 I have the distinct pleasure of introducing the first of our three fireside chats in this year's summit. And as in previous years, the fireside chat fires a very traditional format where we have one great leader interviewing another great leader. And I couldn't imagine two better people to start that off than Ken Frazier and Joaquin Duato. Ken, I know you'll introduce Joaquin. And so I have the privilege of briefly introducing you. Ken is a great leader in our industry, a great legal mind, a great entrepreneur, an incredible supporter of R&D and innovation, and an individual who stepped up for social justice and has been quite outspoken about the inequities that we see in society. I personally call Ken a colleague, a mentor, and a friend. So Ken, I'll hand it over to you. Thank you. Thank you, Andy. So first of all, it's my extreme pleasure to be joining this audience in this conference. And it's even more of a pleasure and a privilege to have an opportunity to talk to my friend Joaquin Duato. Joaquin and I worked together on pharma, actually, Joaquin led pharma during a very important period. And I've gotten to work very closely with him. And I hope through this interview, you'll learn more than just his title, which is obviously Chairman and CEO of Johnson and Johnson, which is at the forefront of what's happening in our industry. And so I'll start by saying good morning and welcome, Joaquin. Good morning, Ken, and a pleasure also to be with you. Thank you. Sure. So you're in your second year as CEO of J&J. And you recently took on the role of Chairman following a really terrific CEO, my good friend Alex Gorski. And so throughout your career, you've done a lot of wonderful things. You've worked in a number of roles in geographies. And as I said, you've been very much at the forefront of our entire industry for many years now. So let's start a little bit with your career and your path to CEO. How did you get to where you are today? And what advice do you have for the audience, many of whom are at the early stages of their careers? Thank you. And a great question. If you would have asked me 35 years ago when I started to work at Johnson & Johnson that I was going to become the CEO of this great company, I would not have believed you. That's my first observation. So I didn't start my career with the idea of becoming CEO. As a matter of fact, as an anecdote, when I finished graduate school here in the US, I interviewed for Johnson & Johnson. And I didn't make it into the second interview. So though, I mean, that tells you that the interviewing is not a perfect art for those of you in the audience. If you don't get hired after an interview, don't persist and be resilient. So during my career at Johnson & Johnson, I have done multiple roles as you described. Sometimes they were roles that I was not expecting. So they open for me opportunities that I was not knowledgeable about. Like for example, I work in our medical technology sector or in our consumer sector. So I was not expecting that to happen. And sometimes it was not even what I thought it was the best step for my career. So I work in multiple roles in multiple countries. And I believe that's part of the secret of my development that I always have been open to new opportunities. And I always have said yes to those opportunities. So when I talk to people at Johnson & Johnson or people that are starting their career, I always tell them be open for new opportunities. You don't know what you don't know. You may have a plan but things are not gonna unfold like your plan and be open for that and say yes. And I have a second observation here that I'm sure you share. In order to develop yourself, in order to have a fulfilling personal and professional career, it's very, very important the company that you joined. That's a very, very important factor. Sometimes people that are starting careers are thinking about what job they are going to do. I think that is more important what company do you join. I consider myself a product of Johnson & Johnson's development and I can say without hesitation that I'm here where I am because of the opportunities that Johnson & Johnson provided me. So what company do you join? It's a key element in your future development and how happy you are with what you do. Thank you, Joaquin. Those are great pieces of advice. I'm sure it was partially opportunity but it was also a lot of motivation and a lot of talent. As a dual US Spanish citizen and a leader in our industry, I think of you as someone who embodies the power of diversity. So can you talk to us about how you navigated working in different cultures and the importance of diversity at J&J? Thank you. As you may have sensed by my accent and the audience, sure they have already catch up to that. I was born in Spain. So I'm what in the US you would call a Hispanic. So for me, you know, the value of diversity, it was really, it really came to head when I came to the US, right? When I came to live to the US 21 years ago. Before that, I had worked in Spain. I have worked in Italy. I have had European roles. And pretty much I was always among people that were similar to me. Sure, everybody has stereotypes and biases. That's no question about it. But I didn't realize the importance of diversity until I came to the US 20 years ago. And I saw how diverse these countries and, you know, I got myself a little bit of why diversity and inclusion means by virtue of this accent that I have. And, you know, for the English audience, for the English speaking audience, for the US based audience, you know that if you have a Hispanic accent in the US, you are subject to certain stereotypes. Also for the Indian audience, if you have an Indian audience in the US, you have your subject to certain stereotypes. So, you know, me myself when I came here, not when I was in the company, but when I was having