 So, I think the session is practical in the sense that it is a case study of a survey that we ran with a team who's been running now for about two years and it's still going. We're not going to be drawing today. If you want to draw, I've got another session tomorrow. We're on PowerPoint today. Okay, so welcome to Practical Project Aristotle. I don't know if my clicker's working. Okay. Hello, for those of you who don't know me. So I used to work in a large financial institution as an agile coach. And then about a year ago, I actually resigned to start my own company doing a professional graphic recording. So basically, I get paid to doodle. But I still consult. So I still consult as a scrum master and agile coach. I'm from South Africa. Has anyone been to South Africa? Okay, come visit us. So I'm from Cape Towns. I've traveled quite a long way to be here, but I'm super happy to be here in person with all of you again. Okay, so why teams? I suppose this is quite like an obvious place to start, but I think it's important to kind of understand that nowadays, especially in agile organizations, all the work we do pretty much is in a team. And we can be the most amazing kind of superstar as an individual, but we need to also kind of understand how great teams work together. And we need to be able to function and operate effectively in a team. So can I ask, please stand up if you have ever been part of a high performance team? So it doesn't have to be at work. It could be like a religious institution, a charity group, I don't know, meetup groups, high performance. So teams that you feel you get things done, you can trust each other, it's a safe space, you feel respected. Basically you'll kind of know. It's like a team where you feel like really good about being part of that team, yeah? Competitive programming. I love that. Okay. So do you understand? Was that high performance, you think? Awesome. There we go. Okay, cool. So I mean, some of us have experienced it. So it doesn't mean necessarily that we're working in a high performance team now, right? And it's kind of like the perfume and the air, that atmosphere. It's sometimes quite hard to kind of describe. But when you're in a high performance team, it can make such a difference. I don't know about this clicker. I can use my mouse maybe. Give me a sec. And basically teams are great because we can innovate faster, we can see mistakes more quickly and we can find better solutions because we're coming with diverse opinions. But it's not always a case, right? So those of you who are sitting down, maybe you haven't found that space yet where you feel like you're really comfortable and you're in an effective team. So that's kind of what we're here to talk about today. Nothing's good I do. See this is why I usually draw. It's easier than PowerPoint. I'll just use my mouse maybe. Okay. So Aristotle had a quote, the hole is greater than the sum of its parts. So there's a kind of magic that happens when people work together really well in a team. And it kind of amplifies and multiplies the individual contribution. And that's kind of where Google got the inspiration for the Aristotle project. Project Aristotle. Okay. I'm going to click on my laptop. Okay. So into Google. I have a feeling this might have been a topic that's been spoken about quite a bit in this conference. Have you guys heard about Project Aristotle? Oh, okay. Great. Okay. Okay. So Project Aristotle was basically Google asking the question, how do we create the perfect team? You know, so what does that perfect team look like? And when they started this research, they had in their minds, okay, the perfect team would be X amount of people. It would be these skill sets. It might be diversity of race or gender. It might be diversity of personality types or work experience. So they kind of thought that all of these things would make the perfect high performance effective amazing team. But as they went, they kind of realized that that wasn't the case. So it's interesting how sometimes we kind of have these perceptions of, you know, people who have similar interests are going to work better as a team. And it's not always a case. So they were kind of challenging these beliefs about these high performance teams. They even were kind of trying to figure out how often do people eat lunch together? Does that make a difference? You know, do they socialize outside of work? But they couldn't find kind of any trends along those lines. So they studied across 180 teams. They reviewed all of the literature around what makes the most amazing team. And it actually went on for about three years. And what they realized was that the who didn't actually matter. It didn't matter what your personality was or your demographics. It didn't actually, there was no correlation or pattern in terms of who was part of the team. But what they found is that there was a pattern in terms of group norms. So we kind of call group norms, I suppose, more commonly we call it like the team culture. So it's those traditions, behaviors, and those unwritten rules. I think in agile what we try and do often with like, you know, working agreements and team liftoffs is we try and make those more explicit. But it's not always written down. And it's not always easy to kind of articulate. It's kind of the way we behave around each other as a group or as a team. So essentially what they realized is that it doesn't matter how many people are in the team or what kind of who's in the team. It's about having these cultural or these traits in common that makes like a really effective team. And this is what they came up with. So these are the five traits that they found really contribute to actually being a high performance team. So psychological safety, dependability, structure and clarity, meaning and impact. Five things. Simple, right? If we just do those five things, we're all going to be standing up and being like, yes, I'm in a high performance team. Okay, but it's harder kind