 I didn't ask and I don't think so. Today, this is the build OGM call for Tuesday, July 6, 2021. I'll go back to sharing a screen because I'm reporting in on a lovely conversation I had yesterday with pristine Kappa first call. The company is called greater than the sum. And they built this thing some app, which basically has it, you know, it's like a I called it survey monkey for networks. They're creating a database, a bunch of interesting information to us, I think. And in particular, she's got some posts about social system mapping, and a lot of really a lot of wisdom and time on this. And they're busy trying to figure out what their business model is and how this all works. So, and I just wish I had recorded the call from from the moment we started I recorded none of it and we were in her zoom so I didn't. It wasn't quick for me to just click in and do it. But I wish I could bottle that excitement in the conversation because she's not quite as old as me so she's been around the block but but she was like, you know, I don't I don't bring up these topics very much because I don't get to have conversations very much. And I was like, come on in join the OGM conversation and we would love to figure out how to how to build up some way to be helpful to you, etc, etc. So we'll, we both need to sort of chew on the conversation we'll come back in and probably invite more people into a conversation so we can figure out what's up. Several things about the conversation got me really excited. One of which was, this is a necessary conversation it's important to organizations like this. The, she was really interested in steward ownership and that whole conversation because she said look, I've been looking, you know, for the last long period for what is our business structure. This is sort of the same conversation fill that Michael has kind of brought up which is like, we really want to figure out what's the business model here, a business model that kind of works ethically and profitably. So she was really interested in that, and I'm going to introduce her to Jordan, and so forth. So just, I was, I was actually like my spirits were raised considerably just from the dynamics of the conversation. And then I'm sitting here thinking, okay, what are the, what are the moving parts that we should, I would love to brainstorm with you all barring that we have a bigger topic or something else to go toward. What are the elements that are important for us to do for OGM to be more of a structure to have more of a more of an essence more of more structure guys. So let me stop anybody else just like to check in. Yeah, to that to the question you're asking Jerry. Excuse me. I mean, Jordan is super supportive for for me to get off the ground and connect and find a real tangible mission to grab on to but what I'm noticing watching. There are a lot of groups and also the TRC. There are so many new entries I mean it's incredible how many groups are coming in, and you don't really know how backed up they are and what their resources are and so on but they're all full of enthusiasm. And there seems to be quite a bit of funding stretching around in the food arena in particular. Everybody is working in their own bucket, you know, the gays, what is completely missing in my mind is this coordinating effort. Now, and this is where my thing with the innovations because I think really resonates because to to. I had a meeting with my contact from the focus house and I'm on the advisory board for the United Nations food system summit. And so we had a conversation about something that he's trying to do and I part in this concept of a of a knowledge manager and all the innovations manager you got all excited about it. And we incorporate that into the discussion be set up. In fact, a dedicated discussion group that involves the Secretary General because he's just so excited this is what we need to do with Africa with South America and so on. And we're always working behind the scene now and really the best you can often do is just to stimulate a discussion and to open people's eyes and once they see it, they start running on off there. So I don't know how, how we can create a structure, you know that has a right and entity of its own. So, so close. The innovation brokers are kind of and correct me if I'm wrong, but when I talk about story threaders and I think when Pete talks about context beavers. And maybe we talk about map whispers and also Christina was really interested in this this idea of a map map whispers he older some collecting of people who are really good at mapping and understand deeply. And people will need some kind of a platform that is both a way to make a living way to connect build community build the guild or some guildish features and, to my mind, use and improve the tools and the data in the because the information brokers are basically going to be like wholesale connecting humans connecting them to ways of doing particular things that that need to be done across the industry as a whole bunch of that right and then if if an OGM infrastructure existed I would love for information brokers to be using it like crazy and improving it as they use it right. So my, my, the question I just want to pose is, is there some minimal set of things that we don't wind up creating but can pull together from different places to create a platform for a new occupation called innovation broker that is simply one of many different kinds of new roles that we envision that we would like to staff up and recruit for and get get hired into engagements everywhere and I think that I think that experts, experts managing Commons is hopefully a new job category that will be hard for the robots to automate and might be a big and interesting place for new kinds of employment for people remote work for other kinds of things in this world. And close first and then and then film. Yeah, see I see the primary purpose for for the gap, so to speak, is in taking an assessment in my food case, go into a community each community is unique in its own right. And it doesn't matter where that community is located but