Ep 73 Listener questions: Design leadership, office environments, design authority. conflict and sharing.

In this episode we will answer listener questions about how to make the transition from design lead to design executive, how do you create a creative office environment, a look at where design authority should sit in a company, how to think abbot conflict inside of your team and some best practices for sharing knowledge across your team.

SHOW NOTES:
http://thecrazy1.com/episode73
 
FOLLOW THE CRAZY ONE:
Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook 

Transcript

Stephen Gates : 0:00

What's going on everybody, and welcome into the 73rd episode of The Crazy One podcast. As always, I'm your host, Stephen Gates. And this is the show where we talk about creativity, leadership, design, and everything else that helps to empower creative people. Now, be sure to subscribe to the show. So you get the latest episodes whenever those come out. And remember that you can listen to all the shows, get the show notes, and a lot more just head over to the crazy one calm, that's the words the crazy. And then number one.com. So we're back once again. And I thought I would do one of these shows that I really love, which is kind of going out to social media, figuring out what are some of the questions that listeners are dealing with? What are some of the things that they want to know about because I think I sort of have my agenda, I have the things that I like to talk about, but I think it adds a nice sort of mix to the show. So did that about a week or so ago got a bunch of different questions from people. And so I that's one of the things I want to do because like Look,

Unknown Speaker : 0:58

that's just

Stephen Gates : 1:00

I like to be able to have that connection to people. I like to be able to talk that back to people. So yeah, this show is built from those questions that people sent me. And like I said, you know, there is, there's a lot that goes into this. And I think the other thing that I always apologize for whenever I do this is if I mispronounce somebody's name, apologies, I do the best that I can with it. But know that it's not being done on purpose. It's just because I'm stupid. But anyway, so for today, we've got what do we got? We've got five different questions. We're going to talk about, you know, moving from being a design leader to being a design executive, we're going to talk about the environment that you work in, we're going to talk about where should design authority set the role of conflict on your team? And then how do you really share what it is you're doing? How do you share the knowledge and those sorts of things that you're doing on your team? I think there are five really good questions, five really good topics. And so let's just dive in and get started. So the first one comes from Pete, Siena and Pete asked me that he was making a shift from design leader to a design executive, and wanted to know if there was a crash course some advice that I could give about how to do this. And it's a really interesting topic because I think, you know, one of the, the tough parts is that, you know, whenever you come into this industry, there's some reason why you start to do this work, you want to be a designer, you want to be a writer, you want to do something that's creative. Well, if you do it in a corporate setting, if you do it with a team or anything like that, you know, that kind of the cruel irony is that the longer you do it, usually the further you're being pulled away from what you love. So you know, for me, I was a designer, started work as a designer, then kind of came up with his associate creative director, creative director, and then as you sort of move up the ranks, you keep getting further away from what you love. And that's hard. And then you know, that last step that you have to go through is sort of that pivot, really, in many cases, as you look at becoming a design executive. And, you know, I think that can mean a lot of different things and a lot of different options. But as you do that it really sort of fully goes to being the voice of design at a company leading the entire team setting the vision doing a lot of those sort of things. So I think the first part is that's how, at least for the the boundaries of this question, that's how I would define what is executive mean is that you are basically the that sitting at the top of the pyramid, in your design organization, your design team, and then are kind of the voice of that team, and of that discipline of creativity, whatever it is for your organization. Now, the tough part of that, like I said, is it pulls you really far away from what you're doing. And so I think, you know, the crash course that I would say, to be an executive design executive is the mistake that I see too many people make is to be able to do it. Well, you've got to be an insider and an outsider at the same time, an insider in the fact that you cannot lose touch with your team. You cannot lose touch with the work. You can't just simply say, Oh, I'm an executive. Now I'm in charge. I don't really care about the actual work. Whoa, what's going on, I have bigger, more like organizational problems. Because if you do that the work suffers, the team suffers. There's a lot of those sorts of things. But at the same point, you can't get trapped on just the inside, not sort of wanting to give up the design piece of it. Because you need to be an outsider at the same time. And I think what that means is that you need to be able to take the longer view of what's going on with the team, you have to be able to drive great work and great thinking and build a great team. But those things aren't necessarily your sole focus anymore. You need to be able to understand where is the team going, where's my budget coming from? How are we being positioned? How are we working with other teams? And because I think there suddenly is a lot of different things that you need to concern yourself with. These are going to be things that oftentimes may feel like dirty words for some of us