Creating Engagement for Ideas| Scott Gould | 526

Is your audience engaged with your idea, or are they ho-hum about it? Are you engaged with your own ideas, and can you feel comfortable repeating them again and again at the one-on-one level to new audiences? Engagement is some of the most challenging work of thought leadership. Without it, it's not going to create impact. Either you'll be missing something within your own spark, or you won't light a spark within others. So today, I've invited Scott Gould, the author of The Shape of Engagement, to talk with me about the intersection of ideas, thought leadership, and engagement. We talked about frameworks and the hard work of sharpening your framework. Scott and I also talked about why ideas need engagement to spread, and we talked about evangelizing your ideas. I'm Bill Sherman, and you're listening to Leveraging Thought Leadership.

Ready?

Let's begin. Welcome to the show, Scott.

Thanks for having me, Bill. It's great to be here.

So I want to begin with a conversation about engagement. And that's going to be the running theme through today. And I know this is a topic that you've spent a lot of time thinking about. And in fact, the title of your book is The Shape of Engagement. So let's do a level set. What is engagement and how do you define it?

It's the million-dollar question. Anyone who's a thought leader who's listening to this knows that defining the subject that you're talking about is often one of the biggest jobs. That you have. Creating some sense of common and shared nomenclature is a great pastime of us thought leadership people. I define engagement as togetherness. If you've got you and me and we remain separate as you and me, we're unengaged. When you and me creates we, we are engaged. And so engagement is togetherness. Now that's very generic, but it actually suits most scenarios. If somebody is engaged to be married, it means that they are together. To be more together in marriage. If two military forces are engaged in a conflict, it means that they are together in battle. If you have, if you're at the gym and your bit of equipment that you're using, the pin is engaged if it's in the hole, isn't it? If it's together with the hole. And if your employees are engaged, it means they are together with you as opposed to being separate and working or thinking or being at odds with what your organization wants to do. Same with customers, Same with audiences, right? So engagement is togetherness. We can break it down a little bit more in that engagement is togetherness in one of three areas. We can talk about head engagement, which is do people cognitively understand you? Are they together with you in the mind? We can then talk about hands engagement, forgive me, hands engagement, which is are people's behaviors and actions together with you? And this is, um, you know, kind of what we would think of in terms of audience engagement in a moment or experience design is are people are they really experiencing? Are they emotionally right here with us, right? The height of that could be, you know, when we enter a state of flow. And then we finally have the third type of engagement, which is not in the mind and it's not in the body, it's in the heart. And this is what we can think of as heart engagement or affective engagement or soul engagement. And it's really to do with the bonds that we have with something. So the example that I use is I'm not talking with my wife and I'm not thinking about my wife right now. I'm not with my wife right now. I'm not surfing with my wife right now. But I am deeply bonded to my wife. And so therefore, we have those 3 different types. So you and I right now, or anyone listening, you are cognitively engaged with this. And Bill and I are behaviorally engaged because we are both here, and I can look into his eyes right now, and he can look into mine. So we are physically in the same space. And then finally, affective engagement really would be the sense of bonding, which Maybe as a listener of this podcast, you have an affective heart form of engagement with Bill and the work that they do here.

So let me ask a question. Are the three types of being with an engagement, are they arranged in a hierarchy in your mind, or they— is it possible to be affectively engaged but not cognitively, for example? Can your head not be in it but your heart is?

It's a really good question. We know that these three different types of forms of engagement can be measured by different mechanisms, particularly an fMRI scanner will look at the different areas of the brain that light up, and not just the brain but the body, the presence of certain neurochemicals. So yes, you can be one without the other in the moment, certainly. However, the way that you get to hands engagement is through head engagement. People can't do unless they know. And the way you get to heart engagement is through hands engagement. People can't be unless they've done something, because we are what we do. So you have this sense of, in the moment, you can be one, you can be one or, or the other. Like right now, I am affectively engaged with my wife. I'm not behaviorally engaged. I'm not with her, nor am I thinking about her. However, the only reason why I can be heart-engaged with my wife is because I have— we've done a lot together over the years, and also I know her really well and she knows me. So you can see how they kind of act as building blocks. Something engages your head, it engages your hands, it engages your heart. And then because something's engaged your heart, it re-engages your head in a new way, and then that re-engages your body in a new way, and that re-engages your heart in a new way. And so we have this wonderful kind of cyclical process that goes on.