they have existing resources they have an in an existing socio economic structure. There's a power structure of this existing interests, you know, and so you have to map first of all who are the owners, you know what is working but it's not working in this school. So I call it the farm the fork community food systems. And because from the farm you need an aggregator you need logistics you need processing you need wholesale retail and so on and so on. And so what are what components are in place which ones are missing. How can you accelerate this system what do they need to know to move themselves to the next phase. That's in its core thing. Once you do this map, then, then you need someone in the field, who knows which who knows where the resources are located and how to call them up. That's a basic concept. And I think one could translate that into energy systems and into other aspects of a community. Bill and then Pete and then me. One thing just generally I was also recently recently about how you kind of put these amorphous voluntary groups into action. And one thing that really came up was creating a timeline of sorts. So, there are things we need to figure out as a group like what exactly OGM is forgive ourselves a month or two weeks or whatever it is that has to be figured out by then. And then from there figuring out how OGM works other entities and if, if that's putting out requests for proposal for projects, like classes or projects with knowledge waivers or whatever the project is but putting out an RFP and time line that and identifying that OGM role and that is providing funds and structure and then giving those people a that they need to hit certain milestones or deliverables within a structure timeline. I think that could be the most concrete way to start moving things forward. That's just where my head is currently. Thanks Phil. Pete. I want to talk a little bit about the platform for innovation brokers or or knowledge waivers or context waivers. And I guess there's two things for me one of them is kind of the tech infrastructure and then another one maybe is kind of like maybe I would call it social social structure. Social infrastructure. So tech infrastructure wise I might my guess is so obviously, obviously I would love it if everybody was using massive wiki. At the same time that the massive wiki doesn't do a lot of things even that I need you know so I use other tools. And so my I guess my top line thing is a recognition that we're going to have different tools, different people are going to use different tools. And so the thing to aim for is interoperability, I think, and being able to translate from one to another easily and well and with with good fidelity. I think there's there's, we're still kind of figuring out what the, what the atoms are the molecules of knowledge are. And so it's always great listening to Mark and talk about knowledge graphs and, and, you know, kind of digging down into what's the base unit of stuff. Because when you understand what the base units are, then you can decompose and compose them better. Right. So I, we're still kind of fishing around or hunting around for feeling around for what, you know, how do you, how do you get something that goes from Miro to Miro table to massive to Trove, you know, in a, in a chain that has a lot of fidelity rather than, you know, you have to morph it, and it turns into something, and, you know, you can't turn it back or, or it gets unusable or whatever. So a lot of work there to do. I think so, instead of the one tool to rule them all it's really, you know, how, how do we make many tools work together well. So then I also wanted to, is I feel I can kind of see the thing that's missing a thing that's missing, because I can look back at my time on Silicon Valley a couple decades ago, and Silicon Valley works differently than big corporations work. And, and I reflect on how it worked. So you have lots of little up and coming startups, you know, forming and merging and dissolving and and that kind of birth and death cycle. The thing that we had in Silicon Valley that I feel like we're missing in the network of network of networks that we're doing right now is maybe not missing but but we need to grow it significantly. It's kind of the, the social patterns and the knowledge patterns of how entities form and work together and subtle differences and things like that. So in Silicon Valley, going back to, I don't know, Fairchild, you know, in the 70s or something like that. They're kept being these innovations of how a little team of engineers would break off from a parent company and then, you know, in the early days I'm sure that they didn't know what they were doing and it sounded like they were completely crazy people hippies or something you know it's like why would you leave a good job and start, you know, you can't start a company that's not a thing right. 20 years or 30 years later startups were a regular par for course kind of thing of course you would you know you would leave your big company job and start a new company. So what happened, there's a lot of infrastructure built into Silicon Valley, right, that there's the VC community there's the banking community there's the legal community. You can walk into a bank in Silicon Valley, and there's specialist banks even Silicon Valley bank, but you can walk into a bank and say hi, I don't know anything about business except I've got this great idea. And they would say okay well I can help you with the bank account I can find a lawyer for you that you need some account and you need to figure out how to pay taxes. And same thing with a lawyer right it's like I've got this great idea and I've got to have it happen. So you literally walk into infrastructure people you walk into a lawyer's office and they say okay sounds like a great idea you look like an understanding citizen and somebody who can kind of that I'm willing to spend time with lawyers would literally give you like a 10k account 10k, you know, I owe you here, you know, user services up to, you know, up to a certain amount of money and we'll get you going. And