that Do you know, a lot of creative work they need to be things like politics, politics, meaning not a bunch of backstabbing and talking behind people's backs and doing crap like that, which is sort of the the negative implication of politics But I think politics and how is your position? How is your team being positioned? I think for success, and also, it may sound a little kind of like House of Cards, but for power, because you need to have your team respected, you need to have them become a critical asset, you need to have them become successful to grow to get the sort of work that you want. politics in many cases, doesn't have to be that I'm, you know, stabbing people in the back, I'm cutting them down politics can be an order, the alliances I'm forming, what are the other teams that I'm working with? What are the initiatives that I'm trying to do to be able to get that stuff done? You need to as terrifying as it might be to some creatives, you need to understand how do you work with a budget? Because in a lot of cases, it's how do I grow my team? How do I reward my team? How do I understand what it is that we're doing? How do I control cost? How do I do a lot of things like that? You need to be able to look at things like organ design. And this is how do I grow my team? How do I keep people on my team? How do I give them career paths so that they understand not only what are we judging them against But then how do we really look at you know, what is next for them? What is that thing that we're going to have down the path for? And how am I sure that while we're holding them accountable some of those things, they're holding us accountable as well, that there are some of these things that we've said like, Look, if you work on this a promotion or something like that will happen. That's what org design is. And you need to understand how is your team going to grow? How are people going to progress and do this stuff, need to understand strategy, this is sort of the the outsider part of that insider outsider equation needing to understand Where's your team going, have a heads up view of because so many cases, leadership is about stringing these little moments, stringing these little things together, stringing these little moves together to get the team into a better place to do better work, to be stronger, to be able to be more respected. There's a lot of these sort of things that I think are really sort of critical in that design executive role. But there are a lot of things in the challenge here and again, while design is having a moment. The reason why I fear may just be a moment is that these are all things that we didn't learn in school. These are things that not all of us are good at. These are things whenever I will talk about about why we need to learn more business. These are those very specific things, because these are the things that ultimately will dictate the success or failure of the team. Because that's the thing we have come from the design background. So we understand how to handle that. You understand how to motivate a team, how to push them on ideas, how to do things like that. Politics, budget or design strategy. These are the things that I think, do create the problem. And I think that as you look at the crash course, those are those sort of things where they do start to take on a more traditional leadership definition. I think it's just simply the way that you apply it the style that you use, that makes a difference. So I think the crash course for me would be to go start to study these What are often cases, much more traditional leadership and executive type of skills. But they're very necessary because that's the thing at the end of the day, a design team is still a team, still part of an organization and will function very similar to the way that others do. So what is going to be asked of it is going to be very similar to that. So I think hopefully that makes sense and maybe kind of clarifies a little bit more about, again, as you sort of go up that ladder. What does that mean? So move on to the next question. And this one's from Megan Rarick. God, I hope I pronounced that right. rorick Rarick. sent me an email, let me know which one that should have been. And the question was, I'd love to hear your thoughts on building out a creative environment for teams. I know envision is all remote. But what have you done for previous teams you lead? What do you see when you visit different customers? That works really well. Now, the interesting thing here is I think that space is an interesting thing, because I think in many cases, whenever I think about what are the three dimensions that will define transformation on a team, a lot of it is the tools you use. A lot of it are the kind of the norms you established and a big part of it is kind of the space that you occupy. And I would say that space I think is definitely I think we maybe over fetishize that a little bit right? Like we maybe put a little bit too much emphasis on how beautiful does it have to be and lug I think everybody likes to work in someplace that is new, everybody. He likes to work in someplace that feels very modern and up to date. But the thing that I would say, though, is that the design of the space is separate from the functionality and the use of the way people use the space. Because that's the thing is that it's, for me, it's much more about the rituals, a team has an enormous that they establish for how they define how they use that space. I've seen all sorts of things in the worlds of design that like some of the best teams, maybe have the worst spaces, and that some of the best teams have the best spaces, but it isn't necessarily the space itself that is causing that work, because I've also seen incredibly beautiful spaces that has incredibly dysfunctional teams. So it's not a one to one correlation that Oh, if we just give people an open working environment or Herman Miller furniture, things like that, well then naturally great work will flow. Will they appreciate it? Sure. You want people to come around the office more