Demystify Innovation Theater - Strategyzer Webinar

Welcome, everybody. Welcome to this Strat chat. My name is Nick Kimovich. This is Demystify Innovation Theatre. Very welcome, warm welcome to you all. We're going to be allowing people a few minutes to join the session and then we'll start probably on the dot or maybe one after, one minute after, if that's all right. It's very exciting. Today we've got Tendai, Vicky with us, he's the author of Pirates in the Navy. We've got Alex Osterweilder, of course, who needs no introduction. Lucy Liu is going to be joining us too, and myself, who are both on the content team at Strategizer. We've got a lot of things packed in. Today's the next hour, so I'm really looking forward to it. And we'll go more deeper into the agenda in just a couple of minutes, but we'll wait for people to join. While we are waiting for people to join, I think it'd be fantastic in the chat box if what you could do is share where you're calling from in the world. So I'm calling from London. Tendai's not too far down the road. Alex is in Switzerland. We've got Lucy, who's joining all the way from Australia as well. So, yeah, if you could be sharing those in the chat box. I can see it's going crazy already. This is brilliant. I don't know, Tenday or Alex, if you want to help me out with where you can see people are coming from. But I can see a few places already. I think it's already pretty global.

Everywhere, right? Canada, Helsinki, Lima, Peru.

Wow. Hey.

Buenos dias.

Great. I'm not even going to try to speak Spanish. That would be.

I'm just seeing people from my ends. I'm just picking up all the African countries.

Tanzania. I saw Tanzania.

Yeah. I saw Cape Town and Joburg.

Cyprus, Cyprus. Good.

What I love is how even you know, during some difficult times, everything that's going on in the world right now, it's cool how stuff like this can bring us together, like even from all over the world.

From Wiesbaden. Ah, Thailand. Great. My third home.

So let's have a look as well. We'll mention on the Strategizer series. Interesting to know how many have you got and who's got all of them? Who's got all of the series? I know I have. I've got them just behind me on my desk over there. Strategically placed. What ones are you missing as well? That'd be interesting to know in the chat box.

There's actually an automatic rejection function that if you don't have all five, you're going to be kicked out of the webinar. Better watch out when you answer. I got some good numbers. Some have all five. Two, five.

One only. See, one only doesn't cut it. Somebody said one only.

If you type one, you get kicked out of the webinar.

Sorry, where's that button? I'm going to press it now. So the high impact tools for teams as well, which is exciting. A quick plug for the next webinar is we've got Stefano, who's going to be joining us next month on the 14th of April. So definitely keep an eye out for that. I'll share a link and if you go on the website, you'll be able to get notified when the registration for the next webinar is up. So that's going to be exciting as well. But welcome to those that have just joined. We are going to be starting in just a minute or two. We're waiting for people to join. You're in the right place. If you're here for the Demystify Innovation Theater Strat chat, you're absolutely in the right place. And you can see here we've got Tendai Alex Osterwalder as well. Tendai Vicky, if I'm doing full names now, Lucy Liu and myself, Nick Kimovich. Looking forward to getting into it. I'll mention here as well. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram. I don't know, maybe TikTok. I don't know. We're on TikTok. And Lucy, I'll mention as well. We've not left her out, it's just she's made the decision not to be on social media. So fair play to her on that one. But it's not that we've missed her out there, just so you know.

I think it's a good decision she made, right, Alex?

Yeah, I never spend time on social media. Not me, not me. Actually, Instagram is my relaxation. I really relax when I post stories on Instagram.

And Lucy's gonna be joining us shortly as well. So I think we're starting to get into it. If you haven't yet already, please type in the chat box where you're calling from. It's great to know where you're calling from and share your name to get to know each other a little bit better. I'm just cycling through one more of these. We've done that. Hopefully now we can get onto the agenda and get into it.

I just want to give A special shout out to Brian joining us from Lincoln. Brian and I were hanging out just last year. Brian, what's up?

Fantastic. On today's show, we're trying to make it a bit more relaxed. Hopefully you can see already by the tone, we're trying to make this feel more like a little bit of a TV show rather than the less kind of formal webinars. Sorry, the more formal webinars that you go on. On today's show, we've got a few segments that will be hopefully be continuing in the next webinars that we'll be doing as well. So the first section is going to be demystifying innovation. So Innov Theatre. Sorry. So this was really kind of like the. Inspired by Tendai. He was really the driver for deciding to go for this topic today. So we're going to really deep dive into that and have a look at that. Then what we're going to be doing is talking about Hot or not. But this is a new segment that we've created that I think is going to be a lot of fun. Hopefully we can create some controversy as well between Tenday and Alex and see if we can have some disagreements. Already I saw some disagreements on Twitter, which was good between the two of them. So we'll continue that on the webinar today. And definitely. Exactly. And definitely on the topic of Innovation Theatre as well. Then we'll be going into the Innovation Theatre mini assessment. A little bit fun to reflect on ourselves and seeing are we experiencing innovation theater and what we're doing right now or are we not? Then we'll go on to what is. I'm really liking the name of this, the Invincible Company of the Month. So Lucy's going to be presenting a case study of Ping an who are doing some fantastic things and lots that we can learn from them. Then lastly, we've got the strap chat Beyond Innovation. We will be talking a lot about Innovation Theater, but then we want to go on, say what happens next and how can we avoid it in our organizations and really help innovation flourish? That's the plan for today. What I want to mention as well is we've got a couple of very exciting virtual masterclasses coming up. We've got the Building Invincible Companies one that's coming up, but that's pretty much sold out. What we wanted to talk about today was The Testing Business Idea 1 Testing business ideas with David Bland and Alex are going to be running that's on the 18th to the 20th of May. And if you use the promo code that you can see there joinustbivmc10. We made it as catchy and as easy to remember as possible. If you type that into the website using the URL, you can use the tinyurl.com vmc notification that will take you to the link where you could sign up to get notified that you. You can get 10% off as soon as we open registration for that. With that out the way, what we really want to do is getting into Demystify Innovation. I want to hand it over to Tenday.

Thanks.

