more complicated than ever and it was frankly just kind of wasteful and resource intensive to do that for one organization when most of that stuff just might sit on a shelf in a binder and not get used and so this idea of bringing people together and learning about the same hard problem was really at the core of COLA what this looks like today is that we're increasingly taking on societal problems through the lens of edge technology tackling them with stakeholders from every aspect so in the food video you saw people from every corner of the system coming together to tackle a really difficult change like the move from a linear destructive economy to a circular regenerative economy and so we're looking at ways that emerging technology can get applied to problems that matter to our members and so the last thing I'll say about COLAB from my experience working with that team is that there's three dimensions to this that really re-resonate in terms of transformation the first I've already hit on which is that a lot of the R&D process nowadays is inherently wasteful most of these big ticket expensive research projects that people embark on don't need to be proprietary there is a time and a place for having patents and IP and things like that but for the most part the learning journeys that we're going on actually we're able to go on with other people and we'll be far more effective we'll be able to learn quicker and make faster if we actually bring other people into that conversation the second pillar is really informed actually by some of Rita McGrath's work who we heard this morning about the concept of arena and competition the lines between industries are really blurring and it's actually increasingly difficult to really innovate if you stay within your guardrails and so by working together with executives from different sectors you're much more likely to have a groundbreaking insight about a blind spot or something that you've failed to realize and the third dimension to all of this is frankly the thing that's probably the most core in IDO's DNA which is making and prototyping and expressing ideas in new formats I like to think of a phrase I heard describing the golden age of scenario planning from the 1960s at Shell with our ARID guys and those guys this idea of helping people create glimpses from the future right creating visceral expressions and prototypes of things that are so compelling and moving that we can't unsee them and not only might we as researchers and designers see them we can then go bring executives and rank and file employees into a context where they can also see those things and then be moved by them so that's some of what we're up to it's incredibly exciting I think it really works when we have great partners and like-minded organizations who are willing to come and work with us and we think we're just at the beginning of a very next exciting chapter for IDO with this I just want a quick follow-up with you on that one though because when we were speaking now you're saying there's another one coming up and like demand is really high but another thing you said to me that really kind of drove home was they know that it's about the process not the outcome they're not necessarily saying I'm going to hold you accountable to come up with Neil might if he was in one of these like where's my next billion dollar whale but in general they're saying it's the process and then the curation of bringing people together and then the empathic inquiry the shared empathic inquiry that's what they're coming for is that right? Yes that's definitely fair to say in some cases there is a direct through line through so typically in these cases we're working in one-week design sprints and there are examples of products that have been commercialized very quickly and very profitably right an opportunity that we saw years ahead of the market in the case of one product and so we definitely for some customers and partners need those case studies and we need the rigor and we need the metrics but for the most part people are approaching this as an innovation portfolio and they're realizing that when they're sending people to these sprints or to be on these teams they're getting home runs either directly or indirectly and they're learning far faster so really things like the Colab are helping them build a culture of fast learning and design at a scale that would just be impossible through a traditional transformation project so I think that answers your question I guess as much about the process as any product they would create so now we're at the part of the conversation where this is what I call the MOH cloud this is the miracle occurs here so in those conversations I'm just going to kind of let my mouth speak without thinking too much but one of the patterns that I saw immediately was this notion of quick iterative sprints Neil you've gone from the three million thing down Itamar you're like if we're going to come up with Shadowland that could have literally come up in a three hour thing with some cardboard and look at what it's done so to speak and I think even Susan with you at an ecosystem level it was even there in the video that said it's amazing when you build things like let's not spreadsheet the idea let's see what the thing is because in the making of the thing our shared sense of understanding gets better so any comments about it's easy to say but practically maybe Neil you first you've gone from we invest three million dollars and we have these big kind of I'm sure a stage gate process and now you're you know every time I talk to you man it's crazy it's great I love it but it's so different can you can you what does that feel like inside a a big organization scary, lonely, chaotic because you're always fighting against a hierarchy a little bit you know but I mean the whole point of it is to really be able to learn I think Anna said that earlier and because I mean you can have the best laid out plans in the world and then as soon as it hits the real world I mean it all goes to hell right I mean we all know that so it's like you better be able to pivot quickly and kind of absorb and synthesize those learnings and issues in front of you right away and it's going to take you in the right direction if you have smart people and you have people that are really switched on that really want to get it done they're going to take it and kind of fold it into the process or product or whatever you're doing and they're going to move another direction I mean it just the organization has to accept and allow that to happen you know so you don't get tissue rejection and you know my boss is in the in the audience and he's been a big advocate for this and you know I report directly up to him so he he is the president of the president so I get a lot of leeway they set us up outside the organization you know we don't even follow the procurement processes I've got a merry band of misfits of about 11 people and we're just in there doing stuff you know and then we use that network or we call the volunteer army to go out and help execute for us you know so and they're all loving it and not one of them that I talked to is an executive you know do you think yes or no answer just so I can get to the others if you didn't know who to go to in that ONA that would be as successful in other words the skeptics or the followers or it's hard to know because we can't empirically test them it's hard to know it would take so