 Without any further ado, I'm going to move to our first speaker, welcome Irene Patrick. Dr. Irene Patrick is the Senior Director of Industrial Innovation Internet of Things group at Intel. Intel being our most recent Platinum member actually, so we were delighted to have Intel join at that level in April this year. Irene joined Intel in 2015 and focuses on emerging technology, social and global trends, and their combined impact on the industrial space. Her work highlights the industrial Internet of Things, edge computing, the transition to intelligent manufacturing, and the needs of the future workforce. 3D printing and distributed manufacturing and the new business models that are enabled by intelligent manufacturing. A long list of things are involved in there Irene. Today Irene will look at what it takes to drive and scale a project in the Internet of Things space. So a warm welcome from, virtual welcome from the open group to Irene Patrick. Over to you. Thanks. So today I'm going to share with you and I've left lots of time for questions and if you have questions as I'm speaking please interrupt. I'd love to have this be a discussion rather than a formal presentation, talk at them kind of a thing. So what I want to talk to you today about is the the challenges with really standing up projects we call it projects at the edge of understanding. So when I take AI and when I combine it with IoT technologies what does that really mean for standing up a project for really making, having it be successful and then having it be able to scale. So what I'm going to share with you today is a lot of work that we've done over the last couple of years with over 400 participants. So this is it's not my opinion specifically, it's not Intel's opinion, it's really practitioners who are technologists in manufacturing companies and the technologists in ecosystem companies that support them. In the effort to be brief and piffy I've tried to make a lot of this very specific but I put material in the backup so if there are things that interest you there is additional material in the backup if you if you wanted some of the details. So I'm going to talk about a couple of things. First of all we did two years of study my face my colleague safe McCrary and I of over 400 people we call it thinking in the wild so to speak. In phase one we really looked at what the industry, what was happening in factories, what was going on within the factory walls but also thinking from the factory floor to the C suite in terms of factory operations and what we found in that study in 2018 is that it really was the co-evolution of workers and manufacturing operations. When we looked at that we said well that's great to know but how can we as a technology company how can we better understand what strategies and tactics actually help us accelerate these smart projects and that's sort of what we refer to as the AI plus IOT projects we just call them smart projects to make it easier. So we have a series of six different seven different reports that are out all of which or all but one of which is available publicly so if you're interested in the backup there is additional information about those reports but today I'm going to focus on one of the challenges of taking these smart projects and what is from the technologist's point of view and I have a graphic in the back that talks about who those technologists are and why they matter and what kind of backgrounds they have but right now what I want to do is really focus on what I'll call the smart project mindset and the smart project mindsets are important to understand because they really emphasize who's the expert innovator who's the innovation maker what about the production person what about the process watcher and to really understand how to stand up these projects we have to understand the kinds of people who are participating in the the the expert learner is really all about smart innovation and ideas around manufacturing this person this expert learner on the left is probably the most seasoned person that you would see and this person is somebody who teaches him or herself as they go and is always looking for new ideas and new ways of doing things these people become very important on teams however we also have to think about the fact that these people can sometimes get ahead of their technologies the the innovation maker really is much more around I'm the deep person who wants to try new ideas and I really want to have I've got too much chat going on here I really want to have a better sense of of the production I want to have a better sense of the manufacturing and I want to understand how I make it how to improve those processes the production champion really is the person who understands the production environment very very deeply we would call this the OT expert and then you've got those process washers over there on the right hand side and those process washers really are a little bit more conservative than the other three mindsets and those process washers are working looking for where is risk going to be introduced into my process how can I make this robust how can I not bring down the rest of the factory or the rest of the line and I implement this so you can see that all four of those mindsets become very important different stages of these smart projects what do we know about the projects and about the challenges well on the left hand side and this actually surprised my colleagues faith and I when we look at the recent project types much more of them are in production than we anticipate almost 61 percent of them are in production we I'm going to come to this point in a moment but we think that a lot of those production projects that people describe to us last year in our study really have to do with some of the low hanging fruit that I could implement on an existing machine you can see however that there's a large percentage of pilot prototype and proof of concept projects that are being done that are really pushing the envelope more than those that are in production right now and I'll call to mind there were 193 technologists that were responding to this so we're not talking about a small sample and those technologists are spread across a wide variety of industries and a wide variety of roles and companies interestingly the areas of biggest challenge that that technologists told us when we talk about the different areas of a project it turns out that the biggest challenges are coming as deployment and maintain maintenance comes up