Thanks. Thanks, Nick. So we're going to talk about innovation Theater today, which is a really fascinating subject and one of the coolest things that happens around the space of innovation is things go on this, you know, hype cycle where people talk about pivots or lean startup or whatever, and then after a while people start to use it for everything. And so the question is, what is truly innovation theater? Right? If you see people, you know, sitting in a room with doing sticky note stuff on a whiteboard, can you just walk in there and go, stop doing all that? Because that's innovation theater, right? And that's really the question that we're going to be exploring. And it's just an interesting topic, you know, something that I cover a little bit in my book, Pirates in the Navy. I've also like written a piece like an article about this in Forbes, and there I really, like pushed really hard on this notion because people are often asking me and Alex questions like, okay, so does having an innovation lab mean that you're doing innovation theater? And that's a really interesting question because it's a hard one to answer. It's like when people are trying to corner me and ask me whether do you think having an innovation lab is a good idea? I'm like, I don't know, is it a good idea? Is it a bad idea? So the real question on deck is what is innovation Theater like? Well, how do we really define innovation Theater? Because what we always have to remember, right? And we have a question mark around that. So what we always have to remember is most of the practices that we see people engage in around innovation, all the way from design thinking to having sprints, to having standups, to running labs, to doing hackathons, all of those things have some value and that's why they became popular. That's why people who are working in this space invented those kinds of practices. The question is, how do you actually use those things in a manner that allows it to create value? Because if you don't use those things in a manner that allows it to create value. Then you end up in Innovation Theater. You're just doing the stuff because it actually looks cool. And so our official definition of Innovation Theater is. Drumroll, please. Innovation Theater is when. Or Innovation Theater takes place when you perform a bunch of stuff, stuff that looks like innovation but ultimately creates no value or creates little real value. So this is our definition of Innovation Theater. It doesn't name any specific practice by itself as Innovation Theater. It's only when you engage in those practices, but you don't do it in a manner that allows your organization to gain any value from it. Then it becomes the Innovation Theater. So with that in mind, Nick has got a really lovely mentee poll that he's going to put up. So with that in mind, what we'd like you to do is to tell us, via this mentee sort of survey, examples of Innovation Theater that you've seen in your own organization.

Right.

I'm just creating some plans, tension.

So Thomas is asking value when. So that's interesting, right? Because as you go down the journey of innovation, there's various moments in which value starts to emerge. There are times when value, you have to wait for value to actually turn up while you're doing the work. Now it's Innovation Theater when you don't even intend to pursue or look for value. You're just doing this stuff, but you're not even trying to work towards value. So that becomes really, really important. Okay, cool. So the mentor poll is up. Nick, so what is the code? I can't see it. There's something blocking.

Yeah, sorry. So if I go here, present, should be able to see. If you go to mentee.com and use the code 684-96432, you'll be able to answer the first question, what examples of Innovation Theater have you seen before? Yeah, there we go. Classic hackathons. Straight away. I was waiting for that.

And the funny thing is, right, you know, Innovation Theater, if you go back to our definition, you know, it's the activities, if they're not embedded in strategy and if they're not connected. Right. So as Tenday just said, the activities per se, and we'll get back to hackathons, maybe afterwards. It's an interesting thing. It could be a sign of Innovation Theater. But the question is, can we call hackathons Innovation Theater? And I'll leave that a little bit for later. But it's the disconnectedness, right? And that's tendai what you also, in your blog post started to push out and that's what Rita McGrath, Steve Blank and I like to call out. It's that fact that these things are not embedded in the organization and not connected. Fun to watch these things here. Coming up, accelerator programs.

Accelerator programs. Hackathons, Brainstorming hosted by folks who aren't willing to take any action on the ideas. That's exactly it. Like brainstorming itself is not a problem, right? But we should start to do it just for the fun of it. Innovation Labs, the fake fake fuck up nights.

That's interesting, the fake part, right? You talk about failure, but actually you can't fail in an organization, I guess.

Exactly right. Oh, and there we. The idea box, that's another one that we're going to.

The cake box.

The cake box, the innovation day. Corporate accelerators, Agile, everything. So these are all really, really, really, really cool. And what's interesting about this, right, is that the very same things that could create value are also turning up here as the very same things that are being viewed as innovation theater. And so the real question then becomes how do you figure out what's Innovation theater and what isn't? And I think Rita McGrath's definition is really interesting in this and we're going to just share that with you as I kind of wrap up this segment that I'm kind of doing right now.

Just one thing to add, Tenday, right? I mean the danger is, and it's kind of fun to show and we can make fun of this, right? But the last thing we want is to become cynical. And I always point this out, it's easy to make fun of it. But the question is, why is this happening? And can we partly blame ourselves as doers, thinkers, authors, Are we not addressing the key thing? I remember mentioning this on a thing on Clubhouse with Scott Anthony and we were talking about leaders and I said, we have to blame the authors, not the leaders. And he said, well, be a bit careful, there's also some agency there. But the thing I would really point out is let's not be cynical here. We want to talk about how to overcome innovation theater as well.

Yeah, yeah, no, no, absolutely. And that's why we've like, we've actually like, you know, made sure that we're saying that it's not the doing of those activities that is innovation theater. It is when those activities create no value. So like what Riddle McGrath is saying here, right, it's an excessive focus on ideation and all that goes with that, with little capability or capacity to then work on the ideas and kind of take them to where those ideas actually need to be. And so that's what really matters. You know, when you're thinking about you're creating actual results and so mistaking ideas for innovation. That's one of the comments that's actually happening here. Great ideas themselves did not become innovation. One of your pet peeves, Alex. Technology is not the same thing as innovation. You have to create value propositions and valuable business models around those technologies. And so that's really what we're trying to push here. It's not cynical, we're not being cynical saying I never have an innovation lab or people who say stuff like if you have innovation inside your company, then you're not really innovating or everyone should be innovating all these mind blowing things. And I just like, what are we talking about exactly? And the goal is to really create value. I'm going to stop here. This was just an initial definition of terms and then we're going to move to something else. So where are we going now, Nick?

We are moving into Hot or not. So this is one of my favorite sections that we've got as well. So I was inspired by, I don't know if you're familiar with Gary Vaynerchuk. He's been doing a lot of videos recently called Underrated or Overrated. And I thought, wouldn't it be fantastic if we could apply that concept to Innovation Theater specifically this month? But also it's a segment that I'd like to continue. So let us know what you think about this because it's supposed to be a little bit of fun, create a little bit of controversy, have a little bit of, you know, banter. It's not like, I don't think you should be quoting anyone from this section outside of the, like, I don't know, don't be putting like all of this on Twitter. But it's just a little bit of fun. So I've got a few examples of things that maybe could be considered as Innovation Theatre or not. And that's what we want to kind of be deciding. Because if it's not like hot, is that in a confusing way? If it's hot, it's not Innovation Theater. It's great, we should be doing more of it. But if it's hot or not, if it's not, then we're saying that's could be an example of Innovation Theater. Perhaps with that context, I'm going to move on to the first one. What's really fun with this as well is we want to make it quite interactive. We're going to go back to the mentimeter and so we're going to hear Alex and Tendai discussing it. They may or may not disagree with each other and what would be interesting is do you agree or disagree with Alex and Tendai? So after each one we'll go back to the mentimeter and we will get you to vote and say whether you think it's hot or not. So I'm going to move on to the first one. First we'll discuss it and then we'll go over to the mentimeter and I'm.