much longer because I'd spend so much time trying to find the right person got you the data kind of brought that to me and said these are the people got you know and and they're they're a varied background because it's just the way data works right it's it's agnostic right so they just pulled these people I mean I have marketing people finance people sales people operations people and it's just a a cross section of the it's almost like a microcosm of the organization so I can go to anybody I need whether it's illegal or and I don't have to sell them on the idea they're already bought into change yeah got you yeah so you come up with Shatterland or any of those other wonderful productions you do or you design a scoreboard I mean we can't even get into the other creative services that you do or the fact that you you're building a whole community up there in Connecticut but have you actually ever really done the same performance twice be honest like if I go down to deep back and I see it one day if they're operating on these principles are you are you is it like a a piano concerto where you're trying to hit every note or if you really look at it is it in the same ilk but different each time because it's driven by the by the principles do you see my question yeah are you dynamically transforming all the time to some degree live performance necessitates that because you're always in some kind of reactive state where things go wrong people need to be coordinated things don't always go the same way and as we always say the only difference between technology and people is that technology does a really bad job of covering up its mistakes whereas people are pretty good if you slip at making it look like I meant to do that and it's a huge asset to working on a people based thing is that things that didn't go the way they were planned can still go really really well and with technology when things don't go the way they were planned it usually doesn't go that well so I think part of what we are looking for is to keep the mindset of our dancers in an optimal place there's an enormous we believe there's an enormous undervaluing of the noise of mindset that actually prevents the person that you hired who's terrific at what they do from providing you with the service for which you hired them because there's something really small that's just ruining their day over and over again that is the last thing you'd think about as having the impact on the bottom line and so ultimately how a person feels when they're doing their job turns out to have an enormous impact on what the productivity of that person is and ultimately that redounds directly to the bottom line and it's a weird kind of indirect thinking to try to understand that unless you're really getting people to be their best selves in the job you're not getting the job that you hired them to do and it's a very important part of what we spend time thinking about because you both have a certain kind of iterative improvisational process to get to good ideas Shadowland for example an ad executive who was working for Hyundai in Texas called me up and said could you make a car commercial without a car in it and I said could we have a sheet to hang up so that we could make shadows behind the sheet he said well I don't see why not and then we tried it and we ended up making a car commercial it wasn't our idea it wasn't it was a guy in Texas who was an executive for Hyundai and then once it got executed we realized we had stumbled into a completely new way of making something and then very shortly after that the Academy Awards called and said we just saw this car commercial oh my god can you do x and then you kind of get more input and data if someone else going this is really weak guys I think we may have stumbled into something and that led to you know essentially over the next 10 years the company selling $150 million of shadows wow you just I feel like I'm a shadow salesman you know what I mean like I feel like I just saw my eyes that's awesome that's cool listen the clock says zero which really sucks because I want to keep talking Ricardo standing there before we we go we have a couple of questions here that would just okay go quickly through them so we can interact so the first one it's it's for you Susan it's how do you in ideal establish and keep a psychological safety environment to stimulate ideas and interactions freely without losing productivity awesome and we work really hard on this and I think it's a I mean it could be a whole a whole other talk but I'll give a quick summary and we have our cultures and values which we really work hard to uphold we actually didn't write them down for 30 years so if the person who asked this question is interested I can find me in the break and I'll I'll send you a link to them but we have our values which we both use with each other we call each other out in real time if people are not upholding them we've actually integrated them into our career journeys that's one really important dimension of protecting psychological safety as well as kind of a system we call the flights system for culture which is an onboarding journey into any project or program it is a pre-flight a mid-flight and a post-flight and we have really trained kind of Sherpa's mentors spiritual people that are going to help you have conversations about how you're working together because this is such a critical thing that we can't exist without the psychological safety to take risks and to innovate and so a lot a lot of time is spent in an IDO project space or office or on the client side actually having discussions about how we're doing and how we're feeling I think my own training in T groups and doing interpersonal dynamics was a big help when I came to IDO in being able to sort of read the energy in a room and I think if you like that sort of mindful leadership it's it's hard work but it's a really fantastic place to to spend part of your career thank you the second question is chaos is a raw material for a new organization of things right or wrong so what is your and there is no no one they suggested to answer so is chaos good bad does it help us does it not if it's there we have to respond you like the chaos piece in the morning seems like chaos is not the goal though right yeah it's not like let's make it chaotic it's just a creative room tends to feel chaotic but a chaos is a by-product of a certain kind of free thinking that one often tries to shut down because it feels out of control and often we find that the kind of chaotic process finds a way organically to kind of come to a point it's not forever Neil are you because I know when I talk to you are you feeling this kind of when we chat and now I'll just declare publicly on the whole live stream but you're kind of like it's pretty chaotic but it's cool but that's not how it yeah well chaos creates is creativity right so I mean it's like harnessing that chaos and using it in a positive way to create new things for your organization that's that's the beauty of it and you know being okay with the white space and the chaos is where you've got to be if you really want to do something fantastic and new so I mean I I think it's amazing you got to have the right mindset for it that a lot of people aren't wired that way they want to be told what to do and you just do it but if you can find the right people and you can get them together and give them the space to do it great things can happen