So I want to ask a question and relate engagement to the engagement of an idea, right?

Yeah.

Which is what we do with thought leadership is how do you disseminate an idea and get people to go, yeah, I like that, I'm going to put that to practice, right? Okay.

Yeah.

And that's a meta conversation, but that's exactly what we need to have here because If you're practicing thought leadership, you can be standing on the street corner here on Las Vegas Boulevard, and you can be shouting your idea. But if no one is paying attention, if no one is engaged and they're all walking from Caesars to the Bellagio to go watch the fountains because they're going to do their spray in the next 5 minutes, you haven't achieved engagement. You could also be giving a keynote in front of an audience. And, you know, they're going, man, lunch is in 45 minutes, you know, and they're looking at the watch.

Yeah, just hold on, we're almost there. Yeah, yeah.

So you could have the greatest idea and have an audience that is not paying attention. How do you make that work? Because I think that's deeply relevant for anyone who's practicing thought leadership.

You've put forward a really great case, and let's just Let's go a little bit more meta for a moment, which is engagement is just a fancy word for relationship, right? Quality of relationship, relationship building. Engaging is building a relationship, and we can engage with objects or ideas or people or things or brands, and all of these are relationships. It's interesting, you know, that there's a lot of people who talk about employee engagement, and then there are others who talk about community engagement, and then there are others who talk about audience engagement or user engagement, as if they're separate, but they're all the same. They all describe how do people build a relationship with your thing, whatever your thing is. And if your thing is an idea, or you, yeah, you, your thing, your organization, what have you. When we're talking about engaging with an idea, I think we're talking about engagement in its most beautiful form for me, because ideas have this wonderful power, don't they? Right? They have this incredible power. I used to be a church minister. So I've got a lot of experience in how people engage with an idea, that idea being the religion, which is— we all, we know there, you, you— I can't physically say to you, here's, here's Jesus or Buddha or Muhammad or whatnot. But then what we have is we have all of these physical manifestations and things as well. I find that really fascinating. So religion can teach us a lot about it. So let's, let's go on the journey of how do we engage with an idea. The first thing about engaging with an idea, head engagement, is I have to know the idea exists.

There's an awareness component, right?

Yeah, an acknowledgement, acknowledgement that there is this concept out there called this and it means this. And actually, probably most ideas die because enough people don't hear about them. So that's prob— that's your first thing, is getting someone just know about you. Is a fair amount of work. The second thing then is, if they do have a chance of knowing about me, will that knowing cut through the other messages out there and land in them? Uh, so this is the head engagement part. The things that engage the head best have what is called affective context, which means they have an existing interest in that idea. The idea has commonality with them in some way. To put it in my parlance, you best engage someone's head when their heart already cares about the idea.

And I think this is a matter of understanding your audience and knowing how to meet them on ground they are familiar with, right? Because it is so easy, and I think it's the curse of knowledge, to talk about your idea from the perspective of the lovely nuance, the depth, the richness, You and I, if we've been thinking about an idea for 20 years, we're going to be talking at that level. Can we scale that down and go, "Let's remember for people who are encountering this idea for the first time." Yeah.

Well, so here's— take an example. One of the best ideas I think out there is Dan Pink's work on motivation in Drive. Right, that's a great— he— yeah, and he actually took this pre-existing concept of self-determination theory and made it really popular by making it easy to understand, which again is the problem with a lot of academia and why lots of books are popular these days that basically take an academic idea but make it knowable. That's what they're doing. So what Dan did is he called it Motivation 2.0, and immediately by calling it just that We've got a great sense of commonality. If he'd called it Motivation 2.0 and he released that book in the '90s, it wouldn't have landed because 2.0 is a Web 2.0, it's the Web 2.0. So it had to come post-2005, 2006. Also, Web 2 described revolution. So calling it 2.0 immediately describes a sense of revolution. Then he called it Motivation 2.0 at a time when people were really curious about motivation. So in that, it lands. I've got someone else who calls their idea the Sense Choice Change Matrix, and I struggle. It just doesn't land. It's too many words. I struggle to remember the order of the words, and I'm sure it, I'm sure it's very good, but it just doesn't land. It, it's not a kernel of a, a drop there. So that's an immediate issue, is just naming it something that actually just helps it land in your head.