my normal life outside of the walls of the company, you know, I was feeling some of these stereotypes and biases that I never felt in my life. So I got a dose of that glimpse of what it means to be different and what it means to have biases. And, you know, that was a big life lesson for me, Ken. And it taught me something important, which is empathy. So I think I became better by understanding the power of diversity and by becoming largely a much more empathetic person than I was before I came to Europe. So it was an important life lesson for me. And since that, I always have considered diversity, equity and inclusion as a core component of how I lead. And now as a CEO of Johnson & Johnson, as a core component of our culture and the reasons people like to work for a company like us. I believe that this is central to what we do. As many in the audience know, we have at Johnson & Johnson a set of values and principles that we call our credo. Our credo was written in 1943. So exactly now, 80 years ago. And when you read it today, you may think it's a normal value statement, but think about how pioneer this was 80 years ago. Putting the patients and consumers first, then employees, then communities, and if you do a good job, if you do a good job, then you're gonna have a fair return for the shareholders. That is the purpose of the corporation today, but that was written 80 years ago and it's an integral part of what it means to work at Johnson & Johnson and what makes this company special. So for me today, when we're talking about our employees, which is a key driver of success of a multi-generational company like Johnson & Johnson, one of the key elements why employees like to work for Johnson & Johnson, one of the key elements that we have to attract people into Johnson & Johnson is precisely diversity, equity, and inclusion. So I consider that a core component of who we are at Johnson & Johnson. I wanna make sure that we have the appropriate representation and we can discuss about that later. I want to make sure that we have appropriate efforts on health equity. And finally, I want to make sure that we create an inclusive environment where our employees feel good and can feel themselves when they work at Johnson & Johnson. So that's part of who we are. And it's very important for me to maintain that as a core component of what it means to work at Johnson & Johnson. Certainly, I think that you have to measure the progress in those areas. And we have specific measurements in diversity. We have a goal of having 50% female representation in management and above. And we are very close to that already. We have 49% of female representation in management and above. Some regions like EMEA and Latin America are ahead of that. And in our executive committee at Johnson & Johnson, we have 50% representations of female. So we are doing well on that compartment. When I look at the US specifically, we have a goal of having 35% ethnic diversity in all our management ranks. And we're doing really well into that goal. And finally, when it comes to black and African Americans, we also have a specific goal to increase the absolute numbers of black and African Americans in management by 50%. We put that goal in 2021 to accomplish in 2025. And we are already almost there in 2023. So we have done a lot of progress and that requires focus, attention, goals. And we have a policy of ensuring that every manager in the company that has responsibility over people does have diversity and inclusion goals in their goals and objectives for the year because you achieve what you measure. So we are very, very focused on doing that. On the equity side, which is an important thing for a healthcare company, as you know, I believe healthcare companies are mission-driven companies. I mean, our ethos is to try to address the toughest challenges that society has in form of diseases. So we have dedicated efforts in health equity. In the US, we have a program that we call our Race to Health Equity that we have pledged $100 million to foster healthcare professionals in underserved communities. And it has created a lot of participation, good partnerships, and globally, we have a bigger effort which we are pledging $250 million to support frontline healthcare workers in low-resource settings. So we put our money where our mouth is and we try to work towards driving health equity through those efforts in the US and outside of the US. And for the audience, if you go to the Johnson & Johnson website, we have a report that we call Health for Humanity where we give you a very detailed account every year of the efforts that we are doing in order to foster health equity. Was muted accidentally. We could tell from that answer how important values are to you. But I wanna switch to the question of the contemporary nature of J&J. So J&J's values, as you just described, are firmly established. But the company is also undergoing perhaps the most significant change in its history with the separation of the consumer health business. So how's the separation going and what can we expect from the new two sector J&J? Thank you, that's a great question and thank you for asking me that question because it's a momentous moment for our company and we are living as we speak. And it connects with some of the questions that I heard before about are the capital markets open or not? I'm gonna comment on that later. So about a year and a half ago, we decided to move on and create two new companies. One company which is going to be a global consumer health champion. The name of this new company is going to be CamView. And another company which is gonna retain the name of Johnson & Johnson which is gonna be focused in the most challenging diseases around medical technology and pharmaceuticals. So we are now right in the middle of that and right in the separation of our consumer health