all we ask is for a big cut in return right. And for somebody who's just starting out who has a great idea and no no understanding of the business infrastructure or how that works was huge. So, same thing in the in the lawyer's office. Each of the lawyers had been through that, you know, cycle dozens or hundreds of times. And I've had been in several offices all the time. The lawyers are generating this body of knowledge about how deals are done, you know, and you get coaching right you start off with an MOU and then you start off with NDAs then you sign MOUs and you know we work on these different structures of how to do profit sharing or equity sharing or things like that. And all the lawyers had seen. The law firm has its own catalog of documents but that catalog of documents is kind of cribbed from all the other catalogs of documents. And so there were, you know, a few flavors of MOU and a few flavors of NDAs and a lawyer would read through and go this is, you know, I've seen this before it looks great you can just sign this, or I'm going to change one thing I'm going to, I'm going to send it to a opposing council in Wilson Sunsini and they're going to go oh yeah I get it I understand why they're doing that. So that layer of infrastructure of how this thing works and how you can do it is something that all of us as little sovereigns are kind of feeling our way through and beating ourselves up and trying to understand what's going on right. And there's just literally a bunch of missing pieces that we have to innovate. We can borrow some of those from places like Silicon Valley or Service Corps of retired executives or, you know, small business administration or things like that. There's a bunch of stuff that we have to innovate because we're doing business a different way for a different reason. But I guess I want to give us kind of, I think, I think there's a big missing layer of infrastructure that we have to build and it's not something that gets built by one or two or four or six organizations it's actually like dozens and dozens of organizations working together, chewing on how to do that, and then loosely sharing and loosely coupling the information together that's what the one the main innovations of Silicon Valley was the loose coupling and the remixing of entities. So that happened with companies that happens with legal agreements that happens with financial agreements. There's always this innovation stuff and everybody's stealing slash borrowing slash, you know, like seeing stuff fall off the truck and picking it up. In some kind of way that was, you know, maybe a little bit transgressive but also a little bit or very productive and and because it was a productive ecosystem of sharing, even in the face of competition and enclosure. It was sustainable and grew and things like that. So lots of lots of innovation, by lots of organizations feeding each other and learning and growing and and that's what we need. Just to follow on what Pete said, one of the things that I saw lots and lots and lots of groups from other countries come through Silicon Valley and do tours and learning journeys to try to absorb and carry back home. Whatever the hell it was special drink that Silicon Valley had drunk that made this work so well. And there was kind of a superconductivity of financing of legal help of programmers of everything else that move through it. And one of the things that made Silicon Valley work really well, all built on extremely proprietary attitudes toward IP and a bunch of other things that are not parts of the stack that we would like. But Pete, I think a piece of what you're describing is this when I talk about what are the next, what are the next stacks the social stack and the organizational stack, you're talking about layers of that organizational stack and how they interact, and you're adding really important sort of social dynamic aspects of the stack. Like, how do we find each other how do we recommend each other how, you know, what, how does that sort of work out. And, and there's this moment right now where work is kind of jobs are being deconstructed, and April one of one of the superpowers in April's new book is like your portfolio, build your portfolio career that jobs, as I'm going to be employed for a long period of time, working nine to five for a company, those are just going away. They're just melting like, we may want them, but but the number of those things for the number of humans on earth is just decreasing, decreasing, decreasing. In particular, because companies really don't like full time employees, they're cranky, they get older, they want more money as they get older, they don't follow instructions. You know, if you can automate a job is that robot software wins the comparison with humans as soon as software is good enough to do the job. So in the face of that, how do you build a portfolio career and part of the organizational stack is not about thinking about organizations as having the old sharp boundaries, but rather a sort of dissolving and having entities, sovereigns and individuals floating around in this in this primordial goo which is hopefully a nutritive estuary. I love mismatching metaphors. Wow. So, so how do we make this actually a new to divestuary where lots of healthy interactions show up and where we figure out what's happening where we can hear where we can see ourselves well a piece of what Christine yesterday was talking about was one of the things that really motivated her was to build I think like Vincent to build an infrastructure where the community could see itself. But then she said but I don't have this naive hope that once it sees itself suddenly magically things will will work well, and everything will be fixed but she didn't know what that next step necessarily was. Right. And that's all that's all really interesting here as well. So, so the one thing I would underline is that there is a new stack, but the stack that I observed in Silicon Valley was actually hundreds of very similar right. And so I do end up with patterns of stacks and lots of them and they all look kind of the