Well, and to build on that, I think of Daniel Kahneman's work Kahneman and Tversky at two levels, right? So there's the academic research on behavioral economics and saying, hey, we are not rational, right? And then there's the second layer with the book, which is called Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow. It's a 700-page book, but you're like, oh, okay, that sounds interesting. I'll dig in. Similarly, I think about someone that both you and I know and his framework, Joe Pine, right? So the phrase, the experience economy, when he put that book out, people are like, what is this? I don't understand the framework. I don't get it. Now people know exactly what they're talking about. It takes time even for a good term or a good idea to land with the audience. And the larger your audience, I think the more time it takes and the more repetition it takes for people to go, yeah, I get this.

Yeah, I mean, there's a few things to say there, and I don't want to get drawn off track, but thinking— the book by Daniel Kahneman is actually called Thinking, Fast and Slow. Yes, not Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow, or Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow. And no one that I've met has ever read that book completely. Everyone stalls halfway along the point. And he actually has actually retracted much of it. But the idea, the central idea of System 1, System 2 has stuck around. And System 1, System 2, that sticks. Take Joe's work with the experience economy. What helped him was the article was published in HBR, and then the book was published by HBR. That really helped them. And then it took him 10 years, he would say, for the idea to really get traction. But the market was changing, and we were seeing it explode. And now the word, the experience economy, the phrase is ubiquitous and everywhere.

It's part of the business lexicon, right?

It is part of the business lexicon, but I would wager that part of the fact that it's alliteration makes it stick.

Mm-hmm.

I think if he'd called it something different, it might not have stuck. Um, we have the gig economy and the creator economy, so maybe they stick around, but other phrases don't stick around. I don't think the engagement economy is ever gonna land. It's just too many words. So I know I'm being really pernickety here, but I think a key thing of what makes somebody engage with an idea is that it is easy to remember the essence of the idea and the essence of the idea is held in the idea's name. So when people call something that's a little bit abstract, it just doesn't really land. And it has to be a bit novel, but it has to be really memorable. The OODA loop is, um, a phrase that was used, you know, to describe military dogfights in the air, and it means Observe, Orientate, Decide, and Act. But just OODA, it kind of makes you remember it. OODA. You know how many things out there have got a snazzy acronym? So now we can think about the Heath brothers, right? And they're great at their acronyms. Or we can think of steps, you know, with, um, Jonah Berger and so forth. There's just a well-worn path, right? Good ideas are just really memorable. And I tell you, I do think if you go— you hear a good sermon, you're getting a good example of how to construct an idea that's memorable enough that when people leave, they remembered it because they designed it to be memorable. They've designed it to hook onto common things. So hence the great ideas. Look, yeah, they use common concepts and they add in something novel, and that's the way it sticks.

Well, and let's layer in on the novel piece. Often it's provocative in some way where someone will say, "Huh, I haven't thought about that this way before," right? You have to get people wanting to chew on it. And you can do it through data. You can do it through story. You can use it through metaphor, parable. There's a number of different tools. But you're trying to get someone to that cognitive point where they're wrestling with the idea and say, what does this mean to me?

Yeah, you're going to touch upon their comfort and their discomfort at the same time. So it's— and you got to do it in the shortest sentence possible. So when you find somebody who's got a really good idea, just the hearing of it lands. You know, I haven't got to that place yet with my concept. So I talk about engagement, but I've not yet got to a point where I can describe it in a sentence and it Jumps in. I'm working towards it, but I've not got there yet. So if we think about engaging with an idea, you've got knowing, head engagement. An idea then needs you to perform the hands engagement. You need to be able to do it and you need to be able to do it quickly.

Mm-hmm.