company called CamView. Why do I believe this is the right move to evolve Johnson & Johnson into the future? And keep in mind that our aspiration in Johnson & Johnson, my goal as CEO is to be able to create multi-generational success. So we have a history of 137 years. So I'm thinking about what is our mission, our mission not only for the next couple of years but for decades in the future. So I think that a sign of evolution is to be able to create two different companies. One is gonna be focused on the consumer. The other one is gonna be focused on the patient. And I believe that by having these focus organizations we are going to be able to better serve our constituencies. It's very difficult for a company today, Ken, to be able to compete in beauty with L'Oreal and at the same time to be able to compete in robotic-assisted surgery with Intuitif or in pharmaceuticals with Merck. It's very different skill sets that you need. So I think that by being more focused, more specialized, more targeted, we're gonna be able to serve our constituents, patients and consumers better. So we are in the middle of the Kenview separation. Last week we started the roadshow, which is a preliminary step moving into the initial public offering. We expect to launch the initial public offering very, very soon. And there's a lot of interest for Kenview and I guess it's a good sign of how the markets are recovering from an IPO perspective. So I think it's also a test for the market how well our IPO does. This is a great company, Kenview. It has sales of $15 billion globally. It's in every country of the world and the brands are iconic. I'm sure all of you know Johnson & Johnson for those brands and have used those brands, Baby Shampoo, Band-Aids, Tylenol. So really it's gonna be a tremendous company and I'm convinced that it's gonna be also fantastic for the remaining Johnson & Johnson being the only company focusing METEC and pharmaceuticals. And I do see, and we can commend that later, intersection between METEC and pharmaceuticals. It's the same diseases, the same hospitals, the same payers and the future will bring interventions for diseases that will combine as it happens today in cancer or in cardiovascular surgery and pharmaceuticals. So I see a great combination of skills having this ability to have capabilities both in biopharmaceuticals and in the area of medical technology. Thank you Joaquin. In a few seconds ago, you talked about the importance in your role of thinking about the long term in the future. And I know that you've said publicly that you believe healthcare will advance more in the next decade than it has in the entire last century. So what are you most excited about and how does J&J stay abreast of all the advancements that we're seeing in science and technology? And then a second part of the question, how does the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical industry need to change if we're going to realize the potential of all of these advancements? Thank you. And by nature, I'm an optimist, Ken. So I am an optimistic person. And I think that people like to work with optimistic individuals. I believe that, yeah, you have to be realistic and grounded, but optimistic individuals transmit energy and create a pool which is positive for an organization. So that's why I want to inspire people by telling them that I am convinced that we are gonna be able to advance more in this decade that we have done in the past century when it comes to addressing some of the most difficult challenges in healthcare, like cancer, for example, or neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer. So I am convinced that this is going to be the case. Why is that? I think there's a unique combination in history now, which is the convergence of our better understanding of human biology. So what is the origin of diseases with the convergence of technology and our ability to process and interpret large sets of data that we didn't have before? I mean, there's no time about how technology is transforming the way we behave as society. It's changing the way we shop. It's changing the way we consume information. It's changing the way we run our companies. And it's also changing the way we are discovering medicines, frankly. Today, every company is using technologies in order to be able to screen different molecules in order to be able to understand better the relation between structure and function in order to use those learnings to better design molecules. So I'm convinced that this is gonna be a force in bringing new therapies to life. And as a matter of fact, you are seeing that today. I mean, we have an emergence of new treatment modalities that we were not speaking 10 years ago. Today, we're talking about cell therapy. How do we use our own immune system cells to combat diseases like cancer? We're talking about gene therapy, how we insert and replace defective genes to cure diseases like blindness. Or we are talking about RNA therapeutics, how we use our own cells to manufacture different proteins that are gonna be addressing different diseases. So the emergence of these new treatment modalities and the combination that technology is bringing in fueling and accelerating that change is gonna bring cure to diseases that are really complex that we have been chasing for decades. One example in my view, and I bring an example from our company is cancer. For example, now we have a therapy, a cell therapy for cancer in multiple myeloma that it's just been approved in the US and it has a 90 plus percent response rates in patients with multiple myeloma that had already undergo four to five lines of therapy. I mean, are we going to be able to cure multiple myeloma or other cancers, maybe not curing, but maybe very likely being able to convert them in chronic diseases. And this is not my opinion. I was talking to one of our lead