same. And they all have a little bit different flavor depending on the personalities and the use case and things like that and so it's important for for each of us to be working on or or maybe this group to be working on a stack right but but really what you want is 100 or 200 or 1000 copies of that stack, all kind of looking the same. And everybody being able to sing from that same choir book kind of, but it's a different choir book over, you know, in their own kitchen key kind of. Yeah, yeah, but but harmoniously. Mark, I'm trying to pass. And no, just jump on the last thing about the stacks. Yeah, it means that you don't have to reinvent as much of the wheel. I'm, I don't know if I have a exact point I'm exploring here but there's this tension between we want to cooperate we want to create a commons we want to create, and we're living on scarce resources because not that many people realize they need the kind of connections. I'm trying because everybody does it well enough serendipitously and doesn't realize how much more it are much further it could go if we made it more systematic. So there's both. We can do much better. And people don't realize that so the demand is scarce. And on the other hand, so we're in competition in effect. We need to cooperate more because that's who we are and that's part of our mission and reason that. And really, we have to think about the ways to. And thank you Pete for reemphasizing the interrupt aspect and not want to rule them all. So if we could think about federation at a very, very deep level. How can we make sure that if ever one of us finds people who understand the need for what we're offering that it can benefit all of us and this is the other aspect of federation, because we're building a commons because whatever we build and another thing about, you know, we're all trying to build this tool where we can embody all those connections. So we're all making our little private personal knowledge network. And without the federation which we're still busy building. We all want to make sure we all have all the data. And that's ridiculous, because we want to build that knowledge commons that whatever we build is useful to all of us, so that we all gain value and we all share whatever we're building individually. And but on the other hand, we are building it also for ourselves and there is value in the understanding we gain by building our little corner of the global brain. So this this tension between scarcity and collective and commons and local and global is, I don't have answers I'm just trying to reemphasize the need for thinking about not just finding a raison d'être for us as individuals but also for us as the added value of us being in a community, and us being in a commons, so that people begin to realize the value of this global stewardship collective stewardship of this commons we're trying to build not just our individual value to, you know, whenever we're there with the mission, but we're collective values towards. And again, no answers, just trying to. And one of the commons that I'm sorry, you were done. No, go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. One of the things that I think it's important for us to be stewarding or minding or taking care of is just that of community and how we come together and so forth. And Kiko lab has had a bumpy road, the last few days, probably weeks, and a bunch of people have come together to try to be helpful and sorted out and be of help and I think that that that reaction and that method is lovely and productive and we need to you know and do more of that kind of thing because, because a piece of being productive as individuals and as sovereigns coming together in these messy squishy relationships is building high trust environments and helping one another overcome our weaknesses. We this is as much sort of therapy as it is like like life, life platform and life business and the better we can do that I think the better we will all be. Very, very quickly. I think we, we emphasize a lot what we have in commons as connectors but we all have different methods, and we need to be more aware of our complementarities, because that's also what makes us work as a collective. Love that Mark Antoine. Yeah, I wanted to pick up on what Pete was saying because I think that is really sort of a profound way to look at the markets evolving the high tech markets men men the tech revolution happened. Currently, innovations taking place in the hardware development and in software development. And these innovations somehow found their way to merge together. And, and out of it came some really big players, you know, as we, as we see today. Imagine if you would have to turn this whole thing upside down and reinvent it. And that's where we are with the food system because he in the US, almost 90% of the markets are controlled by very few corporate players. I mean maybe six companies right would dominate the entire market. Probably the market is maybe 60% or so controlled and I just got into a conversation on LinkedIn with someone who wants to reject any kind of interference because companies that promise to help a country like Indonesia or Honduras or India with the agriculture actually ended up damaging them damaged the entire economy, the civilization, their social structures I mean it is incredible when you start looking at how much what a mess we have made right I mean, and I was participating in it. And inadvertently so to change in the food system, you know you have to. It's not only that you have to build it from ground on up but you also have to do it against the opposition of a system that really doesn't want you to succeed. Because you're challenging existing very dominant structures here. And so that adds the dimension to it that requires completely different approach, you know the creativity and the tools that are out there that could be assembled to make a community really successful. And have an obstacle course to pass through before they can really get there. So that I think we want to see that same kind of evolution happening in the food systems development and