of to do. Very easy to understand but kind of hard to put into practice. So psychological safety is about members feeling kind of safe to take risks. Members feeling safe to be vulnerable. So if you make a mistake or if you give an outrageous idea, no one's going to shout at you or reprimand you. Okay, so it's about having that kind of safe space. And a lot of it also is about kind of knowing who you work with on a personal level. You know, so it's not just kind of work but understanding and getting to know the people that you work with. And this has become quite a kind of top of mind topic with team culture across the board. You know, there's a lot of material and stuff around this. Again, kind of easier said than done. Okay, dependability is about I can trust my team members to get things done. I can depend on my team members. If someone says they're going to do something, they'll do it. Structure and clarity. So this is about our goals, our roles, our responsibilities are clear. So I know what the team is working towards. I know what I as an individual am doing in the team to contribute to that. Everything's very clear in terms of who's doing what and how we operate as a team. Again, I feel like one of the reasons I love Agile is that, you know, there are kind of mechanisms and techniques and mindsets around ensuring that this is present in teams, but it doesn't always happen. I'm not having any luck with the clicker today. I like to walk around, but anyway, okay. Meaning. So this is the work I do is meaningful to me. So I feel like I get fulfillment. I feel like I'm kind of living my purpose. You know, and I find meaning in what I do on a day to day basis. And that's quite important, right? Like you don't want to go to work just to do your nine to five and go home and you hate it. You know, you want to kind of know that you're contributing and it's meaningful work. Okay, and then lastly, impact, which is slightly different from meaning. So impact is about the work I do or the team does contributes to the organization or it helps people or it changes the world or it gives great customer experiences. So the impact is really about as a team, how are we contributing and adding value at an organizational level. And a lot of that's also just about giving context in terms of what is the organizational strategy? What are the organizational goals? And what are you as a team doing to kind of achieve that and to help the organization? Okay, easy, five things. Should we go home? Okay, so basically when I learned about Project Aristotle a couple of years ago, I was so inspired. I was like, well, we've solved it. You know, we've got the blueprint. We've got the answer to build like really awesome, effective teams. You know, and it's not just about efficiency for me, for the organization, but it's about changing people's lives. If you're working in a team and you're really unhappy or it's toxic or it's not efficient, you're not going to enjoy being at work. Whereas we have an opportunity here to really move the dial and to build up these amazing teams. The challenge was it's really great to see it on paper, you know, and it's really great to have these theories. But what do we do about it? How do we actually know what we need to do in our teams? Or how do we kind of get that feedback to see where we need to focus our efforts? Because we can't also kind of do everything for everyone, all at once. So what happened was I was working in a large organization and they actually did have like a survey, an employee engagement survey, but they ran it once a year. So I mean, the Agilis, I think your ears might be like pricking. You can hear all the red flags. So they ran it once a year. We would get the feedback for our department about six to eight months after the survey. So I mean, by then, you never know. The people who've completed the survey might have left. You know, it's almost like irrelevant. And then it wasn't granular enough in terms of drilling down into our department, our tribes and our squads. So this particular organization uses kind of the tribes as like an area. So I'll use it interchangeably like team or tribe. And then the squads are the smaller kind of agile teams within the tribes. So we couldn't see how is this team doing versus that team. So it kind of wasn't useful. There was a massive gap there. They have gotten better now in terms of the group-wide survey. And what we do is we use it to kind of compare because we've got the data. So we can say, oh, yeah, that actually looks the same. But we're getting it more frequently. And we can drill down to the level that we need. OK, and then what happened was COVID happened. Everyone was suddenly distributed. And the leadership team was saying, how are people doing? How are they? How are teams? We don't know. We're not seeing everyone on a day-to-day basis. So there was a real need to kind of get insight into the teams and what was happening. OK, there's just maybe a little bit more context. So the department was, I think when we started, it was around 120 people. It's now, I think, closer to 200. Not all of those are kind of permanent employees. And at that time, there had been a lot of restructures, which sometimes happens in big organizations. So people are suddenly moved from one team to another, or leadership changes, or structural changes within the organization. So there was a lot of kind of uncertainty. And people were quite, I want to say, scared and uncomfortable. So we really wanted to understand what was happening. OK, so we started with one team. I mean, it was something that we wanted to do. And we were like, hey, let's do this thing. We ran a pilot or an experiment with one team. And we basically just used tools that were available to us. I'll chat to you a bit about it more now. So we used one team. We got feedback. And I think initially our survey was super long. And the team was like, please make it shorter. I think initially we wanted to run it every week. And