Happy to be quoted on all of these. Everything I am going to say, I actually mean it. So don't worry. Quote anything I say, I'll.

Okay, so first one is hackathons.

Yeah. This one for me is not.

I'll go with the contrary in particular because a lot of folks said hackathons not. I do agree that, you know, if they're done wrong way and they're just standalone activities, it's not. But I would say it's hot if they're embedded in the testing process. Right. To kick it off, you know, create energy around shaping the idea and then as quickly as possible getting out of the building, you know, in 12 weeks actually testing it. So for me it still remains hot because you can create energy, you can create engagement, you can get people from the entire company. Again, the next step is to do something with it. So it's hot when you follow up.

Yeah, this one is a hard one because I've never actually seen the thing that you're describing. Right. Which is the follow up piece. Hackathons sound like the kind of stuff that you do if you want to eat pizza all night and get drunk with your friends, hack some stuff and then walk away. And also because it's solution focused straight from jump. So it's like people are already trying to figure out a solution and so there's a certain disconnectedness that I often see there. So yeah, for me, this one would take a little bit of convincing. Right. Because I haven't seen it do well.

So final answer each one. Alex, what are you saying with your final answer? Hot and Tendai not. Oh, okay. So this is fun because this is where we can now get the audience to put their perspective forward. So we're going to go back to the mentimeter.

We just need to advance the question right to the next question.

Yeah.

So.

I'm gonna hopefully be able to do it.

Yeah.

It's almost like who listened to Tenday.

And who listened to Me, Chrysanthem's got my back. She's like, I've never participated in a hackathon that created value. And somebody else is like, hackathons are pretty useless. So, yeah, these are my folks, these are my people.

It's fairly even.

But somebody said it depends on the quality of problem framing. Which is what you were saying, Alex. Right.

Which is I would actually say no. I actually think it's not the problem framing. It's the fact that it's embedded in a process where you go and test after. Right. So you put something out there. And I think in a workshop, in a hackathon, you can be customer focused, but you need to just admit whatever you did in that hackathon is gonna be wrong. So the way I would almost frame it is if you want to do a good hackathon, you're actually hacking the experiment, not the solution. Right. So if you frame it as an experiment, you frame the experiment as the thing you're gonna build. You could go pretty far. But then again, right, it's. It's not something you do on a weekend. It's the start. And then you have 12 weeks to actually get the real evidence. Cool.

I guess there's some cool comments here. Right? It's like I've been in a hackathon where the leaders prescribed the solution before we even started. And then the other one is like, hackathons give employees in dead end jobs hope for something better.

Wow.

Yeah. So, yeah, can we just say that.

I win and Alex loses on this particular one? I think the audience is going, team Tendai.

Great.

So it's Team Tendai on this one. Interesting. Okay, so they're going, it's David versus Goliath.

Cool.

All right, let's go to the next one.

Yeah. So I'm just gonna. Should we stick?

Let's stay here. Yeah, let's stay here.

Let's stay here. So the next one is innovation via acquisitions. This is one that Alex was really excited about. Alex, do you want to set the context for this one a little bit?

So I'll go again. Because everybody says not. Oh, don't just do acquisitions. I'll go for hot. And I'll tell you why. Because I think there are different types of acquisitions, which means you could be experimenting with a business model. Maybe you're in an analog industry, you're in the food industry. And you know you're not going to get AI or blockchain, Right. So you're going to acquire a company that's going to plug that hole that is hot, right? Or you do the experimentation in house and then you see, wow, that is a market. But it's going to take us three to five years to even get there. We're going to acquire a startup that has already three, four years under the belt now. So that's why I would say hot, because if you do the legwork, you can make pretty damn good acquisitions. So I'll again go a little bit counter the general speaking, you know, I think it's hot. Tendai, are we aligned or let me see.

Dude, you're getting soft. What happened to you, man? What did you do with my friend? Who are you and what did you do with my friend? No, no, no, I'm just playing around. So I think acquisitions are really great if the ultimate goal is to create value that allows the business to grow. I think that really, that's what makes acquisitions really, really cool, especially if they're done correctly. And you don't take a company that's still searching and trying to find the right business model and plug them into a scaling machine. You know what they say, like startups go to large companies to die. So if you do that really well, you're really able to create value for your organization. Where acquisitions are not hot is if you're trying to create your own innovation culture. If you're trying to develop your own culture of innovation internally by building your own internal capabilities, then acquisitions cannot sometimes are not helpful for that because you're just buying things that are already successful within the context that you're operating in.

The reality that you mentioned, Tenda, is true. In many cases, acquisitions don't work. Companies get acquired, they die, or they get killed for whatever reason, or the culture gets extinct. So that is true. I just really emphasize that not all acquisitions are equal. You can buy a Finnish company and plug a hole in your portfolio, or you can plug a resource or a channel by acquiring. So they're very different kinds of acquisitions. And I also think it's not just yes or no. It's one tool in the toolbox of all of your portfolio actions. It's an important one. Unfortunately, it has a bad rep because that's all what people did so far. CEOs knew how to do acquisitions. They have a checklist, they have lawyers. So it's easy. Innovation is a black box. So I think it remains a really good tool. But it's one in the toolbox of 5, 6, 7 different portfolio actions you have, of which it could be homegrown, it could be investing in a startup, they're all different ways of doing it. So it's almost like when we say acquisitions, we're not saying very much because they're very different types of acquisitions. It's one tool in toolbox.

Yeah, exactly. That's why I have a. Maybe it's because I'm kind of hurting, because every time I've been rejected by a leader, when I'm trying to convince them to do more innovation, they've said to me, oh, we don't need to innovate. We'll just acquire something. So I'm already pissed coming to this conversation. So acquisitions are not hot for me. Right. Because they use it as an excuse. They don't view it as a tool in a bigger toolbox of the portfolio.