Which is why I think the best frameworks enable you to quickly change the way that you're thinking about an idea really, really quickly. They contain within them the seeds of action. So again, if you've got a more abstract framework that takes a while for you to get your head around, or you look at it on a page and you're like, what?, you can't act. Whereas the great frameworks, the great ideas, you can act. So if we take again, uh, Dan Pink with, uh, Drive and Motivation 2.0, one of the main things there is autonomy. Just so I can immediately go, okay, let me give somebody a choice rather than choosing for them. You can do that immediately. Then the last thing of heart engagement is then can it become part of someone? And again, I think the best ideas, they become part of you cuz you can say, right, I will now give people choices. Whereas again, a more abstract framework, it's hard to know, how do I carry this with me? How do I put it in my pocket? So, I think that's an additional thing, right? Again, so you find the best ideas are actually really simple, really mobile. I mean, I think a great one is red sky at night, shepherd's delight. Boom, right? It's got it all, right? It's easy to know you can do something about it because if you see red sky at night, you know it's gonna be nice. And if it's red sky in morning, you know to be a little bit worried. Although when I was a kid and I used to hear that recited, I used to think it was some apocalyptic warning.

Mm-hmm.

Red sky warning, shepherd's warning. It sounds like the end of the world. And then finally it becomes part of who you are. You just know to then behave accordingly. So I think that's a great example.

If you're enjoying this episode of Leveraging Thought Leadership, please make sure to subscribe. If you'd like to help spread the word about our podcast, please leave a 5-star review at ratethispodcast.com/LTL and share it with your friends. We're available on Apple Podcasts and on all major listening apps, as well as thoughtleadershipleverage.com/podcast.

So let's now turn back the distillation of the idea for yourself. How has that journey been? Because you said, I haven't cracked the code on it. I'm assuming there are many in our audience that are going, wow, I wish I could. And how do I do that? What do I try? So I want to ask you, how have you tried to distill it down to that one self-enacting idea or phrase, your red sky moment, if we will?

Yeah, red sky at night. Anyone listening to this who is a thought leader in any way in an organization, writing their book, coming up with a speech, knows it can be agony, right? It is like— it's like writing a book, it's writing an opus, and you've got to constantly trim off the stuff that you like but your audience doesn't necessarily vibe with. If you look at my notebook, you will find that I have journaled over and over again the same things over and over again. My process was a bit funny. I was doing a blog in 2009, 2010. I noticed that social media was not just around the media, it was around the method underneath it, something around the mindset. So I began just playing around with what makes somebody more social or less social. I then began playing around with 2x2 matrixes to try and describe this, and I began to play around with like levels. And then I went off and I went to be a church minister, and I noticed that the models that I'd found worked in work also worked at church, and that what I found worked at church had worked at work. So I found that there was this thing around— there was something deeper, I guess, that I was trying.

Well, and strangely, the people at work are often the same people who are in church, and it's just a change of context, right?

Oh, precisely. Yeah, bang on, precisely. And then I, I began to like I began to let go of my framework. And what I've always done with my framework is I've always gone, right, where's the fat here? Where's the step that doesn't need to be in there? Where's the bit that I could fold into something else? And I had these 7 steps that I managed to get down to 6. And then I tried to get them down to 5, and it just didn't fit. Every thought experiment I did just did not fit in the 5. So I was like, okay, I'll land on 6. But even now, sometimes I still debate the order. There's two levels, 4 and 5, within the 6 kind of stages of engagement. I still debate with myself. And then, you know, I then went to academic research and began to find other people who'd come to similar conclusions. And I was like, okay, that doesn't mean I'm a genius. I think what it means is this is an intuitive concept that if you think about it, people seem to come to the same conclusion. Right? That was the way I looked at it. You know that thing of when people discover the same thing at the same time around the world, but they never even knew each other? And it's kind of like that, although me, it's not the same time, maybe it's years apart, but you read books and you go, "Oh, wow, they are saying the exact same thing that I'm saying. They're even using the same words." And you go, "Right, that's because it's intuitive." So I think you begin to find affirmation. I think that's a key thing. But then you challenge yourself, "Right, let's go deeper." And something that I had an issue with was I wanted to visually explain my idea far more powerfully than I was. And during the pandemic, I had a lot of time on my hands. Well, I say a lot of time on my hands, actually I was having to homeschool 3 children, so I probably had less time than some people, but I had a bit of time. And I began to play around with the 3 shapes of circle, triangle, and square, which are, for those who are interested, you know, they, they, they're in the PlayStation hand controllers. With the X, but they go back further. They were the symbols that were used in the Bauhaus design movement quite heavily. And I have a book on my shelf of the Bauhaus so everyone can see the shapes there. And I began to play around with these shapes and I just thought, could I tag a shape to a form of engagement? There were 3 forms of engagement, there were 3 forms of shape. Which way around would I do it? Ironically, I'd already written my book called The Shape of Engagement using other shapes. But I was like, can I just take this even further? And I began to With the constraint of using these shapes, I began to really reframe the way I was thinking about engagement. And it was, it was like it was meant to be, I guess. It really worked well.