the team was like, no, you're taking up so much of our time. Can we do it monthly? So we really did tweak and adjust. And then we rolled out to the entire department in 2020. I want to say early 2020. And then what we did is we took all the feedback. And we would have one-on-one sessions with the leadership team. So it could be kind of the head of the department. They could also nominate if they wanted scrum masters or other kind of managers there. We'd have a one-on-one. And then we had a special session with everyone in the department to explain what we're doing. And now we kind of give feedback in the town halls with everyone. And it's still going. And it's still something that is used. And it adds a lot of value. So how we did it was we just used the Microsoft 365 suite. So I'm sure you guys could come up with better options if you do want to run this in your teams. We used Microsoft Forms. And then we'd export the data out into Excel and then put the reports into PowerPoint because it's pretty and kind of easier to interpret on PowerPoint. So we built out the survey. We would send the link out in like an email. And then if teams were on WhatsApp groups, we would kind of send it out on WhatsApp. It was completely anonymous and completely optional. And that was important to us because we didn't want people to feel like they're being forced to do something. We wanted people who wanted to give us feedback. Whether that's positive or negative, we wanted to create that platform and not make it like a grudge purchase. And then we'd analyze the data and build out the report. OK, so this is what was in it. I'm going to skim through it because I've used it for all of you. But one other thing that we added to the survey that wasn't actually part of the Google Aristotle piece was we added an employee net promoter score. So I don't know if you know the net promoter score. Usually if you buy a product or you have a service experience, you get the question, how likely would you be to recommend this to friends or family? We changed it to how likely would you be to recommend working with your team to a friend or colleague. And this is a really interesting metric because it's super harsh. So how it's calculated is if people score 0 to 6, you're a detractor. So that means that you actively kind of disengaged, kind of negative, not in a good space. Between 7 and 8, you passive. And then between 9 and 10, or 9 and 10, you're a promoter. So it's actually quite a harsh metric. The detractors are measured as a minus 1. The passives are measured as a 0. And the promoters are measured as a plus 1. And then you kind of get the average of that. And what we found with this is just a really nice kind of indicator. It's quick for people to answer. And it gave us like a way to kind of measure engagement over time, as well as the Google metric. And an important thing here is that with the NPS, you're not striving for 100. You're never going to get all of your employees scoring 9 or 10, not a 10. Well, maybe. I don't know. If someone here is a company like that, tell me, because I'll go with it. But you're actually striving so anything above a 0 is good. So 0 to 30 is good. 30 to 70 is great. 70 to 100 is excellent. So you can kind of, if you decide to do something like this with your team, you'll kind of benchmark based on what responses you get and decide what the right target is for you. OK. And in this, we've covered already so psychological safety, dependability, structure, clarity, meaning, and impact. And then there are questions that relate to that. So we used a scale of 1 to 5 just because it's kind of less binary and it gives us the ability to do a bit of math. And then the final question on our survey was just an optional free form text comment. And those are actually super valuable, because if you give people the platform to give feedback, you'll get it, especially if it's anonymous. And a lot of people actually give suggestions, which is great. So the leadership team can then take that and action it if it's something that they believe in. OK. How's everyone with QR codes? I know sometimes they're a hassle because you have to get like apps and stuff. Do you guys want to try and scan this? Yeah. So if you try with your camera, sometimes your camera just picks it up. So this is actually a Google form. And we have put together as our Agile India team. So we can do a quick team survey. OK, who managed to get in? Can I see hands? OK, so you can answer the survey honestly. OK, can you put your hand up when you manage to finish it? And you kind of know. It's optional. It's anonymous. No pressure. There we go. We see some responses coming through. We've got 15, 16 people. OK, so this is just Google forms, right? We used Microsoft forms because it was kind of approved by that organization. And we had an enterprise license. So what I want to show you is that it's actually so quick and easy to do things like this in your team. Even if it's not exactly the same questions, find what works for you and your team. So I mean that's awesome. We'd have to kind of calculate the ENPS because you have to do a bit of a calculation there. And then you can kind of see the responses there for these questions. So what we would do is we would kind of take it, put in Excel, and then manually analyze and calculate, and then put in PowerPoint. So you don't need super fancy tools to pay extra or to have like a proprietary tool. You can use what you have. Awesome. Thanks, everyone. Maybe I can give it to Noresh. OK, so I want to show you an example. So I've kind of sanitized the data. I want to show you an example of what our reports look like. So what we would do for the department. So this is just participation. So I mean at this point, I think it was maybe 160, 70 people. So that last survey there was quite good. What we decided actually was to run it every quarter just because people were so busy and inundated. And we found that it actually gave us enough time