sure. Does it make it easier on recruiting? Sure. Does that mean you get great work? No. And I think You know, a lot of it for me is about how do you define how you use that space? And how do you actually be deliberate in making the rituals or in breaking up the space to do different things. Because, you know, the spaces in the layouts that I find to be the most fascinating, are often separated by different zones of work. So there may be one area that's just about an individual work area. So it's about individual desks, with monitors with some of those things where it's a quiet space, you're gonna go in there use headphones, it's just about getting worked as an individual. There may be other spaces that are more about team collaboration and team working areas. There are communal tables, there's white board, there's lots of energy, maybe there's music playing. It's much more about bringing the team together and getting to work together as a group. And you I've seen that where they also then do it of doing really smart things like do you put your project managers your producers do they actually sit in the corridor is that people travel the most. So again, if there are spaces, there are three ways to go between these different sort of spaces. They would put the reducers are so that the people that they need to talk to, you're often most of the time just walking by, they don't have to go seek them out. They don't have to go disturb them. But I think that's the thing that I would say more than anything is that, you know, it is really not just about the creative environment, but what are the norms you establish? What is the time that you set aside for people to go off and work individually? What is the time when you want people to come together and work together as a team? How are you being deliberate and thoughtful about that? How are you doing it to say, Okay, look, whenever we do a brainstorm, I don't care who's in the room. Everybody leave your title at the door, all opinions are equal. But then when we do a pinup, or we do a shredder, we do a review that then maybe the opinions come back in. So that's why I said Is it this isn't about post it notes. It's not about pretty furniture. You can take any space and make it a wildly creative space. I think it's just again, how do you define how you use it? How do you define what those spaces mean? How do you sort of create those sort of rituals that are then going to be able to activate it to be able to do that and now a lot of this is going to be individually up to the way your team works. Because again, some teams, maybe they they're going to index a little bit more heavily on individual or some teams, they're going to want to do all team work all the time, that's going to be dependent on chemistry. And it's going to be dependent on reading that a little bit. But I think, that ability to say, this is our process. These are the stages we go to. This is the time when we come together as a team, this is the time when we work individually, these are the places that we do it, this is the way we utilize this space. You can take any space and be able to make that happen with it. So I think that that's really the biggest thing that I've learned is, like I said, you know, a beautifully designed space does not equal a functional team. That it you know, like I said, is it good for recruiting make you feel better? Absolutely. But I would really look at how deliberate is your team in the way that they work? How much room how many rules have they defined? How deliberate are you? Or is it just sort of happenstance that you know, and you need that to be part of it. You need people to go over and tap somebody on the shoulder and do that. But I would say Look at that, think about that and and how are you utilizing this And being deliberate about that, because I think that's really what ultimately defines a creative environment. The next question, next question comes from Carmen brand G. Man, nobody's nobody's named Bob Smith in this one. So brand g brand g again, let me know if I got that right. Hopefully I got that one. Right. But the question is, where should design authority sit? Interesting question. Interesting word choice. And I think I get something similar to this question a bunch. And I have to be honest, that I think the question itself may be an indication that there is a problem. Because I think whenever you use words like authority, that's a little concerning because the best teams that I work with are balanced. They are a balance of product, their balance, attack their product, product balance of design. There's an equal state and everybody being invested in the best idea being invested in the process. So everyone is a part of that process. And but I think that doesn't mean that everyone's opinions are equal. But what it means is that they are all responsible for the product. They're all responsible for the outcome, but each of them drive certain parts of the process, and each of them own certain artifacts. So it's not saying that again, everybody has an equal say on what design is. But I would say like I said that the word authority for design directions should sit with the design team. I would probably, though, swap out the word authority for words like expertise, subject matter expert, again, swap it out for kind of any word that you want. But I think that what you want to be able to get to is a word that infers respect between the parts of the team, because I think one of the biggest problems I see one of the biggest breakdowns I see is that there is there is no trust there is no respect. And if there's no respect, then you start to get to places like who is right who has the authority who has the final say, because I think that leads to an incredibly dysfunctional relationship, it leads to a lot of, you know, again working at who is right. And the thing that I would continue to say continue to preach, continue to talk about is if somebody is right than somebody else is wrong. Whenever we are doing creativity, whenever we're doing creative work, it shouldn't be about