There's a lot of emotional baggage behind this one.

And now I'm even more hurt that Alex is winning this one.

But.

Okay.

Yeah. So. Well, this is fun because it's one for Team Tendai, one for Team Alex. So this is good fun.

One thing to just want to tell a story to what Tenday just said. I think that's a clear thing that's happening. Large companies, CEOs will always say, well, I can acquire. What they don't realize is you make better acquisitions when you have an innovation culture and you test it internally. But the other thing is, I was intrigued. I asked my friend Anton Affentranger, who used to be the CEO of the biggest construction company in Switzerland, big player in Europe. And I asked him on stage. I think we were there, Tenday, I asked him, well, why did you do acquisitions and not innovation? Because you clearly understand innovation. And his answer was exactly what I said before. He said, look, Alex, the stock market can deal with acquisitions. I have to get maybe two or three out of five. Right. If I get them wrong, not a problem. I can call my lawyers. I have a checklist. I know exactly what to do. Innovation, he said, is a black box. So it's the fallback option. And that was years ago. So I think that's still a little bit the reality, but I think we're getting more sophisticated, so the transition might happen. And Tendai, next time you convince the CEO, he or she will say, absolutely. That's our maybe last option. Again, one tool out of many.

Yeah, absolutely. All right, cool. Let's move on to the next one. Nick, If Nick is here.

Yeah, yeah, no, I'm here. I'm here. I'm just trying to add a little bit of, like, theater to it by making it drag on a little bit.

Let's See if I can make theater. Yeah.

So Innovation Kickbox. So this was created by Adobe. Like, you know, I think many of, many of us are familiar with it. Oh, already we're getting people voting on it. So, like, Alex, do you want to share your thoughts on this one?

I'm going to let Tenday go first.

Okay, cool.

So this one is one of those sort of semi controversial ones because the box itself is just like you can grab a box. This is actually what Richard McGrath is referring to as excessive focus on ideation. So people are asking what it is. It's like companies that give you this sort of a box. Anyone can pick up a box. Inside the box are all the innovation tools to generate ideas. You could even get like a thousand dollar credit card in there to go and test ideas. So the question is, I mean, it's a really great way to sort of build up momentum and generate ideas. Where I've seen it done well is when all of that is then followed up by a process to capture the value and the progress those people are making and then transform that into great value propositions. But just giving people the box itself, that's fun and games, right? That's just like, let's have fun, you know.

So you're going not, right?

Yeah, I'm going half and half. Can you do that?

Come on. No, no, no. Clear position. I'd go for not. So I don't think the idea is wrong, but it doesn't work. So I've never seen it work anywhere. I think the concept is great, but it's not working yet. Right. And that's what the data shows. I think Adobe has been really good in marketing this and it's got a lot of traction. But you know, you go ask companies, go ask Adobe, what are the results like? There's not that much there. So again, the idea is great to give people a box with the tools and give them some money to go testing where no questions asked. That's phenomenal. The problem is, and here's where I would emphasize why, absolutely not. Innovation and entrepreneurship are a different profession from managing and people are just not ready. It's as if you tell somebody, here's a box to become a surgeon, you know, just a little box. But you never ask them to read, you know, an anatomy book or a physiology book. So that's what we're asking from innovators. Oh, here's a box. You're going to be an innovator. There's a little bit more to that. So I do think you can learn innovation. You can actually get better at it, but it's not through a standalone box. So the intention is great, the concept is great, but it doesn't work.

Yeah.

So we're aligned. Tendai. Look at that. No more fist fight.

This is great. The first time we've got pure alignment between Tendai, Alex and the, and the participants as well. So this is great. Right, let's go on to the fourth and final one so far. I think it's. Oh, it's even Stevens.

Yeah.

So let's see what happens. Let's see if there's going to be a winner at the end of this. So using agencies for market research, what are your thoughts on this one?

Not.

And Alex, I'd love to see you argue that this is hot.

There's no chance.

I'd love to see you try bend that one.

I love to be controversial and to spin it, but this one, there's no chance. Right. So I've seen this. What you can do is get support for the process. You get people who challenge you. What you can't do is outsource the work. Right. And you know, in the exploitation context where you're running a business, agencies can do great work to do surveys, large scale stuff. The problem is again, innovation is different. You might actually, after talking to 10 people, you might pivot. So if you give an agency, you know, 100,000 bucks to do a study, or sometimes it's in the millions of dollars, you already learned that you shouldn't be doing that. So you cannot outsource market research, you cannot outsource testing of your ideas. It just doesn't work. Our friend Steve Blank is a big proponent of that and says, look, can you imagine an entrepreneur who's going to tell their venture capital funder, hey, I'm going to hire Pricewaterhouse Cooper's Baynor. So nothing against those firms, but to do a market study, like they're never gonna get money again. So in innovation, in order to be able to act fast, to pivot, to see the insights, to feel the insights, there's no chance you can outsource this. You need to hear the messages from your customers at least over zoom. Right. So you can't outsource this. Like this is freezing. Not like this is the Antarctica knot.

I've even wondering who gave it the 1.1 score. So, so what's crazy about this is that this is where a lot of organizations that we work with have a go to methodology. Regardless of what the question is, they have a go to methodology. They first decide that they're going to do a focus group or get a market research agency. And then after they've already decided, they then say, okay, what are we going to ask the customers now? Whereas the approach that we propose is design your idea, extract the hypothesis, and then have the hypothesis discussion, you know, define the choice of method rather than.

Do it the other way around.

And so it's. Yeah, this is definitely.

Some of the people are calling us out, right? So, Alex, don't mix up market research and testing. And, you know, it's a fair point. So, Mark, I'm not saying market research has no value in companies, so be careful. I never said that. I do think when you're starting a campaign for a new product and you already have the product, market research to make a great ad campaign, that's great. But when it comes to, you know, figuring out a new value proposition or business model, you can't outsource it. And to be a bit more refined. Right. So beyond being a bit, you know, controversial, where agencies can help maybe is in access and network. Right. So in some. Give you an example, you know, Tenda, you are working with pharma right now. Sometimes you actually need a consultancy that gives you access to the right people, former decision makers in the government, and they provide you kind of the legal framework to do that because otherwise you go to jail. So, of course there are ways where you want agencies to support you, and Strategizer helps people with the process and challenges people and also tells you how to do this. But we don't do the work for clients because that doesn't work. If you don't do it internally, you won't figure out the right value proposition and business models. It's simple as that.