to kind of implement actions, like get into the data and understand it. This here is just a screenshot from Microsoft Forms. And then essentially you can kind of pull it into Excel and do this. So that's how many people responded. And then this is the ENPS. So this department set a target of 60, which I think is a bit of a stretch. I think last year they got 40 out of 100 ENPS, which is actually really high. So I think what we've learned from the survey for that department is that generally they're not doing too bad. Like people are generally pretty engaged, but they wanted to set a stretch target which they didn't achieve. But they got kind of 34 in the last one, which is not bad at all. And then these are the different tribes. So these are the tribe's ENPS scores per quarter. So this is the data for 2022. You'll notice tribe number three went into the negative 50. And I think an important thing here is context matters. So if you show this to a leadership team for their teams, they'll know exactly what's happening or they should. But it helps to have the data there so you can actually have the conversations. So that team had gone through a restructure and people were quite upset at the point of that first survey. But I'll chat to you about what they did. That last tribe, tribe seven, they were restructured into our department so they only joined us halfway through the year. And you can see that first survey, they scored a zero on the ENPS, which is kind of borderline not so good. And then you'll notice with tribe six, they're just flying. They're just consistently super high. And the thing is, you kind of know it. Like in your organization, you kind of know the teams that are really high performance and awesome to work in. But this gives us data to actually have the conversations. And then you can go to that manager or that leader and say, well, what are you doing in your team? Why is your team so happy? And so high performance. OK, and then these were the Aristotle questions. So what you'll notice, I mean, I didn't find this very useful at a department level. Because essentially, they're all over four. So generally, at a department level, I think they're doing pretty well. But it doesn't really give us enough data to unpack it properly. So that's why being able to kind of see per team helped a lot more. OK, these are some of the comments. I'm not going to go into it because it's a lot. But essentially, these are some of the comments that we got at an overarching level. And then what we did was we actually put them into the tribe reports. So again, I think it's just about giving teams, giving leaders the data to be able to know where they must focus their effort and what they can do to improve the team culture. If we don't have that data, if we don't have that information, we're just flying blind. OK, so here's some examples of tribe reports. I'm not going to go through all of them. This was that team that I mentioned that had like a restructure. And he actually pulled it around really well. So in the one-on-one discussion with this manager, and it's not an easy discussion to kind of say, well, here's the results from your survey. You're sitting on a minus 30. And if you look at the top there for Q1, all of the Google kind of high performance team indicators are quite low. So anything below a 4, I actually flag and say, we can do better just because the standard for that department is quite high. So you would have to kind of benchmark what you feel is low and high. But essentially, everything across the board was quite low. And it was really tough. He was like a new leader. He had been promoted. A lot of people in his team were kind of, they'd been with the company longer. They felt that they had been overlooked. So there was a lot of kind of uncertainty and anger in the team. And he looked at me and was like, I know. I know my team's unhappy. And this is what I'm doing about it. So he's like, thank you for giving me the data because this just reaffirms what I'm seeing in the team. And what he did was he actually spoke to the team. They kind of workshop like working agreements. They clarified the structure. So he went and took each of these things and just worked on them for that quarter. And then in the next survey, they were up by plus 44. And if you look at the swing, I mean, it's actually a massive swing for the Q2 for those results. So I think it is possible to actually turn things around in a team. But often you just need to know kind of where to focus your energy. OK, so this is the same team. It's just a trend of the high performance team questions. And then an example of kind of the comments that people would put. So these would be comments for that team. And people would give suggestions, host a town hall in the beginning of the year, discuss strategy and way forward, discuss where safe fits in. So this is gold for leadership. You can actually, that's easy to do. So we found this super valuable at like a team level to get this data. OK, again, this might be a bit deceptive because these are actually quite low. It's just on the same kind of scale as the previous graph. And this team also are kind of battling quite a lot, especially with psychological safety. So what we do in these situations is we actually work with the scrum masters and the leaders and help kind of coach them. We're like, do you need help? Can we come and facilitate some sessions? Or how can we support you? Or can we teach you how to improve the psychological safety in your teams? OK, and then this is that awesome team. Again, the scales may be a bit deceptive, but they're ranging from 69 to 81 with an average of 75. And if you look at their high performance team indicators, I mean they're pretty much all over 4.5. So they're exceptionally high. So pretty much this manager can just chill, continue doing what you're doing. I don't know. But again, context matters, right? So this leader, she really makes an effort to know what's happening with her