it is incredibly necessary I just posted an article where science is basically now clear, you know, project fall down everybody is clear, because it is out fixing the food system, we can't meet the IPCC targets impossible. It's physically impossible so how do we, how do we get there so that's a couple things. One is another analogy. And I'm rewinding a little bit in this conversation, a class you had said about piecing the different parts together and in talking with Christine yesterday one of the analogies that came up for me is like you're trying to build a rose window and what we have right now is a lot of people building individual little pieces of glass and then someone takes this ugly sort of the substance called lead and basically saw us together the different pieces of glass, and all of a sudden, you have the rose window which sort of comes into into being and I'm, I'm looking for for metaphors that work for people, I think OGM can play is like not necessarily building up parts of all these things but but helping connect the different moving parts in ways that offer local diversity and preference. Lots of autonomy and privacy, and yet high functionality and connectivity and sort of this this reusability of data the nurturing of the soil, which is the new the new comments the data. And then, going back to your, your what you how you were thinking about innovation brokers class that first when you describe the first mapping step of coming into a community. My first reaction was, my first reaction was OMG, this could be really like a whole difficult for anything because actually trying to map the politics of any local situation. People who don't want those dynamics, you know, visible or exposed who won't tell you who's who, or what's what, like getting, getting to the actual dynamics in a community is going to be like very, very difficult. Second thought was, hmm, could you crowdsource aspects of that map anyway, by surveying something by picking up data by looking at another sort of outside measures. And my second reaction was, hmm, what if there were what if we had a cadre of young community mappers, who were busy doing this all over the place, who then turn the soil for the next wave of people to come in to say okay, I'm a resource now I see the community map, and here's what's available in the world somehow so so I went from, oh my gosh this sounds impossible to hey could we hack it to I could see sort of layers of commitment of commitment or participation or entry into local communities building up. And that was just my brain riffing on the possibilities of how to, you know how to stand up in for innovation brokers locally. Go ahead, Pete. And the next thing on Silicon Valley again, they. It occurs to me I put this in the chat in in matter most. The people who you worked with, you know you went to your bank or you went to your IP attorney or you went to your patent lawyer or you went to an accountant, even you know whatever. They would be helping you fill jobs. They would be seeing a ton of what we would call sovereigns they would be seeing a ton of startups, and they would start to notice patterns. And often they were the ones who did innovation brokerage basically as not as a frontline part of their job, but as as incidental. But incidental to their main job right as I'm providing you patent attorney services. Hey, you should, you should bump into this person. And they know what's going on about the other part of the problem that you don't, you know you haven't figured out yet. VCs so VCs maybe do that as a part of it's actually part of their business model to be matchmaking and marrying up people to make a stronger sovereign. But a lot of other infrastructure providers don't have that as a explicit part of their business model right it's it's just that as a patent attorney I get more deal flow when somebody says oh, I got recommended to meet my co founder by this patent attorney and I want to use them again and I think you should use them again. So it reminds me of a pattern that we used to have in social text where what we learned often was that people didn't like go oh I'm going to put stuff in the wiki. It was a lot more like I'm doing work. And if I just have a little bit of extra work to do to get something into the wiki maybe not not perfectly. I'll do it right so it's a that that same pattern of sometimes many times maybe maybe maybe the right pattern kind of hunt for is how can the things that have to happen for sovereigns also do a little bit of matchmaking incidentally to the mainline part of their their work. So, it takes a lot of kind of in the overall system it takes a lot of calories to stand up a special purpose. So, maybe another way to say it is in Silicon Valley I didn't see. I'm going to go back on that now I was going to say I didn't see people who are explicitly just matchmakers. Because that doesn't pay the bills, you know, being a patent attorney does being an accountant does. There were actually specialists who would be mentors to baby startups like coach Bill Campbell. I, I, a star nursery kind of star nursery people who would would gather up little startups, and then they would ask for a big chunk of equity kind of to do that. But they could, they could be the it was like a tour guide or a river rafting guide, you know, we'll make sure that you get through the rapids okay. But even then, so they did matchmaking and stuff like that but even then it was kind of incidental to their overall business model which was really getting a big percentage of one sovereigns thing rather than trying to match make a bunch of sovereigns so. Yep. I'm Mark Antoine than Judy. I'll try to go fast. What strikes me I spoke of complimentary skills. I'm just a metaphor I'm reminded of when people were asking for somebody to do their website. And that meant, you know, the copy editing the graphic design, the server maintenance, the HTML coding the JavaScript front end coding it was ridiculous like the array of totally different skills that design. Yeah, it was all there information architecture. And when it's obvious that this is something