Yeah. But also just to sort of come back to that question, which is we shouldn't confuse market research with testing business ideas. Actually, the conversation we're having here is when the opposite happens, is when teams confuse market research with testing business ideas. So that's where you get the innovation theater, Right. That's where that becomes a problem. And so that's why I was just like, this is not hot. And also people are making comments about ideo. IDEO is research agents. It's not the same thing. Ideo are really great. They really get into empathy and understanding customers and making sure what they create actually creates value for those. Even if they're doing it on behalf of a company, they do it really well.

And we're not going to diss any companies. I think the way to Frame it is also, I would not necessarily blame the agencies. I think the companies should not hire them. So if you're an agency, maybe depending on your moral code, you're going to sell man days or women days, but I think the buyer is not sophisticated enough. So this is a recommendation not to the agencies or not dissing agencies. This is for the innovation teams and leaders in particular, not to go to that fallback option. That makes sense in exploitation, in managing a business where market research makes a ton of sense in innovation. It does not. Right. It's a very different kind and it's not as black and white, of course, but I think we're not very sophisticated as buyers in large companies yet. And again, that doesn't go for everybody, but I think we can see that pattern still. We don't know how to buy the right tools yet. I think that's a pattern I've seen in many companies. The buying is getting better, but it's not quite there yet.

I think we're going to stop it there. I don't want us to descend into blah, blah, blah. I think we've had a lot of fun. This is the first time we've done this hot or not kind of segment and I think it's worked out really well. I was, you know, Tendai started off with very strong. There was a strong team Tendai kind of support at the beginning. Then it. Then it switched all the way back over to Alex and then we've had two more kind of even Stevens there. So that's been good fun. Do you think this is something that we should continue and do in the next webinar? If you like it, please let us know in the chat box because it'd be really helpful for us to know whether we should continue with this as a little bit of fun. Okay. What I'm going to do is stick in the mentee, I think, because it's a little bit of. I think it's going to be a bit more difficult to go back to the slides. And what I want to do is go on to the next part, which is the Innovation Theatre mini assessment, to reflect on ourselves and how we're working in our companies and explore, like, are we doing innovation theater or not? And so I want to point out as well that, oh, we've got 75 people already shown so on here. Oh, excellent. We've got Lucy. Welcome, Lucy. Lucy's calling in all the way from Australia. So, Lucy, do you want to say hi and welcome, everyone?

Hi, everybody. Good to see you all. Sorry for the late attendance. But it is, what, 3:00am in the morning here. So I took a nice nap, woke up and I'm joining everyone here around the world. So happy to be here.

Yep. Lucy the trooper. No Innovation Theater there.

Brilliant. Thank you so much for joining us, Lucy. This is brilliant. So we're just going to do the mini assessment and then we're going to be jumping into Lucy's Invincible Company of the month, which really looking forward to. So let's go into this. So with this, I just wanted to point out with the mini assessment that we've put on them, that some of them are right answers. It's not necessarily a right answer, but we just wanted to record for maybe some of you who are actually doing really well with this stuff. We wanted to see if there's anyone out there who is actually kind of like absolutely killing it on some of these kind of examples. So we'll be able to see that by having the leaderboard. But don't think of it too much as, oh, I've got to try and get the top answer every time. It's not like that. But just because of the way that Menti works, it made sense for us to do it this way. Alex, shall I hand it over to you, though, to talk through these? Is that all right?

Yeah, let's do it. So we're going to, you know, you're going to score yourself, your organization, if you're doing innovation theater or not, and if you're a consultant or so you can score one of your clients, right. Pick one and then go through, through the whole thing and maybe we can get started with the first question. So you give yourself a score by answering these questions. The lowest score is 1. The highest score is 4. So, first question, how much time does your CEO spend on innovation? Every week. So is it, you don't know, not so good, up to half a day, you know, like 10%, about a full day. That would be 20% of the CEOs time every week, two days or even more. So give it a score. Okay. So many people don't know, which is a bad sign, because that probably means the CEO is not spending time on innovation, because if it's not publicly visible, it's probably very little. Anything you want to add tenday to this one? Because we see this pattern quite a lot, right?

Yeah. No, I mean a lot of the, usually the most prominent score we get, CEO spending less than 10% of their time. And then if people are saying they don't know, that really means innovation is Not a priority in that organization. Like, the CEO probably never talks about it, so that visibility is actually really important for making sure we're driving something sustainable.

I like to call this the Rita McGrath test because she's the first one who kind of framed it this way. I remember her saying, if you want to know, our colleague from Columbia University, she says, if you want to know if your company is innovating, just look literally at the CEO's agenda. Look at the calendar every week and try to understand, is he or she spending time on innovation. So I like to call it the Rita McGrath test, because you can do that very quickly and immediately you'll get an understanding. Does that company innovate or not? And I like to say if it's less than 40%, he or she is setting a symbolic tone that innovation is not going to happen. The only other alternative is if you have somebody. And Lucy will talk about that a bit. If you have somebody at the same level of power, that's the only other alternative. If you have somebody who's spending 100% of his or her time on innovation is as powerful as the CEO. But as soon as it's somebody under the CEO, you're delegating, you're saying it's not important. So that I think is really, really, we need to emphasize that. And then Scott Anthony asked me, I remember on Clubhouse, what do you mean? What are they going to spend time on? Well, meeting with the innovation teams, meeting with potential customers who are not customers today. Understanding the dynamics, understanding the trends in the market. Right. So super important. Let's go to the next one. Okay, so we got some leaders here who, you know, companies. Who's in a company. Christine seems to be in a company that is innovating. The speed of the answer actually makes a difference, too. Let's see the next question. Oh, wrong direction.

Yeah.

What is the percentage of employees in your company that do innovation? Not just R and D, is it 0 to 1%? But think of it, you know, in an organization with thousand people, that would be 100. And generally what we see, then I can comment on that a bit. People say we're taking innovation seriously, and then you have a team of five in a multinational company of 100,000 people. I can't take that seriously. Right.

Yeah. No, I was just on a call today having a fight. And I remember at the end of the call, one of the leaders, like, ooh, tonight is telling us that the emperor has no clothes. He's telling us that we're saying we care about Innovation when we're actually not investing enough resources into it.

Cool.