investigators in the last American Society of Hematology Congress and she was telling me, Joaquin, I never used in the past, they were cured when it came to cancer because I've seen many patients not having that. But today with the combination of sequences of new therapies, I actually speak to my patients of the possibility of a cure. So I think that is super exciting and that's why I think that you're going to see that in many different areas. Today there was news about one of our fellow biopharmaceutical companies showing results on how they were slowing cognitive deterioration in Alzheimer's. So with the advances we're doing in early diagnosis, we may be able, if not to reverse the symptoms to stop them and to be able to intervene early in what is a harbinger of how medicine is going to be, it's going to be more personalized, smarter, less invasive. And I think that's something that we are all striving for. Now, you asked me also how does Johnson & Johnson remain vibrant and innovative? And I think that that's a great question and I want to address that. For us, it's very important to be humble. It's a very important for a great company to remain humble and understand that most of the innovation is not going to occur within the walls of Johnson & Johnson. So we have to be externally focused and being able to partner with multiple companies, most of the time smaller companies like us than us and being able to add value with our own capabilities which are more in the area of bringing a scale, bringing a scale in clinical development, bringing a scale in manufacturing, bringing a scale in commercialization. About 70% of the products in our pipeline come from external sources. That doesn't mean that we buy everything, no, because you know very well that sometimes we actually partner a preclinical asset and that preclinical asset sometimes it takes 10, 15 years to get to the market. So I would consider that part of our normal effort but about 80%, 70 to 80% have an external origin and many of them stay in our pipeline for multiple years, even more than a decade sometimes. And we have developed a very sophisticated system of onboarding innovation and that's one of the secret sources that we have. We have a three prong approach. We have what we call innovation centers in the key innovation hubs around the world. We have four of them, Shanghai, San Francisco, Boston and London. And we have people there which are scientific scouts connecting with the innovation ecosystem in the area. We have a system of incubators which we have 21 incubators around the world that host 900 startups and we provide them the space. The laboratories is a Nord Streams attach model so they can do whatever they want and we provide them also guidance in how to move things into the regulatory space, how to gain capital. We have about a hundred investors that come to our facilities in order to deal with the companies. And we have had about 70 billion dollars of capital for external sources going there and about 48 companies have become public of these companies that we have hosting our incubators and 300 of them of the 900 have done at least one deal with Johnson and Johnson. So that's another way that we have to be able to evolve innovation and new talent. And finally, like Met, we have a development corporation which is Johnson and Johnson Development Corporation that also takes equity in different companies. So that's the system of onboarding innovation that we have and we do surveys of what company is the partner of choice. And we share the number one position with one company which is your company, Merck. So Merck and Johnson and Johnson are there exactly in the number one best partner in innovation. So I think that's crucial for a healthcare company to be able to be open to the ecosystem overall, right? I think your next question, Ken, was about what type of changes you think the industry should go through? Well, yes, but I think we're running out of time a little bit and I wanna get to the audience question. So I'm just gonna ask one more question and then go with the audience questions if you don't mind Joaquin. So with India hosting this year's G20, the Indian government has identified strengthening cooperation in the pharmaceutical sector with a focus on access and availability as a key priority. What role do you see companies like ours having in advancing these priorities and what more does the industry need to do as we look to deliver value and ensure equitable access to innovation? Thank you. That's a great question certainly India, which as we read is gonna be the most populated country in the world pretty soon or it's already recently been the most populated country in the world, it's always gonna be important for a healthcare company in many different ways. In the innovation space, in the manufacturing space and also in providing access to the medicines that we discover and manufacture. And in that context, especially in a country like India, I believe that the partnership with the governments, it's crucial. It's a very important one. On one side, we have to make efforts to provide access to innovative medicines in India. On the other side, the government has to create the right regulatory, intellectual property and legal framework for companies to be able to operate in an effective way. And there are opportunities to do that. In our case, we have a partnership with the government of India in treating multidrack resistant tuberculosis, which is a big problem, multidrack resistant tuberculosis. It's a significant killer. And we have now a partnership with the government to create the right protocols, the right education to treat and diagnose multidrack resistant tuberculosis. Now, we would like to continue to advance those conversations to get into other sides of our portfolio that are not addressing, let's call it diseases