that a good team can work on very well and in a, you know, limited time, and maybe it's a can we either form teams around the service of connection. We can not try to be hired but the do contracts as a team. And or can we find a way that our services can augment known existing established work in a way that we can become part of teams, even if we maintain this cross linking as a community of practice of connectors. I think that's it. That's a great thought mark on fun and that clicks really nicely into the reason I was trying hard to build guilds a word I'm now not sure we should use. But the idea of guilds is that we're in new territory here we're kind of in the new economy we're busy like mapping and context making and doing a whole bunch of things that are not familiar to your average sort of business on the street. Therefore, how we define these tasks and how we present them to the world matters a whole bunch, and drawing sort of definitions or not boundaries but but defining what this guild is versus this other guild was to me, important in what the new set of tasks and roles are, and then, and then that would help create teams of people who love collaborating to achieve those particular sets of goals, and they could form up and one of the nice things right now is that voluntary associations to go do a project are super easy right now and, and we all got shoved into zoomed during the pandemic so so geography didn't matter because it used to be, you'd form a little company with your buddies who were who were in the same city as you. So right now that's the even post pandemic that's just less interesting less less less necessary. So, you can form up into these little high performing teams, and we need a we need a vessel for high performing teams like if I were running LinkedIn. One of the things they've left on the table, for example, is the formation of high performance teams that love to do work together. They think of you know, LinkedIn eight the resume and now, like lots of people hunt for jobs, the old way through LinkedIn. So I think it's just like missing all these opportunities. Phil, then Pete. I think it was Judy next. Oh, I apologize, Judy. That's right. I've suddenly grown accustomed to little hands going out but it's Judy then fill in Pete. It's okay. Thanks. I'm still kind of on the wake up cycle I slipped in. But part of what I wanted to just emphasize is that what I have found richest about OGM over the last recent years dates clear back to you can but especially now is the caliber of the individuals and the collective expertise in any particular room call whatever just highly talented ethical people who are more than happy to help with just about anything. They don't want to be taken advantage of of course and everyone would like to earn some money if that's a possibility. And so it seems to me that one of our higher priority goals might be to really focus on the resource capacity that's latent everywhere and implicitly by setting up systems and connections and tools or whatever might be the case. Setting an example kind of the leading and walking by example model of good people helping other people do good things. Again, I don't especially like the term guilds because it has a funny tone to it, but, but I don't know talent agents talent contributors express special knowledge groups whatever we would come up with as a more awkward name. What I find really, really attractive is the wisdom that's expressed in every call and the ability on the drop of a hat to put out a query and say does anybody have time to talk about X and four to six people who are interested in and knowledgeable about that topic will usually show up. And that's a very unique trait. And I think that somehow capturing and taking the wisdom of all of the people in the things that have worked might allow us to actually include in the wiki or something similar, you know how to get started on blank. And, and what are the next stages, you know, sort of a, a simplified project management for individuals who haven't had project management training or other things, because I think if people get help without having to work hard to get it, they get inspired and they become inspired by that same model and I think the number of abusers of that was probably small. And if they wanted they could find some other knowledge in a different way. So, I know that's just kind of, I'm kind of into what is the process of being collectively wise and productive. And how might we model that share that and help other groups with less experience acquire those skills. And just one of the. One of the tasks of our community is to deal with bad actors one of the principles of design from trust is to try to deal with bad actors late, rather than design the whole system to prevent bad actors from acting bad. You design the whole system that way you shut out the genius that's in the room you shut down opportunity and connection and all of that. And one of the things we haven't faced very much is sort of trolls or bad actors floating in here and either just trying to disrupt or trying to pilfer, you know, taking the role of property do whatever else and take advantage of the group we've been really lucky in that sense. We're still flying under the radar in that way. But I think that pieces of our maturity will show up and and we'll have to find new ways to do things when that starts happening more. But but again I think that doing it late is fine is good, and setting up, setting up dynamics that promote the building of the community and the connecting of humans into high performing teams and all the, the crusting into solutions, like, I think should work. So, Philip and Pete. Yeah, I love that point. I am thinking through this kind of Silicon Valley example, I keep coming back to y combinator startup school, and they have kind of this whole free process laid out so that you can get your idea from ideation on through to MVP basically. And the idea is that if it's good enough, you can apply to y combinator as one of their select startups that they'll incubate that they'll foster they'll grow. Obviously