So here's interesting. Right, so quite a few of you in the call say 1 to 5%. Now, I'll be very blunt. I don't believe you because we're excluding R and D here. So we're saying not R and D, we're saying people who are trying to figure out the right value proposition. Right. Business model. Now again, I might be completely wrong, but I would look very closely if you told me 1 to 5%. I'd look very closely if that's true or not. If that's the case, we have a really world class group of companies on the call that are doing innovation extremely well. That's probably why you're here. Right? Anything to add tenday to this one?

Yeah, no, absolutely. And there's a question also going on in the chat is can there be such a thing as the right percentage or does it depend on the industry? And I'm trying to think of what industry where it would be okay to have only 1% of your team working on innovation and what industry where it would be even more important to have over 10%. So I think it's a. Yeah, I'd.

Say if you're a monopoly, you could potentially have less than 1%. But it was a good question. So Jay asked. No, sorry, where was that? Somebody asked, what if a company ramu. What if a company does not have an R and D group? So again, don't mix R and D and innovation. So I'll give you a silly example. You know, Nintendo was really strong at RD in the game console industry. That's what everybody was competing on, computing power and graphics. Turns out Nintendo didn't have enough money anymore to compete on R and D on technology. Guess what? They did. They innovated. Okay. They came up with a Nintendo Wii, which was technologically an inferior platform. So you could have innovation and zero R&D. You can innovate and have zero technology. Innovation in that. So let's kind of destroy this myth that innovation means technology. It actually gets me going. You can see how I'm getting excited. People put that as a synonym. Innovation does not need technology. It may, but it doesn't have to have technology. That's a big thing.

Okay, so let's move on to the next one. Let's see, we're not too worried about the leaderboard, but let's continue on to the third question. So let's try and speed through these a little bit faster, by the way now, so how fast does your organization kill innovation projects that have no traction?

Tenda, you gotta take that one.

Oh, yeah, this one is my favorite one. So you know, like working in this pharma, right? And like once you start an innovation project, it doesn't stop. So we decided to come up with a metric we call the number of zombie projects. So like what is the number of zombie projects you have inside your organization? It was just a way to do something really kind of interesting and controversial. And you can see the majority of people say rarely to never. Which means that they don't have an innovation funnel like we often recommend. What they have is an innovation tunnel. Once you're in, you stay there forever. And if you're one of those countries, if you're one of those companies that's got like this annual budgeting, once you have your half a million, it just gets renewed every year. Every year, Every year. And you just keep going like that. Yeah.

And that's where you can go to some of our more deep going material on the innovation funnel and the portfolio where we show you kill actually after different phases. Right, okay.

Did you see Dan's comment? Like, we don't kill projects, we just wound them. Love it, love it.

Let's keep going, let's keep going. On that note, so you've got the next four, fourth or fifth five questions. Next one is how much legitimacy and power is given to innovation in your organization.

That's a good one. That's a good one. It goes back to the CEO question, right?

Yeah, go on. Who wants to talk about this one a little bit?

This one's the biggest challenge and we'll keep it short, right. Because we want to listen about Lucy's Invincible Company of the Month. But I would say from all we see, this is the biggest challenge, that innovation has no power. Often we see companies that put money into innovation time, also a bit of a challenge. Maybe that one's just as big. But innovation usually has no power. So the innovation leaders sometimes report to the person who reports to the person who reports to the person who reports to the person who reports to the CTO, who reports to the innovation chief who reports to the CEO. Like, guess what? Nothing's going to come out of that. Right. Have you ever seen that, Tenday?

Yeah. And that person's title is Head of innovation. But they report to the person reports, the person reports to the CEO. So that can be an idea.

Maybe the only thing to add there. This is really the startup garage, but in the negative sense, not the Silicon Valley garage. It's like the worst place in the building, in the corporate building. But it's changing. It's changing and Lucy will talk about that.

So we'll do the last one so that we've got plenty of time for Lucy for the invincible company of the month. Oh, is that the last one? I'm sure there was one more.

That was the last.

Okay, cool. Perfect. Well, that works out well. So what I'm going to do is stop sharing my screen and I'm going to hand it over to Lucy. Lucy, do you want to share your screen? Is that okay?