and we think this is really important because most of the technology companies are really focused on how do I define the program the project how do I architect it how do I develop it and develop the tools to support it and then we sort of say okay we're done now manufacturers go and deploy it and we think that that's a really serious problem because the majority of problems are happening at the deployment level and at the maintenance level that the sustainability aspect and and the reason for this we think is captured in that far right graph the expertise versus the responsibilities we're really seeing people trying to deploy smart projects where their expertise far exceeds I mean far underperforms what they need to do so for example when you get down to things like real time or when you get down to things like computer vision you can see the experience the people who have experience in the buff color are far fewer than those who are actually responsible to deploy it and we think this is a serious issue certainly my own teams are now looking at the kind of developer toolkits that we need to be producing and the kinds of supporting materials we need to be making available but we think that the ecosystem in general needs to be much more aware of what we call an unanticipated developer whose expertise doesn't quite keep pace with the responsibilities that that developer or a deployer is responsible for so this one is actually related to what I was talking about earlier when we pull these 190 some technologists less than 50% as they thought their smart project of today had a 50% shot of making it to production and we think this is a stunning number it might not surprise many of you however because we see pilot purgatory but but we have to then say well what causes pilot purgatory why is it so difficult to go from project at the pilot scale to actual scale and then long-term sustainability and what we're finding what technologists told us is the problem is that it's not a single problem it's really a holistic problem in other words I have to be thinking about people processes organization culture and organization structure and the technologies and each one of those in and of itself has its own problems but when you put them all together in these smart projects we find that it becomes really challenging and when I when we think about on the right hand side the top factors that people told us we're driving this complexity not surprising the majority said operational technology is a real serious problem my company and my processes are different than other companies in different sectors we're all dealing with legacy systems but look at how far people come people become a difficult challenge because they have a skill set different a skill set a lack of skill sets they don't have a statistical mindset or a data driven mindset and then you think about enterprise systems well enterprise systems have been around for a long time the problem is that smart technologies when we start thinking about these projects we don't necessarily think all the other systems they have to touch and so our our our respondents told us it's really a system of systems approach and to get the sustainability I have to be looking at at the outset I have to be planning for all of the systems that my smart project is going to touch or rely on to actually provide insights and because of that participants told us technologists said we need a clear roadmap to go from pilot or poc to scale once we have that clear vision of what digital technologies can do for our company then we can begin to work incrementally and this becomes really important because you'll often hear fail fast you often hear start start small fail fast we believe it's think big and then start small fail fast learn quickly so it's a little bit different but if you don't have a real appreciation for where you think digital technologies can make a difference then everything looks like progress until it doesn't connect okay so what does this mean well this really means that uncertainty is the new normal and I'll indicate you're going to see quotes of several different times here in this presentation these are all quotes from technologists directly if we've made any kinds of additions you see it in little carrots so these are their verbate and words and this person this program engineer in actually an operating technologist in a manufacturing environment says the biggest challenge is uncertainty in the technologies they just keep advancing and we need consistency so what they're basically saying is there's a mismatch between what ecosystem partners are giving us and what manufacturing technologies can actually consume so 55 percent of the technologists said we're wondering how was the technology going to integrate and scale in their target environment and do we have the best mix of this technology for their purpose would a project deliver real benefit in the long run and this becomes really critical because often we think about smart projects and their point value when we think about ROI we don't think about how to re-envision the process so we we calculate we tend to calculate ROI in very what I'll call myopic terms and that's a serious problem and technologists themselves recognize if I can describe business value I'm unlikely to get my project funded and then the last one is what resources are really going to be needed and what will the workflow look like and this is an interesting one because IoT projects span a lot more traditional functional responsibilities than a more traditional upgrade would and so what we see is technologists working with people who are out of their functional silos who are out of their general work stream and workflow of people they collaborate with and so you've got a lot of relationship building that has to happen at the outset to really think about all the places this technology might touch the the operations because of that some of the projects really are a different breed they they really the technologists said smart technologies may be thoroughly described and I would question that because we're not hearing a lot about thoroughly described smart technologies but what is it described what people really care about is what's their interaction with other technologies and this person links it to it's like a pharmaceutical which is well described but which can have unexpected consequences when combined with other pharmaceuticals and we're hearing this is one of the biggest challenges to successfully going from