And I think what I've seen in the past is it takes a while to get into that, what I would describe as a flow state of idea generation. And when you have it and you're like, "Wait a minute, I can push this idea further. I can make it cleaner. I can simplify it." And then all of a sudden, you're working at a different level. It doesn't feel like a struggle as much anymore. The things that have been sort of simmering in the back of your head, all of a sudden you're like, "Oh, this is what I've been trying to say." Yeah, I think those do come.

I've had a few of those. I've got to say my experience has been a bit different. My experience has been, Bill, that I go really deep. I make it too complex, but I go really deep. Then I come out, I take some time away, I come out and I go, "Right, now let me simplify this." And then I chop away at it. This is what you do if you're into bodybuilding. In bodybuilding, you have a phase called bulking, which is where you eat loads and you lift loads of weights and you put on as much muscle as you can. Then you have a phase called cutting, where you then chisel into yourself and you eat less and you go on diet and you lose some muscle, but you trim all your skin around the muscle and you look amazing, apparently. I've never done it. I don't have the stomach for that. And I— and if you've ever done that though, I did do the bulking phase, and it's hard to eat the amount of calories that you need to eat. And I found that I just needed to basically just go over the top with the ideas. I needed to just go idea crazy and then take some time away, and then I saw new syntheses that I didn't see previously.

So I want to ask you a question. How do you stay engaged with the concept of engagement. How do you keep your fire lit?

Yeah, I mean, look, we all know this. The classic example is, you know, the worldwide band like U2 that plays its classics every night as its residency in Vegas, right? They're not playing— and the trick is, can you play Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For like you love it after playing it 500 times, 1,000 times?

The illusion. Well, it's theater too, right? And it's live performance of the How do you make that first time for your audience as magical as your first time playing it?

But, and I'm sure people listening to this know that the myth of creativity is that it's kind of this spark that happens out of nowhere, and actually it's discipline and it's rigor and it's practice. And the best actors have gone over their lines again and again and again, and they've got it so deep down into them that it's a part of them, right? And then it just flows. My answer is there are some songs that I can sing every day and I never tire of them. I need my idea to be that. I need to so hone and smooth my idea that it becomes blissful for me. There's a story that the novelist Kafka, Franz Kafka, used to love reading portions of his books to people, and he'd with delight read them back because he thought they were so good. And basically, you're going to love your idea, haven't you? And sometimes you know that you're loving your idea, it's also the villain, because it can be agonizing to you. But ultimately, you've got to love it. And the other thing that I do is I constantly look at the eyes of other people as I can see my idea taking a hold. And then whenever anybody reaches out to me afterwards and says thank you, I always say, what was useful? What helped you? What's made things better? Now, whenever people— which is a heart engagement question, like what's made your life better? That's a heart engagement thing. And whenever people tell me, they always list a bunch of things., and I go, this is worth it. This, this idea actually helps people, as opposed to it's an idea that I like that doesn't actually make any difference. I need that. If I didn't have that, I would lose it. But because I have that, I'm like, okay, all right, this enables me to go a bit longer. And then there are times where I just think I want to jack it all in, and then I take a weekend break and I do stuff with my family, and I come back on Monday morning and I'm like, you know what, actually I'm ready to go again. But I've got to anchor it in. Does it actually— does it work? Does it succeed? Because the moment it doesn't, I have to just say sunk cost bias and endowment effect and the IKEA effect and all these biases mean I will value it too much, right? So, right, so I have to constantly remind myself, does this actually work for others? And if it does, I'll keep doing it. The moment that it doesn't, the moment that I'm getting high of my own supply and that's it, I gotta pause and say, right, let's reframe this.

Well, and I think the longer you're on the journey, the more stories you can accumulate of success where you are making an impact. Right. In theory.

Yeah.

Where I want to flip that to is early on, because as you're teasing something out, as you're trying to figure it out for yourself and asking yourself, is there value for others? How do you stay engaged in that part? And let me frame this another way. What advice would you give your younger self? Yes, starting on this journey.