who is right, because that's a very, it's a very black and white, very sort of finalized approach to be able to look at things that you know, without, without those things, right, because they don't encourage trust, they don't encourage respect. And without those, it does dissolve into this constant battle of who is right. And that's not healthy, it's not functional, it doesn't tend to work terribly well. Because that's what I said is, is it that point, whenever it's about right. It's very black and white. It's very, it's very absolute. And so for me, you know, the teams where again, we should be able to have a conversation with protocols. We should be able to have a conversation with tech, we should be able to have a proper a conversation with executives with all these sorts of different people to understand their opinion. We can wait those opinions, we can agree with those opinions, we can disagree with those opinions, there's a lot of different things that we can do. But we need to hear them out. We need to be able to respond to them, we need to be able to respect them, even if we're the ones that are the arbiters, the curators, or whatever it is that sort of work. So I definitely think that it's something to think about about maybe, that ultimately, yes, design should sit with the design team. But we need to be open, we need to share we need to do this sort of stuff so that it's not just simply in these absolute terms of authority, right or wrong black or white, things like that, because whatever it's that then we really get into. And I hope, I hope that makes sense. I hope that people understand what I'm saying. Because whenever it comes down to politics in that terms, whenever it comes down to politics, and that sort of like fight or flight, right or wrong sort of thing, whatever it does need to be about whatever I say that is the right thing, and you need to listen to that and you need to respect that. You don't get respect by saying you need to respect me if anything, you probably get less respect By doing things like that, and so again, I think our ability to be the ones that can that can let people into the process, our ability to have that confidence to be able to do that says a lot. And I think it can set the tone because in many cases, that's what creativity looks like. That's what design looks like in too many companies. It looks like a power struggle, it looks like a bunch of opinions, going to war. I think this is also why I will leverage and get teams to try to do things like looking at what is the source of truth about that, because of the source of truth is what I say versus what you say, always an argument, if the source of truth, if per se is data, if the source of truth is customer research, if the source of truth is actually going out and talking to your customers, much more subjective, much, much better, much healthier, dynamic around the work that's being done because then it isn't just about Am I right? Or are you right? It's about well, maybe neither one of us are right, but also at the end of the day. It doesn't matter which one of us are right, because I think that's the ultimate problem here. What matters Is what the customer thinks what matters is what they want to do, what do they want? What are their needs? because too many, in too many cases, we've gotten so arrogant, we've gotten so self centered, that what we think matters in design is our opinion, when ultimately we're designing for other people, right? Because design without design that is just purely about emotion design, that is devoid of results is called Art. That is not what we are doing. So again, I would just say, to try to look at the mentality of that to try to look at the approach to that for how again, can it be more about the fact that it's about ultimately we want to engender respect, and we want to engender trust? Because when those happen, that's when the best work happens, because then we trust each other to take risks. The next question, the next one comes from Chris Federer. And Chris asks the topic of conflict in the design process is interesting. Maybe a little bit more of a statement than a question, but I would, I agree, I think that conflict is something that I've looked at for Quite a while very interesting. And I think like, Look, this can be taken a few different ways. And I think especially on the heels of what I just talked about, about how it's not about right or wrong, things like that. Conflict for me is a little bit different, right? Because I think that here again, that I'd probably be swap some of the words around, because I think conflict starts to get a little bit too close to fighting, it gets a little bit too close to again, who is right. So I would say for this, I would probably swap the word conflict for a term like tension. Because like I said, conflicts and in pliers, the sort of like fighting somebody being right, you know, and that's a combative attitude that we don't want. I think tension to me, really more implies different views, different opinions, and forces that can pull against each other. And I think that you know that that's the heart of great creative work. I think a lot of people don't necessarily think about it that way. A lot of people may not necessarily view it that way. But whenever I think back about the best partnerships I've ever had, whenever I think back about the best work I've ever done, there has been a tension and a push and pull between myself and the people that I worked with. And the problem is that our natural mentality sort of goes against this in a really interesting and odd way. Because, you know, most of the time this is where gender bias race bias a lot of things, you know, happen and I think in creativity, you can get sort of a mean created by it sounds like a dumb way to say it. But I think that you can sort of get almost like a creative blindness, where what you do is that you surround yourself with people who just agree with you, you surround yourself with people who think the way that you do you surround yourself with a lot of people that are