pilot or PFC to scale and that is I didn't anticipate all of the other changes that would be necessary to truly achieve the ROI that was predicted often by vendors by the way I didn't really think about gee what will I need to have is as as databases that will have to interact what will I have to have this bandwidth if I have constrained bandwidth how will I have to think about computing at the edge versus sending all my data to a cloud if I have constrained bandwidth how to identify which data really matters versus which is sort of interesting to have and so the biggest challenge that we're seeing frequently for projects that don't go to scale is that we didn't think carefully enough about the infrastructure needs underlying that technology that smart technology so the smart project even when it's successful often doesn't yield the ROI we want to see so here's what we call the eyeball but this really captures we ask technologies to tell us what was their primary responsibility in terms of technologies that they were using on these smart projects and then to tell us what other secondary technologies were they required to know to be able to deploy that smart project so the way to read this is the larger the dots around the circumference the more common that was called out as a primary responsibility by technologists the lines between them indicate the amount of time that particular technology was paired with another and what you can see here and we took out all of the secondary relationships these are only the primaries when we had the secondary relationships in there it was a black circle and what this really calls to mind is that solutions aren't a single technology smart technology smart projects require combinations of technologies and frequently combinations of vendors and this becomes really problematic for a manufacturer trying to stand up a smart project when managing those vendors finding those vendors is often a really out of their comfort zone so so these technologies come from multiple vendors and the legacy systems and the infrastructure in which these processes sit didn't anticipate all of these interdependencies so it's not just that I have a legacy system or a legacy piece of equipment or that I have constrained infrastructure resources it's that I haven't even thought about all of the places these smart projects will touch so this is one that came very clear and these are once again these are technologists telling us this isn't purchasing this isn't a senior leadership CEO level this is the technologists themselves and we basically are finding that the vendor relationship which has driven most of our our interactions has really been a transaction it's been a handoff of goods and services for a particular fee under a particular contract during a particular time what we're finding with smart projects is that that's a recipe for disaster it really is much more about building a relationship with the partner who can share goals who understands the vision who has a clear idea of what you're trying to accomplish as the manufacturer and who has a a commitment to helping you see this through so it's not just a set it and leave it and and good luck it really has to be much more of a partnership and what we're hearing from technologists those projects that were the most successful really had an ongoing partnership management approach where they work with vendors and they work with them over time so at different phases of a project you might have different needs from a vendor and your vendor has to be as committed to that project as you are and understanding that upfront and building that into your contract language becomes really important and then you have to this is this is one that's getting companies into trouble right now manufacturing companies we have to be balancing our external sourcing to stand up smart projects with our internal resources to grow bench strength one of the things technologists have told us is that my company is so worried about being late to the party or missing out that they're bringing an external consultants they're bringing an external experts to stand up these smart projects and gee i as the expert in my company and left doing the grunt work and so i'm doing boring projects and i'm not learning how to stand these smart projects up and so we think that companies need to be aware of this this this tension because getting things done quickly doesn't always get things done in a sustainable way so here's another one when we think about the the role of vendors and the interaction between vendors and and manufacturers here's a consultant a strategist from a consultancy saying i think the biggest single request i would have is that documentation and literature improved and what do people really want well they want to get out of the marketing hype they want to get out of the jargon they want to get past high level two paragraph descriptions of their projects too much deeper pilot descriptions so i want to i want to hear not just success stories that are at a very high level i want to hear what didn't work so people want easy to understand actionable up-to-date content and messaging and and these these these things are things i think you can use as a way to say is my vendor do i have the right vendors is my vendor really being as um as let's see as responsive to me as possible so content that bridges technical silos also becomes very important remember i said earlier that i have content i mean i have people working on smart projects but often these are are creating teams that are outside of my normal working groups so i have to have content that helps bridge some of those technical silos it has to be much more detailed with better examples and tutorials with real-world examples and then the other two things that are important is companies technologists have told us that forums are very important when they think about where to go for information they're really not thinking about i'm going to go to my vendors website and i'm going to read all their marketing materials they they really want interactive peer-based communities such as open group to provide them with the ability to to be interlinked to have discussions where you can actually sort of discuss both the pros and the cons the positives and the negatives and you can do it in bite-sized chunks so i can get material just in time when i'm ready to consume it and and i think that technology companies have done a pretty poor job of this overall my own included by the way so