Yeah, when I— I guess there's a bit of bee in my bonnet, but I hear a lot of other speakers and I read a lot of other thought leaders, and I think there's a lot of poorly developed thought leadership out there, you know, with people who Like even this one that was sense, choice, change. Why not make it 3 C's? We know that'd be more memorable, right? But C's, SCC. And I think there's a lot of stuff like that where people haven't really gone to the honing level. I'm talking like the mastery. You've worn this so much, you've smoothed it so much that everything— like, I, at night, I will visualize my frameworks and run through them in my mind, right? Like, I find it that much So what would I say to my younger self? I would say, you've gotta get in, you need to just keep on practicing and keep on making mistakes. And that's what I did and I still do it. What I do to this day is every time I'm presenting my work to someone, I always go back to it and refine it a little bit. I always make it a little bit better. And I've been doing that now for, what, 8 years or something. So actually I started doing what I think was good. I kept on making it better every time I did it. The thing that I would say to myself, cuz I had a few people say, I don't get it, don't like it. Someone once called it, said, I've got a bunch of miasma looking at this, which, and I never heard that word before, it means like, you know, like a kind of like a blurriness, lack of clarity. But what I learned to say to people was, I know the idea might be rough and have loads of fat and everything, but do you think there's a kernel of something here that's worth pursuing? That's what I would ask. And I knew that knowing my stubborn self, I'd probably keep on going until I found that. Luckily, people would generally say, yes, we think there's something. And that gave me the courage to keep going. And then I just practiced it as much. I got as many free speaking gigs as I could and just did it over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

I think that's great advice. Is in many ways, it's thought leadership is that search for the kernel, right? And if you don't take the idea for granted and early on lock it in and just never touch it again, but like you continue to work at it, to polish it, to sharpen it, that's where you get the lovely nuance for yourself. But you're also crafting it and saying, how do I make this shine for others? How do I reveal the facets that I love so much. Yeah.

And the more you practice it, the more you get to see which concepts land, which ones are a bit trickier. You then go away and go, right, I want to make that a bit better.

And you—

so I always try something new, right? That's what I said. I'm always putting out a new way of saying it. And I guess I'll always be trying it out, always testing it just to refine, refine, refine. And then suddenly you find out, actually, you test something that you haven't tried for a few years and you find actually that really landed. And you go, ah, okay, maybe I need to revisit that one a little bit now, you know. So it is, it's this really interesting journey of idea design.

It is. So as we wrap up, I want to ask you one last question. Whose work in your field is something that more people should be aware of, and why? This is a chance for you to say Here's some great ideas.

Wow.

That's a tricky one because I'm really old school.

That's fine.

I take all the old ideas. So Meredith Belbin's work on the 9 roles that people will take in a team, and then he broke them down. Meredith was a man actually, and broke them down into 3 components. People are either more action orientated, people orientated, or idea orientated, which then I called API, you know, which is the name given for— and that's the way that I actually judge people is I quickly go, are they an A, P, or an I? And then that's their API for me to interact with them. That really helps me. So Meredith Belbin's team roles, I think, are really great. John Kotter's 8 steps or flywheel, I think, are really good. Obviously, Joe Pine and Jim Gilmore with the Experience Economy and the progression of economic value is amazing. Chip and Dan Heath's book Switch is all male, which is a real issue, but Chip and Dan Heath's book on Switch I think is superb, absolutely superb. And then I also like people who can come up with ideas that are not visuals or frameworks, they are sentences. And for that, I would recommend Naval Ravikant, The Investor. He is fantastic. There's a book called The Almanack of Naval Ravikant, and he is fantastic at the way that he frames things with his words. So you don't come away with a mental model that you could use in terms of a structure, but you do have a mental model in terms of a sentence. That to me is majestic.

The best ideas are those So Scott, I want to thank you for joining me on a conversation of ideas, engagement, and impact. This has been a delight.

Thank you, Bill. God bless you.

If you're interested in organizational thought leadership, then I invite you to subscribe to the OrgTL newsletter. Each month, we talk about the people who create, curate, and deploy thought leadership on behalf of their organizations. Go to the website orgtl.com and choose join our newsletter. I'll leave a link to the website as well as my LinkedIn profile in the show notes. Thanks for listening, and I look forward to hearing what you thought of the show.