very much in the same space that you are, makes, makes you feel better and makes you feel a little bit more comfortable. I think it's the same thing. Why, you know, people with certain genders surround themselves with that same gender as people of a certain race. Again, I don't I don't think it's necessarily in some cases being done maliciously, or, but I think it's just it's a part of human psychology. But the problem is whenever it comes to creativity, it weakens the work and it weakens the idea. Because whenever everybody just agrees with us, there isn't a friction point there isn't that sort of idea of how do I get somebody to push back against this to push me to be able to get better. And so I think what we need to be able to do, even if you are surrounded by people who are that way, who just kind of think the way that you do, then that's a case where you need to be able to start to, again, establish norms that encourage people, if not expect people to push back against ideas, to try to break them to try to do better work. Because I think, you know, for me, the best teams are the ones that you knew, you knew that whenever you showed up to a meeting, your work was gonna be put under a microscope, you knew that they were going to push you for the best, they were to ask a lot of tough questions, they're going to do a lot of those sort of things. They weren't gonna make it easy. And whenever that happened, it pushed you to be better. It pushed you to be able to do better work. And again, I think that that's why we need to understand that these tensions may feel uncomfortable, they may feel different They may even go wrong at a certain point because I think if you needed to become attention, not a conflict, and so it may take a little bit of practice to to get that tipping point, right but they are really good and really necessary. One of my friends always has a phrase that I sort of come back to whenever I think about this about how steel sharpens steel. And it's true because you know, maybe it sounds a little cliched or a little, you know, Tweedy t shirt or something. But you do you need to surround yourself with people who really will challenge you with who wants you to do better work, because it is it's so easy to just become comfortable. It's so easy to just simply take the easy route it's so easy to do the lesser as opposed to pushing yourself to say look, you know, I'm maybe I'm not gonna get it right the first time maybe I'm gonna get somebody who wants to question it. It can maybe feel a little bit wrong to you but these are the sort of things that we've got to be able to do to get better because you know it great ideas aren't easy. great ideas take work they take refinement This is again go back to one of the very first shows called light bulbs are bullshit. That's the whole reason why right Like this is a blue collar profession and we need to treat it that way. So that's what I would say is to seek out and be deliberate, be deliberate in the way you build your teams be deliberate in the way that you think about, again, your org design. So you're creating a sort of tensions, you're creating opposites people can play against each other, because the work will get better. Now, we come to the last question. So the last one comes from Luca De Filippo. Filippo, Filippo, man, I'm just really suck at this today. But the question is, what's the best way to share design knowledge? And kind of like this could be processes, methodologies, guidelines, project relevant info, and how do you keep everything updated and accessible a lot to unpack there? So I would say the question, Luca, probably is actually two different questions. Because I think on the one hand, what you're asking about is how do I share organizational ways of working right because I think whenever we talk about processes method ologies guidelines, those are things that apply to organizations, they cut across projects. These are things that are sort of team mandates team norms. Now whenever we talk about things like project relevant info, keeping everything, you know, updated and accessible, that feels to me like it's a little bit more of sharing around a project. So let's break that apart into two different things. And let's sort of answer those two questions separately. I think that whenever it comes to organizational information, you need to think about it in a few different ways. There are some things that you send out to an organization that can just simply be shared. These are things that are talked about in all hands meetings, these are things that can be included in emails or in Slack, or different things like that. These are things that are just smaller informational updates. I do think that whenever we talk about process, methodology, guidelines, things like that, whenever those things are instituted, they need to be they need to be taught or trained or what Whatever it is you want to do, I think after they have done that your leadership needs to understand what is the expected outcome? How do they coach against it? How do we check in on it? How do we support it as an organization? Because what I see too many times is that we just simply share a process or methodology, and hope and assume that everyone adopts it. And even if they do, the problem is that you'll often find that it mutates it changes it isn't necessarily consistent across the team. So different teams come together to start to work, different projects get moved around. Things have to get rethought, redone, I think it's also thinking about how do you make these things a part of all the parts of your team? So is it a part of onboarding? whenever new people come onto the team? Are you teaching them those processes, those methodologies, those guidelines, that does not mean that I hand them a PDF, that does not mean that I just simply throw them in a bunch of meetings and quote unquote, hope they catch on? That's too much of a happenstance way of sort of sharing that information. I see that happen way too much. But I think like I said, these needs to be things that are coached. That