here's another piece of it that's that's very important to standing up smart projects and that's the complexity takes engagement not just buying we hear about buying all the time but it's not that's not enough and in fact i'm working with a very large company right now helping them think about their digitization strategy and taking some of the work we've done and saying how could we roll this out for our own company and and what they're finding is people even when they have an appetite to change are fearful of some of that change and and really want a chance to work much more at the beginning when strategies are being talked about and discussed than they want to have strategies imposed on them so what are people asking for well first of all to get engagement you have to provide context i really have to understand what groups need to interact and i have to be able to tell those groups why they need to interact i have to find much more collaborative approach that brings these teams together and it creates a set of stakeholders that share a common vision that share a common mission and often those stakeholders are in a what we call a tribe they're in a much less formalized group than we're typically used to working in and then finally we found that the best projects really focus on the why of projects to bring others along in other words why am i undertaking this what value will it have why do i think that you as a particular line worker or technologist should become involved in this how will you benefit how will our company benefit so we really have to get past the we can do this three times faster or we if we introduce this particular type of compute we can process things more quickly that really it is considered behind the scenes i really don't care if i'm the manufacturer i really don't care if i can do it two times faster or 2.2 times faster or three times faster what i care about is what results i can get more quickly and how those results lead to business value and so we have to change the way the conversation is and we have to do it very early and we have to do it continuously over time so it's not a one and done here either often in fact this was true of the very big company we're working with a heavy manufacturer they had change management plans but those change management plans didn't happen until after they were down the pike of saying here's what we're going to do and oh line workers here's what we're going to provide to you and what they found is that those change management plans were inadequate to really create the engagement necessary to accelerate the adoption so what really sets successful projects apart is the ability of the early project team to ask the right questions at the start of the project and i have a list of questions that people told us were the most important things to address at the beginning of the project at the in the backup in the interest of time i didn't put it into the main presentation but i think it's worth a really careful look because many of these questions are what are we trying to accomplish so they'll start with the technology they start with what are we trying to accomplish why does this bring business value to it how to who does this bring business value so who are the first kinds of stakeholders should we engage only then do we start talking about what possible technology alternatives might help us who are the vendors we might go after and why and then how are we going to build relationships with those vendors so that this smart project isn't a standalone island in our manufacturing plant that we can actually figure out how it links over time to other kinds of projects so i'll leave this is the last slide that i have is as part of the major main presentation because i wanted to leave time for questions so i wanted to leave some takeaways so if you are a technologist either within the manufacturing operation or in an ecosystem company vendor that supports them there's some things we found that are really differentiating between those that are very successful and those that are less successful and the first one is you have to be able to move quickly without falling into that scheduled trap of oh my gosh i can't get behind schedule early on projects tend to be a bit behind schedule because people had over over rose the expectations of what was possible you need to focus on the problem and you need to be able to figure out how you're going to measure that value and you need to think about how you can do that in a minimum viable approach you can always add on bells and whistles over time as you become more comfortable with the base solution it's much more difficult to take a very complex solution and deploy it in a way that you can achieve all of that value upfront we've not seen that happen very very successfully by too many companies you need to aim not just for buy-in but the engagement that i was talking about and you need to find and nurture a tribe and and what is a tribe a tribe is a group of people who come together with a combination they often organize in less formal ways so they're not necessarily all answering to the same functional silo they're often not all of the same pedigrees or background or experience and this tribe comes together because they have a belief that this smart project can really make a difference you need to nurture that tribe because that's the group that actually creates the the bridges the barrier spanners over time and you need to think about not just who's leading the initiative but who's going to influence it and how do i bring those influencers on early so that they can become engaged and influence the rest of their colleagues who need to be bought into this over time you need to cultivate what we call connection bridges and once again i've got very deep descriptions of these in the backup but the connection bridges are really the people who bring an interesting view but they also bring a view over time across functions and often across organizations and and we have heard from technologists particularly vendor technologists that understanding who the connection bridges are is critical to a to accelerating successful deployment of smart projects and then finally you need to embrace what we call connection independence these are the people who are skeptical who bring a skeptical point of view and who question things in a way that moves the project forward because we've considered things that might not work at the beginning so if i have a very rosy view of the project i tend