team. So if someone's going through a crisis at home, she knows about it. If they need time, or she's very understanding, she treats people as people first. But they deliver. They're one of the hardest-working teams in the department. OK, do you think something like this would be valuable? Yeah, I mean I must say it was really an experiment because I was just like, we've got such awesome theories, but how do we actually use them? And to be honest, it was free other than our time because we had licenses to the tools. And it's given us such amazing insights that the leaders actually use, which is awesome. And that's the next point, right, is if you just run surveys and nothing changes, you actually stand the risk of really alienating your colleagues, your employees, because they're going to be like, well, I'm giving you feedback, but what have you done to make my life better? What have you done to address these issues in the teams? So a really important thing here is that you actually followed up with actions. And what we do is we also communicate those actions back. So a lot of the time the actions will be team-specific because again, context matters. Some teams battle with one thing, whereas other teams don't. But yeah, we kind of hold leadership accountable, but they have autonomy. They can decide what they want to do in their teams. And then we support and coach if needed, and then visibility and feedback to the team. Okay, so what we learned. And it's interesting when you start to do these things because it changes the conversation. And I think even just globally over the past couple of years, especially with COVID, the conversation has shifted where people are talking about mental health. They're talking about psychological safety. They're talking about happiness at work. So what we found with this is because these indicators speak about these things, it actually gave us a vocabulary to have the conversation. And it almost gave people permission to implement things that maybe traditionally we didn't think were related to effectiveness. So having team-building sessions or having a little chat before a meeting that's personal and it's not 100% work, all of that builds cohesion and psychological safety in the team. And it's okay, people must take time to do that because we value it. So it really shifted the conversation and it gave us a vocabulary to kind of place an emphasis on these things. And it has made a difference. I mean, I actually should have pulled because I think over time, this was just 2022. I think over time we have increased. It's quite difficult with restructuring and that to have a long-term kind of data set because the people have moved around quite a bit. But leadership also matters. So what you'll find is even if people have moved, often you'll find the results are kind of often according to the leadership. Okay, and then data to talk about emotional things. You know, it's really, it's a hard conversation to be like, your team's really unhappy. How do you know? Well, I know because, look here, this is how people are responding. So it helps to kind of have those emotional conversations to have that data. Actions, you have to take action. Some actions you can take at a higher level. So we'll kind of analyze the comments and the trends across the department and then see what we can do at a department level. So I think like after COVID, everyone was saying, please can we do like a fun team thing because no one was in the office anymore. And that was quite a common thread. So then they organized like a team event for the whole department. But often it would be handled within the team. Yeah, and then basically get feedback and see what's working and what's not working. So we still run the survey. Even that team that's just awesome, they still do it. And their participation is actually very high because they care about kind of giving that feedback. And you want to see based on your actions if you're moving the dial. So it's important to kind of also keep track of the actions and what's happened in that time so that you know what's working and what's not. So I suppose it's just kind of trying to see the trends and the correlation between actually taking action and then what people are saying. Are there any questions? Everyone's very quiet. This is the afternoon lull. Yes? Oh, sure. How am I doing for time? Q3, I think across the board for this department was low. I think Q2 was higher and Q3 across the department was low. So you know, and it's an interesting thing because sometimes it's not actually what we're doing, right? Like it could be, for example, it's like year-end kind of fatigue. So what we find in that department is Q3 is really tough because you like tired and you're waiting for, we often take a long holiday in December in South Africa because summer. People are waiting for that long holiday and sometimes people are just like hitting that burnout and frustration. So I think across the board Q3 was low and that's where it's helpful to kind of look across the department and be like this quarter, across the department is higher. So it may be something that we're not doing. It might be like environmental, but at least it gives you the data to have those conversations. So I do agree that's a massive swing and I think the one thing about making it optional and not kind of checking that everyone always responds is that you find the people who respond first are either super high or super low, right? So I'd be interested to see what the participation rate was between that if there were like more people that participated or less. Yeah, so I mean, I'm not saying the data's perfect, right? I know that this manager, we did work with him a lot to kind of say, well, these people are super unhappy. We know it. There's been a restructure. What are things that you're doing? Do you need help? You know, how do we have the conversations, et cetera, et cetera, and he actually had a lot of kind of sessions and one-on-one