they're doing that model that leads to profit for them, but I think there are learnings from that that we can take and kind of bring into our own environment to bring a communal and shared learnings. The second group I think of is zebras unite, which is their core goal is is trying to, to create this new economy, but they have this whole network of people that you can put out calls to action you can ask for for help for resources, and help and I feel like that's a model you might want to copy a bit as well or at least taken to to some account. The one thing I would say with them is they do have this focus of creating this new economy. I do think we need some core focuses like the knowledge moving project like interoperability like we need to have OGM is a community for all this OGM is working on these things. I just kind of separate definitions, but yeah, that's. Thanks Phil, Pete. I wanted to pick up on the grouping formerly known as guilds. And it makes me think of a thing that we used to a guideline that we used to use an agile which is the highest performing teams were self sufficient work groups project groups. So self sufficient means that it can do a lot of stuff by itself. You know it's got front end back end design. Some project management, things like that. So a project team had a, it was, it had a variety of kind of specializations within it, and it could do a lot of work. The thing that makes it a high performing team is that it's not people who are all good at one thing. It's that it's people who love to work with these people. So that activation energy, you know, I, you know, I do design and she does. She does product management and, and he does development. And we'd love to work together the love to work together is the important part of that, not that we, you know, and and actually we don't even necessarily need to understand each other really well as long as we have the patients and the interest in discovering each other together as a team. Right. The other, the other thing that we that we kind of another guideline in talking about scrum here in particular. There's this weird thing in companies where it's like, well, you know, I've defined the org chart and this group of people shall work together because you know that's what fits best in my org chart. So it's you putting you end up putting people together who work some worked well together and there's one or two duds who just don't work with that team, and they may work perfectly well with another team but for whatever reason because of departments or offices or whatever. You stick them in the wrong team. That's a real tempting thing for management to do. And it was always super disastrous for the team itself. You want scrum goes on like two week cycles right two week sprints, you really want the team to come together at the end of the sprint and reflect. Retros are also something that didn't end up people people didn't really understand how to do retros but if you do it right, you have this deep introspective team introspective of what worked what didn't. And, you know, after the third time of coming around to an and she's a love, I like, you know, I like being around her as a person and every time that she's in our team, it just breaks everything and I don't know why, you know, you know, and when you come to that, you know this person doesn't fit in the team, you throw them out. Hopefully in some compassionate and loving way where they end up with some some other team that where they're going to shine. Everything is better right the team is more productive you can't you don't want to stick a team together that doesn't fit together you really want the team to be able to self select and weed out the things that are making them not work and sometimes that's a person. So, it. So then you end up with these project teams who work really well together and that's their defining characteristic, not that they're front end or not that they're back end but they work really well together. Then you need parallel teams adjacent to them. And you'll start to see that each of these teams has a back end person or each of these teams has a design person. So you do want to end up with something that kind of is like the organization formerly known as guild, where, you know, all the design people can have coffee together and say okay well I ran into this weird problem or I need a tool what what's that tool that you were using that you were using so effectively. So, into this I wanted to introduce or reintroduce a classic. I'm going to hit return on the matter most, and then try to share my screen as well. This is a picture. This is Nyberg's picture of scaling at Spotify and one of the things that whenever I bring this to a group it's like okay so Nyberg himself if you read down a little bit says that this is just a snapshot in time this is not the way to design an organization please don't be fooled by the fact that this looks attractive and wonderful. Do it your own way. You'll see that what he what I was calling a project team is what he calls squads. And then you'll see that guild thing. These are a bunch of people who are interested community of interest interested in databases or CSS or you know the design of stuff or information architecture or whatever. Another thing he calls chapters chapters for him are things where these people need to coordinate pretty closely together. They're doing kind of the same role in multiple squads and to help hold the squads together the chapter of design people or the chapter of database people will will coordinate and cross. Keep these squads kind of aligned and then as it happens he's got the tribe parts of this are big clusters of things maybe this left tribe is working on the back end and the right tribe is working on on the front end. Big clusters of stuff. Anyway, it so it occurs to me that along with the organizations formerly known as guilds. A more important even more important pattern for us to look for is people who work really well together. These squads and and help people understand that you put together a high performing team. It's got a lot of