are updated, and that they're revisited regularly. There should be something for as big as process methodology guidelines, there needs to be fielded a responsible for this, it will probably not be their full time job. But they need to be the ones that are checking in on this stuff. They need to be the ones that are looking at it to say, look, is this working? Do we need to alter it? What are the parts that are working? What are the parts that we need to get better? Because all of those things are also living things. They should not be written in stone, they should not be constant all the time. They need to be tweaked, refined, evolved. So organizationally, I would say to do things like that. Now, whenever we talk about projects, and how do I share project relevant info, keep everybody updated and accessible. For me, this really comes down to how do I find central points that serve as a source of truth for the project. There is a lot of different tools out there that can do this. But I think too often what I see is that that source of truth is Hallway Conversations or emails or side conversations in slack That those then some of them are captured, some of them are lost, some of them are talked about, some of them are given more importance than other ones, there's not a consistent way of being able to do this, all of those things are going to continue to happen. But to have a central point person who is responsible for that, oftentimes a producer or a project manager, whatever the title you want to use is, should be the central point for that. And then there should be a repository for assets for different parts of the project. For conversations for decisions, there needs to be these sort of sources of truth, that everybody can go back and reference that we can document what is going on. Because like I said too many times it's we got to create a brief we all do a bunch of individual stuff, and then sort of try to pull it together as we go off and creating more disconnected more conflict than what we really need as we go through. So just think about what is that source of truth? Like, look, it can be JIRA, it can be a Google Doc, it can be any number of things, right, like, again, work for the tool that that's best for you. There's so many good ones out there, but really get to what is that source of truth and the other part of it is There is no substitute for actual human communication. Do a 15 minute stand up every day do the same thing of talking about what did I do yesterday? What am I working on today? What am I blockers don't solve for it just do updates, there is no substitute for that regular communication. So that again, we're not just leaving it up to an email, maybe somebody read or maybe they didn't put it in slack. Maybe they saw it, maybe they didn't. Again, make sure that people are engaged, make it because like, Look, this here, again, successes a choice, make sure that people are engaged, make sure that they know these decisions are going on. Because when you do that, and you have these central points of truth, that's when a lot of that sort of sharing becomes much easier, much much better. But hopefully, that helped. I'll make the offer that I always do like look, I think I'm I'm here to help if you want to if you have any questions of your own. If this answered a bunch of things that raised a bunch more questions, reach out to me reach out on social media, you can email me through my site, we can go there's all kinds of different ways you can do it. But the you know the intent of this is for it to be a conversation that the more that we share collectively, the better we get collectively, because that's the thing is like, you know, for me, I continue to be really concerned, like design is having a moment. It's good moment. But if we aren't able to take on issues, like becoming design executives aren't aren't able to deal with things like design authority, with conflict with even sharing our knowledge, that this means that we're in danger of this becoming just a moment that things will swing back. And things like design thinking and all these things that are sort of in fad right now will be replaced with something else. So I think this is why we have to share this is why we have to ask these questions and share what it is that we know, to be able to get better at this stuff. So anyway, I think as usual, if you found any of this helpful, do me a favor, head over to your favorite podcast platform, drop a review in there, let people know what you think about it. Make sure you subscribe to the podcast because I know not always the best about releasing these on the most regular basis, but whenever they're out there, I want you to know that they're there, so make sure that you subscribe. As always, you can find out more about this podcast related articles show notes. All this sort of stuff, head over to the crazy one calm it's that crazy and the number one.com follow me on social media like the show on Facebook just go in and type the the crazy one calm or sorry, The Crazy One podcast. And you'll be able to go in and like it there. And again, you can go and engage ask questions, I'll get back to you as quickly as I can. Sometimes I'm traveling so it may not be right away. And if it goes longer than I don't know what a couple of days, just bumping again to make sure that I see it. And I will get back to you just sometimes, like I said, my travel and things like that work my brain and I lose track of a couple things. But finally, as always, everybody in legal wants me to remind you that the views here just my own, they don't represent any of my current or former employers. These are just my own personal thoughts. And finally, I say it every time because I mean it every time. But thank you for your time. I know time is truly the only real luxury that he has have was incredibly humbled. You want to spend any of it listening to me. So until next time, go out, ask some more questions, share what you know, have some fun doing it. Hopefully all this helped. And while you're doing it, always remember Stay crazy