Yes, absolutely. Thanks, Nick. Okay, so my turn. Now that we've done sort of the minute assessment, I really wanted to take you guys through and show you. Okay, so now that we've gone through, you know, what innovation could look like, what companies may or may not do in terms of innovation in the organization. I really want to show you you when a company, a very large company actually does it really well. And here is the case study for Ping An. It's actually the first case study I worked on for the book Invincible Company. So it's very near and dear to my heart. So I'm going to use exact same questions that you just did for the quiz just to show you how Ping an really does do innovation differently. So firstly, number one, how much time does their CEO spend on innovation? So traditionally Ping an as an insurance company, the third largest in China, its org structure is very similar to any other organizational structure. You have the board and you have a CEO Peter Ma, who manages the exploit portfolio. So all the business as usual, how to help it grow, how to help it improve. But about 10 years ago they Ping an really wanted to shift its strategy, its overall strategy of what the company actually was. It really wanted to move from simply being an insurance company to become a technology company that was able to transcend industry boundaries. What that actually mean is they wanted to use the technology and capabilities they have to be able to play in healthcare, in real estate, in automobile, in all these different ecosystems and even entertainment in the future as well. But what he realized was that in order to do this, they really need to redefine their organizational structure. And this is exactly what they did. They hired a chief entrepreneur or also referred to a co CEO Jessica Tan about seven years ago to do exactly that. She's solely responsible for executing and growing new businesses and all these new different ecosystems. And so technically Peter ma as a CEO doesn't spend 50% of his time but by divvying out the work, by having someone Solely at the CEO level run the Explore portfolio. It in essence does exactly the same thing. So this then leads to the next question. Well, how much legitimacy and power then is given to innovation in your organization if you structure it this way? If you really allow innovation to be led by someone as high as a CEO, then naturally you're giving a legitimacy. You're giving it resources, you're allowing it air and energy to breathe. And so this is an example of what it could potentially look like. So this is the org structure we have for the book. So it may not exactly be what Ping an does, but I imagine it to be something fairly similar. So in the Exploit, in the business as usual, the insurance company business, you have the coo, cfo, CTO and so on and so forth reporting to the CEO just like any other traditional large company. However, in the Explore reporting to the co CEO, the organizational structure is a little bit different. You have the chief portfolio manager who runs the portfolio of brand new ideas. You have a chief venture capitalist that understands how you invest is fundamentally different. In Explore Exploit, you have a risk officer who understands your perception of risk is also incredibly different. You have to be really risk tolerant here in Explore, which is very different to Exploit, which is focus about execution and of course the all important army of entrepreneurs, the people who are going to get down the ground and innovate for you as well. But this doesn't mean that the two are completely isolated. It's really important, it's really important to find someone who can actually bridge the two because you as an organization, as an entity has to survive with both in the same organization, what we refer to as an ambidextrous organization. So you need chief internal ambassadors to be able to leverage the benefit of both, to be able to leverage the expertise of your Exploit portfolio while being agile and being able to innovate and use all of your innovation resources in your Explore as well. So this is how you give organizations legitimacy, by really building out an organizational structure that will allow both the Explore and Exploit to flourish. Okay, now so what does this actually look like as part of your portfolio, as part of your business? So in Exploit it's all about growing, I mentioned, it's taking your existing businesses and helping it grow and improve. Whereas in Explore it's all about searching for new ideas and growing innovations from an idea to potentially a scalable business. So again, what you do in both are fundamentally very different. And so this is what Pian did. They were able to take all of the technological advancements and IPs and really grow the insurance business, asset management, banking, casualty insurance, while using the same technology to be able to build new startups in healthcare, in fintech, in automobile, in real estate. This has all been done in the last 10 years, which is pretty incredible if you think about it. And based on this, within the last 10 years, Ping An's ranking in Fortune 500 has jumped from 462 to last year, the 21st. That's incredibly fast in 10 short years. And the third most valuable financial service company in the world. So how do they become third so quickly? Because everything in their export portfolio they were developing the last 10 years actually adds up to one third of the company's valuation. That's incredible for what they'd be able to achieve in such a short amount of time. Lastly, one of my favorite questions as well, and what we discussed before, well, how fast does your organization kill innovation? Projects that have no traction? So I want to use one of Ping an startups as a case study to demonstrate how they kill innovation and what that actually means for them and why it's incredibly valuable to be able to kill innovation as well. So this is their startup that they have called Auto Home. It's an online to offline platform that sells cars, that allows auto retailers to sell cars to consume it. So traditionally, when they started this idea and seeded this idea for Auto Home, it used to be called Ping An Haoche, which translates to Ping An Good car. They started this in 2013, they seeded this idea and in a short amount of time they actually launched this and created a brand new platform for it. But within one year, so keep in mind the timeline, they actually retired the idea, losing $200 million USD. Okay, that's an incredible number in such a short amount of time. And they were really cutthroat about this and decided to kill it. But within one year again, they realized that they were unable to innovate the way they really needed to. They were unable to scale the business the way they actually needed to. So by simply killing this idea in the same vein, they actually invested, double down, invested a lot more money to buy Autohome, which is another O2O platform, for $1.6 billion. They realized through running the initial startup what they weren't good at. And through that, they actually acquired an existing platform that allowed them to scale. And within three short years, by making improvements to the platform through data products and everything they had learned by building their own startup, they were able to build it to what it is now, an investment that is worth six times the initial investment. So the current valuation is at $6 billion. It's incredible what they were able to achieve in three short years. So I beg the question, do you think they were able to achieve that kind of growth with something that they had purchased an existing platform without having to fail in the first place? I actually don't think so. There's no way you could grow that quickly, learn that quickly, adapt a business that quickly, had you not failed. So imagine yourself as Jessica Tan in her possession. Right? You just sunk $200 million. You just lost $200 million for your company, and within one year you said, I need to double down. I know what we went wrong. I need us to innovate more, innovate better. I want you to invest $1.6 billion more so we can grow it into the business that it needs to be. Imagine yourself in her position in an organization. Can you actually say that to your senior leadership in your organization? Could you even make that kind of proposal? Do you feel you have the legitimacy and power to be able to do that? She can. Why? Because risk taking is strongly encouraged and failure isn't stigmatized. This is how you allow innovation to flourish. This is how you allow innovation to repeat itself to ensure that you're not just performing innovation theater. So this is, Sorry Pingan, one of my favorite case studies. I will now pass it back to Nick.

Wow.

Thank you so much, Lucy. What a fantastic example and case study for all of us. That was absolutely fascinating.

Right.

Please share your gratitude to Lucy in the chat as well, especially for being here at this time. Because the plan was for this to be a video, right? But Lucy said, no, no, I've got to be there. I really want to do this. So fantastic. Thank you so much. I'm going to move on to my slides again now, so you'll see that in just a second.

And by the way, Lucy, when we looked at these companies, it really is one of the standouts where you don't have a founder kind of driving that innovation. I think by far, Jessica Tan is one of the standout innovators out there. And kudos, actually to the founder Peter Ma. To hand that over. That takes a lot of courage because as a founder, he originally was founder, then chairman, you have to take some risk there. So maybe just one last thing on how did that happen, that Peter Ma had that courage?

Yeah, I mean, he, I believe, is a true innovator at heart as well. I read through a lot of interviews and then Jessica Tan before jumping to ping an really run the innovation engine. She had a conversation with Peter Ma. She's like, this hasn't been done before. You know, this org structure, everything we want to do, this entire pivot to your organization into a technology company from insurance company. I don't know if I can succeed. And he said that to her. He's like, it doesn't matter as long as you try. If you really try, it really doesn't matter. Even if one of the ideas succeed, we'll be fine, we'll be successful. And he gets it, right? Because Alex talks about this all the time. You need to invest like a vc. You need to really invest in a portfolio of ideas because it takes 250 to be able to find that one. And he gets it. He absolutely gets it. So having someone having that kind of support is incredibly important. And I think Jessica Tan feels that she has. That this is what gives her the courage and the legitimacy and credibility to be able to do this and try and try again.

And what I like about what you're saying, Lucy, right, which really speaks to what separates real innovation from innovation data, is this notion that as long as you try, as long as you really try, which speaks to the authenticity of the innovator in doing the work. If the innovator is not doing the work authentically and is just hosting events and doing all this other fun stuff, but it's not really trying to discover value propositions for customers and sort of creating that scale, then even if you get the opportunity, you end up burning bridges with that opportunity.