cross functional stuff it's not all of them can do the same thing it's it's actually the strength of that team is that they can do different things and so when you say, Hey, we need this new feature in Spotify. You know one of these squads can go, we can do that, you know, we're going to have to ask this other squad for a little bit of help but we can do most of it we can do the front end part we can do the design part we can do the back end part. We can do the database part. And our database person is going to coordinate with two or three other database database people as they do it, but we can handle the whole thing as a team, and then they take chunks of big chunks of work as a project, and they get them done. That activates also a bunch of human stuff when when you're in a small team like this, and you have a group commitment you say yes we can do this yes we will do this, and we can do it for X dollars in X months. Then those are the people that when push comes to shove they look across the table or across the zoom at each other and go. Okay, we need to pick it up people and it's the commitment to the team that activates their energy and not commitment to something larger that's puffier and harder to understand it's like, I'm going to do it because Emily is doing it because we committed as a small team that we're a team that delivers stuff and we're going to do it. So, I, we haven't I feel like we haven't been talking about this project team thing very much and, and that's not to say that we should talk about only that there's these other, you know, other patterns that you and not again not to say that this is the exact pattern that you want to use. But the things that I learned from this or the thing that I observed from this is, he's got these overlapping kind of fractal patterns, and they're, they're, they're orthogonal right so a squad and a chapter or have this orthogonality to it, and I think that's important when we're trying to structure these, you know, social social groupings that we cover a lot of axes, and also a lot of fractal scale. Briefly because I have to bounce at the top of the hour to a different call and I'm happy to pass the con to someone else. When they talk about guilds I had the feeling on first read of this that they meant something different from what I was hoping to intend which was, for me guilds are about craft a particular set of skills. Kind of like furriers and carpenters. And I think guilds a different subset in their model otherwise I really like the Spotify agile model. Again, I would not. I, you know, rename everything, group it differently, figure out different orthogonals. Don't take it as a little bit. But his guilds are communities of interest. Okay, so there was interest. Yeah, they were just run interest. Okay, cool. Michael then Judy then we're out of the call. I'm really intrigued by by what comes out of that chart and when I first saw Pete, I thought of different organizations, being the two, you know, parts of Spotify, and the way that peers in an industry. I mean, I just remember, you know, from my days in the magazine biz, how the, the clan of editors and art directors and production managers cooperated for their common good. They recommended freelancers and that kind of thing, and, and also set standards. And so figuring out how that looks for, for, or where our GM fits into that in terms of allowing, allowing people in different orgs to to come together. It seems seems critical and part of the kind of mission statement that we need to to get down to because it's more brass tacks. One of the industries that sort of figured a lot of this out is Hollywood and other movie makers where everybody knows what a gaffer does, even though muggles don't know what a gaffer is. But I think down to how you coil cable so that people are basically interchangeable and then your reputation and who you know basically is how much work you get sorry Judy go ahead. Well, I was just going to add that that what this leads to actually would be the listings or collections of wisdom about particular needed skills and attributes and behaviors that allow the cross functional connections to occur. The team formation is an organic sort of thing. I recall once a team approaching me on the steps of a building saying can we eject a person from our team. And I said, Well, probably would tell me more about what's going on. And those dynamics are really critical to sort of the heart and chemistry of the working together. So we were able to develop some sort of correlation listing of individuals who behaved in certain ways delivered certain kinds of things had knowledge in certain zones, whatever, without making it prescriptive or prohibitive or elitist or whatever. And then it would be a tool for the community. And people would know that they could call person X and saying, I'm trying to put together a group of people to do X in the community or to accomplish why. And we need someone who would be able to help with this dimension of it or we need help just forming it because the groups not coming together like we'd like those sorts of expertise zones are really valuable. And that could be a very cornerstone, the connectivity of the talents of the guild is what I'm trying to get at the ability to resource to form the cohesive team and if the team forms and they find that they're really great at kicking out these kinds of things. You can just get the whole team to come do something because you know that team's going to get it done. They know how to work together, and so on. I'm not sure how we would do that but it's, it's a concept I'd love to pursue because that's how you get work done. A bad note and this call on but we could just bring someone in who knows machine learning really well and it's rolling zoom to just infer people's competence and behavior from our activities, and then to shut down their privileges as they act poorly, you know so you'd get less zoom time allocated to you. Anyway, thanks everybody I'm glad we're inventing our robot future and hope it's a future we all like. Bye for now. Great to see everyone. Same here.