which are endemic in certain countries, which are addressing more chronic diseases that are or diseases like cancer that are also a significant need in India. For that, my plea is that we need to continue to work in partnership. And the Indian government has to continue to provide us the right regulatory framework and appropriate intellectual property framework and a system in which innovative companies like us can operate effectively to diffuse our innovation to broader parts of the population in India beyond what you would think are antimicrobials or medicines for diseases that are endemic in low resource settings. Thank you. If I can come in here, this is Dr. Srehan from India. So Joaquin, if we were to focus on what are the regulatory that you are referring to which would help to enhance because like I said that we are in the G20 year for India and India has determined to make the regulations friendly to the international. If you know or your organization can communicate to us what are the pinch points that we can be addressed? It'll be a great thing to do because like you said a country like India with the maximum population very diversity in food and also very robust based pharmaceutical industry and innovation and IT industry which is still, I mean which is there already and it can be leveraged for the world good if we go into partnership with companies like yours. Yeah. No, I mean and I look at the risk of being repetitive is two components which are crucial for the innovative industry. One is an unstable and predictable regulatory and legal framework which equalizes innovative multinational companies with the local companies. And the second one is some system understanding the situation of India as a country of intellectual property protection that can create the conditions for us to be able to operate there. So those are the two pillars that are fundamental for the innovation based pharmaceutical industry to operate beyond what we can do and we're already doing utilizing India in many different ways because for many companies India is an important source of manufacturing an important source of capabilities in many different talent spaces. Many of our companies have significant operations in India in the clinical trials operation side or in our cyber security, software engineering but I'm talking specifically about how to provide access to innovative medicines in India that the two components are regulatory framework and in intellectual property framework. Thank you, Dr. Trihan. Our next question is from Dr. Ozaze Udabala who's a clinical lead at Takeda in the GI space. If you can unmute, unmute. Excellent. Thank you, Ken. And thank you, Joaquin for the opportunity to ask this question. So in this discussion you shared some perspectives on finding innovation and effective partnering strategies as well as some comments that you had made at the beginning on the corporate evolution of Johnson and Johnson. So given that my question is in your role at J&J how do you approach the balance between focus and agility in this rapidly evolving healthcare landscape? Thank you, that's a great question and the large company at Johnson and Johnson has important classes and one of them is that we have the scale and the size to make a big impact and a real impact. The downside of that is that we can become too complex and we can become slower and that's something that happens at Johnson and Johnson too. So one of my roles as CEO is try to drive more simplification across Johnson and Johnson and drive more prioritization on what are the key areas that we want to focus to have an impact. I believe that by having the right priorities and having a more simplified and delay your organizational structure we can work towards making the company faster and less complex and that's the type of inertia that I'm trying to fight as a Johnson and Johnson CEO but there's no question that everything has a trade-off and the trade-off of having a big company like Johnson and Johnson that can have an impact is that we always are by default more complex and sometimes slower than smaller companies. Hence the need for external innovation and the need to have an ecosystem that can drive effective partnership and in that there's also a question of mindset that I think leaders at big companies need to have. We need to be humble and we need to understand that when we are dealing with a small company we need to put ourselves in their shoes, understand their issues and respect what they are doing. One of the lessons for me of working in multiple countries is that I could find good ideas no matter where I was. It doesn't matter if the country was big or small, it didn't matter if the company was a 50 people company or a 150,000 company, good ideas, creativity, imagination, innovation can be everywhere. Thank you Joaquin. We have about three minutes left. I'm gonna try to squeeze in two more audience questions. The first one from Dr. Tiziana Cromona, Senior Postdoctoral Science at the University of Bern. Hi, I can thanks a lot and Joaquin thanks a lot for sharing your experience. Now, can you please give an advice to all the women that are present today that are highly motivated, we highly educated with either a PhD or an MD PhD that in what are the right step to follow in order to get a successful career in industry? I'm gonna be both here at Tiziana. Choose the right company. Okay. That would be my advice. Along the lines of what I told you, there are companies where diversity and inclusion is a core component of who they are and it's an imperative and then they walk the talk. And in those companies, you're gonna find a much more open field for women, including in an area which is more complex, I recognize that that is research and development, right? So the right company is gonna help women advance in their career and be much more productive