Brilliant. I'm going to jump in. I'm going to jump back in because I want to keep us on time. I know Alex is Swiss and we need to make sure that the time is good. So that's the invincible company of the month. If you liked this segment as well, let us know in the chat. I think this is cool. So we're celebrating. Ping an now what we're going to do is we're going to very briefly, I think very, very briefly is reflect on the Beyond Innovation Strat chats, talking a little bit about some of the tools that can maybe help us do this. We've got as part of this as well the innovation ecosystem design that we offer. But I don't know. Alex Tendai, do you want to share some examples here?

I would actually just emphasize what comes before the innovation ecosystem design is what we've often done with companies is the innovation ecosystem assessment. Right. To see if there's innovation theater. And obviously we don't frame it like that often. I Get asked, just have this picture of a CEO in mind who says, alex, are we really doing innovation? Well, because they're unsure. They don't know. So they don't know if it's innovation theater or not. So my response was because I also didn't want to. The person who brought me in was heading innovation, and I didn't want her to look silly because she's doing a great job and she has a lot of roadblocks. So it's not her fault that innovation is not where it should be. So we see that there is an assessment that's required, you know, not as fun, as playful as we did now to kind of make fun of these things and play around, but really good assessment, where we look at three things and intend. I maybe can just give one experience. We look at the portfolio mix. What types of innovation are they doing? Is it going beyond efficiency innovation? Are they beyond incremental? Then an assessment of the programs. Is it innovation theater where you have hackathons that have no impact, or is it stuff that's really connected, labs with phases where you actually kill projects, etc. The last one, what's your innovation culture? We would look at what Lucy just said. We will look at the org structure and say, hey, look, that's going to lead to innovation theater, because there's no way you can create a culture. Tenda has done a couple of these. Maybe there's one funny story from those innovation assessments.

Yeah? I mean, the one that's always occurring to us is when we ask them to come with their top 10 favorite innovations, right? And then we ask them to map those innovations, and they start off by exaggerating how much transformative innovation they're doing. And then when you start having a deeper conversation with them, you can see their hearts break as they move those innovations over to efficiency, efficiency, efficiency. But that visual really starts to make them see that they're not really doing what they're supposed to be doing. And they can start to.

And the big thing, you know, as the last comment there, is, we never tell people, you know, that's bad. We help them see what they're doing, and then they can judge if they feel like that's bad or not. So we give them yardsticks and we never again, I think cynicism and, you know, saying, oh, that's crap. That never works because nobody has bad intentions. I have never seen anybody having bad intentions. I think we can help people get to that next level. And that's what this is all about, showing what the yardstick is and how this should look. And then you show ping an and it almost feels like, oh, that's not encouraging, but it's possible. Right. So that's the thing that we now know how innovation works. It's the commitment of the leadership. That one thing. Commitment of the leadership and they get it. Will they make the jump? That's a different question. But when you show this to leaders, they get it 100% and many are making the jump. So I think the world has changed. We're much further now and we're set.

Up here now for the innovation white paper that's coming. Is there any comments that you want to put on that just quickly before we finish?

Yeah.

So with the innovation readiness white paper, we are actually working on trying to capture some of these lessons learned and also capture the way we work with companies so people can learn these methodologies and use them themselves. So just sort of sign up for that. It's going to come to you soon.

I just also just heard someone type in the saw someone type in the chat boxes. I've never heard a person say, I have a horrible idea that I think we should do. That's quite funny.

But here's the thing. Horrible ideas and good ideas, they look the same at the beginning. And we need to admit that. We actually need to admit, you know what, maybe my great idea is a crap of, you know. But people don't admit that. So that's important that that shows. If you, if you can say that in your company, I don't know if it's going to work, then you're beyond innovation theater.

Yeah.

And how they just asked if they.

Can get an innovation innovation assessment. So I don't know whether somebody can quickly post the link of the how to assess your innovation culture. I think we've got a post on that and you can get the assessment of that online.

Yeah, I've put a post to the Innovation Readiness program, which is that in the chat. What was the other link? Tenda, can you find the link and post it in there now? Is that possible?

Yeah, let me see. I'll try it.

Brilliant. Brilliant. Okay, so that one question from Paolo was because I think Paolo won. It wasn't really like a competition the hot or not. But he's asked if it's possible to have a prize. I think the prize is just the innovation should be thriving in your organization. Right. I think that's what we can offer. So just to mention now, this was kind of the first in a new series of webinars that are going to be happening. So we're calling them Strat Chat for now. It might change. We're innovating all the time. Today's it was a bit of a test. We'd love to know what you think of it. So again, share any comments of what you think in the chat box about this. We'd love to see you on the 14th of April. It's going to be at the same time and we're going to be bringing in Stefano who is one of the co authors of High Impact Tools for Teams. We're going to have Alex again as well and we're going to be following a similar format as long as the feedback is good for this one. Otherwise we might make a massive turn on it. But that's how it goes. If you'd like to be notified by IT when that slight registration is up for that because it's not quite open yet, go to strategizer.comwebinars and you'll get notified so that you can join up for that. One last point, just to remind you about testing business ideas. Look, we wanted to make it feel like you're just hanging out with Tenday, Alex, Lucy and the rest of the Strategizer team in these webinars. If you've enjoyed that experience and you want to continue it, why not join us on a virtual masterclass? The next one Testing business, sorry, the one after next Testing Business Ideas with David Bland and then Alex Ostevaldo is open. So if you want to go to tinyurl.com vmc notification and you just copy that, then you'll be able to get notified and then if you use the code that's on the screen now, joinustbivmc10, you can get a discount as well. So that's pretty much what we had lined up. I do want to do a quick poll before we finish, so I'm going to launch it now. So it's basically to know how likely are you out of 10 to recommend this webinar to a friend or colleague. That'd be really, really helpful if we could see that. And that's pretty much it. Alex, Tendai, Lucy, any last thoughts that you want to share with everyone before we go?

It's fun to innovate. This was our mvp, right? So let's see what you give us as feedback. Obviously a lot to change. We got some more ideas on timing now we're a bit over the Swiss time I can digest but was awesome. Thank you for hosting us. Nick was really cool, an absolute pleasure.

Come on. That was an absolute pleasure.

All right, thanks, Nick. I posted the link on the link to the assessment. I put it in the chat window.

And Lucy as well. Any last thoughts from you, Lucy?

Thanks for joining us, everyone. This is a lot of fun. I'm going to have trouble getting back to sleep, but, yeah, it was a lot of fun and I'm glad I came and participated live.

Brilliant. Well, take care, everyone, and we look forward to seeing you on the 14th of April for the next one.

All right, bye, everybody. Take care.

Cheers.