conversations with people in the teams in that time. I think he was also quite shocked as well. He knew it was bad, but when he saw that, he was like, okay, yeah. So, and that's the thing, right? I'm not a statistician. I'm not, and I hope that inspires you because I do believe that kind of having data is helpful. I don't think it's perfect and that's because of some of the design decisions we made, such as making it optional and anonymous, and you can choose to do that differently, you know? But it has been exceptionally helpful for this department. Yeah? So, thank you. What a great interlude into the last part. So basically, I've kind of, I've put you, there's a nice article about rework. I mean, it's not super agile, so I'm sure we could do better in terms of like more agile specific techniques or thinking, but they do have, so I put the link, I'll put this presentation up on Conf Engine. But essentially, there are guides and resources and tools for leaders for these different traits. So what we did with the leadership team as well is kind of equip them with information. Thank you for this, right? So psychological safety, a lot of it's also just about like allowing people to talk, not talking over people. If people give ideas, like don't, you know, ridicule them or don't, you know, and you can call that behavior out in teams and make sure it's not present, you know? It's kind of like how we behave together. What was your question, meaning? Dependability, okay, so that's a lot about obviously like roles responsibilities. Do people know what they're doing? Are we holding each other accountable? Someone says they're gonna do something. Do we hold them accountable? Structure and clarity, something like OKRs can help. So, you know, what are the goals at an organizational level? What are the goals at a department? What are the goals at a team and a squad? Whatever your kind of structure looks like, but having the clear and transparent goals can help there. Meaning, so I mean, this is give people positive feedback, express gratitude. I think meaning's quite personal. I think meaning and impact are quite interlinked. So what I recommend with the managers is like or the scrum masters or whoever, the teams is whenever you're talking about things, always link it back to the value, you know? So how is this gonna change the life of our customers? Or, you know, so I find people, if they can make that connection, even if your job, you know, seems mundane or whatever, if you know how that's helping someone, I think it can really help give people meaning. And it also kind of speaks to the impact as well. But I think it's really about linking that, you know, what's the actual value we're delivering? Because we so often just get into this conversation about like, oh, we're delivering X feature. But it's about having that kind of customer mindset and that value mindset, and that can really make people feel like they have a purpose and they're making a difference. Yes? Pardon? Why? Exactly. Yes. So why, I think meaning's quite personal, right? Because you never know what motivates an individual. But I do feel if you say, why are we doing this? And you can link it to like, especially a human value, like a customer value. Because for me, I know this makes me sound terrible, but it might not always be super inspirational to be like, for impact, I'm making the company money. You know what I mean? That doesn't really inspire me. But if you can say, you know, I'm helping someone by doing XYZ. So ultimately, the work I do actually does make a difference. Does that help? So it's a distinction. So I think linking it to the why, linking it to the value, linking it to people and kind of customer mindset can help. The hard truth is, maybe some people, you know what I mean, are in the wrong job. Like maybe some people are gonna kind of self-exit because they don't enjoy what they do. But I think you can definitely shift the narrative. And I have seen it happen in the teams with leaders who are really good like storytellers and can link it back to the customer. Okay, so you're saying a big organization versus a startup. I don't know if they would. I mean, it's a really good experiment if you're in that space to run something like this and see if it adds value. What I find is sometimes in smaller teams, it's easier to kind of have a sense of what's going on. I don't think it would hurt to have some kind of data around it, you know? But in a small organization, would you not still have kind of goals? So maybe your goals are different, right? So in a big organization, it's often about customer experience or revenue or sales. In a smaller company, especially if you start up and you haven't sold anything yet, it might be, I don't know, to bring in revenue or to help people or to, you know, there would be or to deliver something to a customer and get feedback or, so you would have a goal that might just look different. I guess it's not as inspirational as, in fact, change the world, you're not really there yet, I guess. And I think the great thing with Agile is, and I know I'm over time, the great thing with Agile is like, we have all these really amazing tools, so you can do like a visioning, because I think even as a small organization, you should have some kind of shared vision, right? For like what you're trying to achieve because the organization would be trying to do something, otherwise they wouldn't exist, right? So I think to kind of start there, like a vision and purpose for the company might help. But sorry, I don't know, like the context. So it's hard to say. Okay, cool. Oh, one last thing. I've also put, I'll put this up, but there are some questions. So even if you look online, there are a lot of kind of questions that relate to the Google Aristotle traits. So you can mix up the questions and switch them out or you can have 10 instead of five or whatever. So I'll share this as well on the content engine. Awesome. Thank you so much, everyone.