and effective on what they do. So that would be my bold advice. Thank you. Thank you. We have about a minute left. So I'm gonna ask Dr. Dina Katabi who's professor of computer science at MIT to ask her question. Thanks again. So Joaquin, the thing that shocks somebody like me, a computer scientist coming to the pharma industry is that 90% of drugs on average fail the clinical trials and only 10% make it. So that's a huge amount of cost, time actually in patients life. And we have an opportunities now we see like AI, digital technologies, so many things that actually can give us even statistically significant digital biomarker and insight about which drugs are going to have or likely have higher probability of making it and providing out these kinds of insight early on particularly for diseases like Alzheimer's Parkinson's. So help me think about the future of clinical trials and how we can change those numbers with innovation. Thank you, Professor Katabi. I mean, look, this is the Holy Grail, what you are referring. If we were able to predict the activity of a medicine prior to do the most extensive part of the research which are the human clinical trials which is about 80% of the cost of the development of a medicine we will be able to lower the cost of R&D significantly and be much more effective in bringing new medicines to market. I mean, I think we are gonna be in a position to predict the activity of different medicines very early on. And certainly I believe that we're gonna be able to use digital diagnostics in a way that is gonna simplify identifying and predicting disease much early on too. Now, I believe that the technology could help us in simplifying and speeding up human clinical trials but that we will always need human clinical trials and clinical development. So that... Like I'm not saying that we should not. In fact, I think the clinical trials are very important but hopefully we can get the insight within six months within one year as opposed to like 10 years of clinical trials in Alzheimer's or Parkinson's and then the answer is no. Yeah, and I think that you are right. And I think that the predictive value that information that we have accumulated could help us in actually identifying the activity of a medicine much early around that we are doing today. We also need regulatory science to advance at the same pace that we are advancing in technology. And we still have a very antiquated way of doing clinical trials and we have to advance one step at a time there. Today I was reading the trade magazines and I was reading that the USFDA is going to start for the first time considering what they would call remote clinical trials. So clinical trials that are conducted outside of the hospital it could be by telemedicine, it could be in some of the testing the home of the patient. So we are still at that point, we have the USFDA now accepting in certain areas what you would call synthetic placebo groups in order to speed up the clinical trial development. I think eventually if we can find predicted biomarkers that can help us anticipate the safety and activity of a medicine which I think is at reach it could speed up the clinical development. So I'm excited about that and I think it's a key possibility. And also I'm humbled to talk about this with you because the expert is you, not me. So I tell you that people here in the industry is very, very, I mean, every single company you come now in every single R&D group you hear about the excitement of technology and you hear about how they are hosting for example in every single area data scientists, software engineers, artificial intelligence experts and it's become mainstream for most of the company. So I am positive that we're gonna see significant change in the speed in which we design molecules and in the speed in which we test them. So that's part of my promise of we're gonna make more progress in the next decade that we have done in the last hundred years. Well, unfortunately we're out of time now but I wanna wrap this up by thanking Joaquin. This has been wonderful conversation starting with the importance of a company's values the industry's values, the importance of continuing to deliver value to all the constituents particularly patients and providers the importance of finding ways to provide more equitable access across the globe and find the importance of technology and biology to driving future innovation. You've covered the whole waterfront and for that I wanna thank you and I wanna thank Karen and Andrew Pomp my good friend for allowing us this time today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ken. Thank you everybody. Thank you for all the questions and have a great session. Thank you. All right, thank you. Thank you very much, Ken. Thank you very much. So we're gonna move now to the audience participation section following that fireside chat. If we could pull up the polling question, please. There we go. And I'm just gonna do my thing to make that larger. So it's a straightforward question very interesting to see what the audience feels. Question is there will be roughly equal number of women and men in pharma executive teams in A, five years, B, 10 years, C, 20 years, or D? Never. So look forward to hearing your thoughts on that question. We'll be back in a couple of minutes. Let's, if we could pull up the results to the polling question of there will be a roughly equal number of women and men in pharma executive teams in X years and let's see what the audience pulled. Well, so some optimism actually. So the mode answer is 10 years, which received 40% of the vote, 30% in five years. So we see some real opportunities in 20 years, 25% and then actually there's some either pessimists or unfortunate realists out there who think that we'll never see gender equity in the executive team. So thank you very much for participating.