to miss where i might stumble these independence actually help in creating a lot of the upfront planning and upfront discussion that we've heard is so important to these successful projects so with that i will open this up to to discussions and hope we can have a an open discussion so how would you best like to organize this discussion i mean thank you thank you very much that was a great job we had lots of comments in the chat in the q and a say unfortunately pay attention to the man present so i missed a lot of those comments no well and that's fine because the way we're going to do it is um the the q and a channel has been used so i've got a i've been keeping a collection of uh or adding to the collection of comments for you so i'm afraid it's it's just you and me but the the comments are from all over the place so um i'll do my best and even though you've allowed us uh a plenty of time i'm not sure we'll get to all of them but okay see just somebody has asked can i put up the questions while i answer questions so let me go to those questions there's the questions okay yes right so um yes so that's that's those but before i finish thank you very much for your for your thoughts and uh and your presentation today very interesting lots of people saying there's so much information in here just to repeat all the slides will be available to everyone who's uh who's here today and has registered um during the course of next week probably wednesday next week we also have a report uh behind this that's i don't know 60 or 70 pages that companies are welcome to request and i will be happy to send out that's great that's great to question her so let's go straight into the question the first one uh first one that came in is um do you see a gap or a disconnect between a technology expert and an industry domain expert and if so how do you close that gap oh yeah that's the well in smart projects that's the iqot divide that we always talk about right most of these smart projects require not just understanding a deep understanding of the process but understanding how information technologies can support changes to that process but also some of the vulnerabilities that information technologies introduce so you have to have the security and you have to have thought about it up front you have to understand the the linkage between different databases we're finding that even simple things like i have the wrong labels we call things differently across functions and so you need to have a lot of those discussions up front so that you're bringing these different groups together who are going to use the smart technology and they're having discussions i'll use a very specific example from this large company we're working with um they found that even when they talked about inventory uh they were we talking about growth or net where we talk so there are just little things that don't sound like hard problems but when you start trying to say what my dashboard should look like then you really have to have a single source of the truth so we find that the earlier the discussions happen the better so that's how to bridge it but there's definitely a gap um very few we call them DevOps doers very few people are really highly skilled at both it and ot the opera the specific technologies i mean specific processes if you have one boy hold on to them because they're they're as precious as gold right now right that's good to know and on the on the using different labels point um talked about um uh a comment stroke question really there are three open group standards omi um let's see where are we it's it's moved up in the in the list now um we we have some internet of things standards inside the open group omi um and odef being odef in particular being about uh getting the consistent labeling uh have they been used or do you are you aware of those and if not we can help you out in how we spend a lot i personally don't spend my time doing a lot with standards i have colleagues who are deeply engaged we have them deeply engaged with open group in the open process automation forum for example yeah and in the emerging one around um uh modeling in the in the petroleum industry but but so we believe heavily in standards open technologies open source kinds of things can only work with standards uh so so we're a very strong proponent of that it's sort of the unsung hero because no offense standards take a long time to develop and they're not really exciting or sexy and so they don't get the attention that they should in many companies uh and so when we talk to companies we talk about that as sort of a a table six if you don't have the standards you're not going to have interoperability right right now odef was the one i uh i omitted but well one of the things that we're doing is we're trying to create standards quicker and make them sexier so maybe maybe we can fix that maybe we can fix that so um next question what's a reasonable time for failing fast oh boy um well let me let me back up from that because what we've been told is that because many of these early smart projects in particular the last ones who've been stood up in the last couple of years they really were stood up by people who were really well meeting very enthusiastic but the senior leadership tends to see those as being black holes like the money pit i have to keep throwing more and more money at it and the reason that happens um is because i the technologist didn't adequately anticipate the infrastructure support needs and so when you say how long before i i stand i i claim defeat and say this didn't work um very few projects will be scrapped 100 percent but but teams have to range pivot but the early teams you saw a lot more pro smart projects just being scrapped because they couldn't make it work they couldn't make it work within their system they couldn't make a talk to other things it became a terrible sink of subject matter expert time we're seeing less of that as companies get better at deploying smart projects we see more pivots and shifts than we see a whole scale throw it out right so i mean a related question um is one of the origins of the problem the original project specifications and the scope of the work absolutely almost almost 100 that or i've chosen a vendor that i'm really comfortable with because i've been working with them for decades but that may not have the specific expertise to stand this up so i i rely on a vendor uh that i have a deep relationship with who might not be the right person or i look for a a i look for a piece of a solution from a vendor but i haven't adequately thought about what other things that piece will have to be integrated with essentially a box of Legos if i just dump the box of Legos on your desk i haven't really given you value and so those are the two places we see a lot of companies struggling right now let's see you talked about the importance of the relationship with with vendor do you have any guidelines for creating that type of that type of relationship for these projects we actually do have some very specific um suggestions that that uh technologists gave us about how to be a good partner if i'm a manufacturer or how to appear as a good partner for a manufacturer if i'm a vendor and it almost always relates to uh am i providing value am i describing value in in in concrete terms not just in technical process terms uh am i willing to work with you to help scope the project am i willing to talk with you about some of the pitfalls in fact what we're finding from an intel perspective at least is we spend so much of our time in an advisory capacity rather than in a sales capacity because it turns out that the advisory capacity is essential right now and she'll companies get more comfortable and then the other thing technologists have told us is if they if your vendor can't show you something concrete that don't be fooled by slideware right yeah okay um let's see um question uh wonderful overview lots of insights can you explain a couple of failures or situations where not meeting the desired results um where you didn't meet the desired results and explain why it happened and how it was put back on track where others in a minute or less um we have a few we have a few minutes actually but but yes it's about five minutes left right so um i'm trying to think of a good example so i'll give you an example of one that was the failure and i'll talk a little bit about why that was the failure and i'll refer to this large company again because we're doing good we're working closely with this company uh not on a for-fee basis we're working to really understand what the digital digitization process really looks like from the inside of a company so it's almost a piece of our research like a deep dive case study right and and i'll give an example since i didn't mention the company or the sector i can do this um they bought in a brand new piece of equipment that they work with the vendor who actually had deep process knowledge in their industry not quite as much savvy around the it end of things they brought this in and this piece of equipment six months later is still sitting off to the side not integrated into their process not plugged into the other data systems and and the main reason the main reason why and they're not sure they're ever going to get it off by the way and this is this is a company that's a big this is a big expensive piece of equipment but but several things happen number one they looked at the ROI with only that point solution of what where it was going to be plugged into their line they didn't look at how that ROI was going to impact the rest of the line so that's one the second thing they didn't do is they really that data labeling problem became a really serious issue so if i don't create one source of the truth then my end user my manufacturing staff can't create really robust dashboards that are customized to their specific needs and so they found out that even when i had this thing plugged in i might be able to get some good data from it but i really couldn't integrate that data into business insights so so that so so how are they going about it now they're actually taking a very long term view of their equipment which by the way is going to be in service for probably 30 years minimum and they're saying what do i need to do now and how do i future proof this in such a way that i'm always driving business value so they changed the conversation going forward but i don't know if that was ever that one piece of the equipment i just talked about i don't know if it'll ever be fully integrated into their into their planning right right you might be giving some clues about the sector with that with those as well um uh you described a number of blockers with technology like poor documentation would you say these problems are general to all iot technologies or are some worse than others or put it put another way are some technologies particularly problematic from this perspective yeah i think i think at this point data center technologies are pretty well understood we've been using data center we've been using cloud kinds of technologies for quite a long time relative to edge technologies for example um certainly edge technologies which are the hot thing right now don't have enough non marketing non jargon kind of information around them 5g communications technologies you're going to see a real heat up between cloud service providers and telecom providers i don't know that i don't know that manufacturers and technologists who need to consider these alternatives i don't know if they have the language to actually ask the good questions or to understand the explanations that are given so those are the those are the couple that i think are pretty problematic right now okay and we have time for for one more question i think um let's see there are so many um i have to answer offline too if you want to okay that would that would be very helpful if you can um okay you mentioned the importance of tribes do you see value in formalizing these in organizational structures like in the spotify model no right great short answer i don't it's because as soon as you formalize them you create a who belongs and who does not and that assumes you know what that smart project or set of projects are going to need over time and that you've anticipated them all up front what we're finding is that's just not a very good model that these really require um learning across functions learning across expertise levels and expertise domain um the big company that we're working with actually called there's the trailer tribe they had a trailer on site that these people worked in and learned from each other including consultants they brought in and and so we we think these tribes tend to evolve over time as the projects themselves evolve right right that's a great way to end iran really appreciate your your information and sharing your experience and imagine a big round of applause coming your way from from the it's so thank you very much appreciate it i appreciate it