Good morning and a very warm welcome. I'm so pleased to see so many of you here on this beautiful Friday morning where we will spend the next 45 minutes or so presenting Implement's new team model. When I say we, it's because I'm not alone in this studio here. I have a colleague, Mass, whose educational background is as an attorney and his work within sports administration and leadership. Then there's Christina, who's a trained psychologist, and myself with a business and leadership background, both in and outside of consulting. What we do have in common is vast experience and a strong passion for team development. And together, Christina, Mass, and myself, together with other good colleagues from Implement, we've spent the past year, almost, developing the new team model, which we are so excited to share with you today. Before we dig into it, a few words of context to set the scene. There are many good team models out there. Many of them are born out of a sports context, maybe out of an army context or some other extreme environment. From the get-go, we've taken a design choice to base this new team model on or build the context around an organizational and business team context to make it as relevant and as applicable as possible to you. Our model is based on research. Our model is based on research. We've been studying the existing models and theories out there. Many team studies. And not least, the vast experience from ourselves and all our good colleagues here in Implement has gone into this model. The agenda for today is as follows. Basically, it's the why, the what, and the how. Mass will talk to why do we even need a new team model. Christina will present what does it look like and what is its components. And I'll shed some light on how do we work with it. At the end of the session, there will be a little surprise, just a t-shirt. So I hope you'll stick around. Before we get to it, I should also mention that we'll be sharing the material. After this session, you'll receive an email. Should you have any questions during the session, please post them in the chat. We'll address them also in the email that goes out later today. Or on Monday. And with that, I think it is time to dig into why do we even need a new team development model. Hello, everyone. My name is Mass. And over the next 10 minutes, I want to take you behind the scenes of our thinking around team development and the new model. And we wanted to ground our entire framework in this fundamental question, why do we even need team development? The question may seem banal, but the nuances in how we answer it reveal everything about how we should approach team development in today's complex business landscape. And in developing our framework, we challenged ourselves to leverage this creative tension between, on the one hand, approaching this topic from a scientist mindset, fully curious, fully curious, willing to question potentially everything that we thought we knew about teamwork. And obviously, at the same time, we built upon years of experience, both our own practices in implement and also the vast body of research in the field. So obviously, we want to keep doing what we know works. And let me share the first insight that shaped our framework. We depend on each other to succeed in the workplace. Intellectually, yes, we know that. Intellectually, yes, we know that. It is not always the case that we lift this. But most of the strategic bets that our organizations make, they either succeed or fail based on how well our teams function. And unfortunately, I think most of us must recognize that we are not necessarily the born teamwork superstars, or at least we may experience or tell ourselves that it's all of those around us who are not, who are not. So we need to practice. And we also know and see and meet teams that run with avoidable friction, misaligned goals, unclear roles, low trust. It is costly, but it is also fixable. And there's a vast body of research pointing to the need for better teamwork to potentially and hopefully close a gap that we see between what we got, so the current status of our teams, and then what we could have and should have, the impact that our teams could deliver. And we have brought some numbers today that are quite interesting. The first one, time spent on collaborative activities is increasing. This number, the 50% is from studies by organizational psychologist Adam Grant and some colleagues some years back. And they coined this dilemma, collaborative overload. Sit with that for a moment, collaborative overload. The way that we interact today may be exhausting. That's quite important. And then secondly, a 90% number. We call this the effectiveness gap. So turning back to the gap between we know teams are critical to the success of our organizations, but there is a gap between that criticalness and the actual current status of our teams. And then lastly, we could call this the potential readiness crisis. Quite interesting, because we know from studies that although many leaders will agree that they need to shift to a towards more team-centric and networking -based models in their organizations, few are ready to make that shift. So there's a transformational need here and our model needs to support that. We need training, we need assistance, and there's this gap that we want to close. And then we can ask the question, should we really mind this gap? Yes, we should. This is the easiest way for us to phrase the business case for teams. Better teams are better business. It sounds almost too simple, but it's true. We have the traditional metrics on subject matter expertise, goals, and all of that. And we also have the human dimension adding to this business case. Engaged teams perform better. Engagement is not soft. It's pivotal. We also have the quite significant body of research on psychological safety, a top predictor for performance in teams. So when we have something in stakes, we need a team environment that allows us to lean in, share ideas, challenge status quo, and not least be willing to have the learning difficult conversation around mistake. And then lastly, and yes, we are biased here, but this is actually research. We know that deliberate teamwork practice works and is needed. So when we target the interventions, we bring impact. And then you can say, yes, but those findings are not necessarily new. And that's true. And that leads us to the next question. Then why are we here? Why do we need a new approach to team development? Why do we need a new approach to team development? Are we just chasing novelty for the sake of doing something new? And no, we are not. The important emphasis here is that we are not reinventing everything, but we are looking at what does good look like in today's business and organizational landscape. The fundamentals of great teamwork, they haven't changed. So purpose, trust, clear role, psychological safety, they remain the same. But something has changed that impacts or should impact how we drive team development. So teams have changed. So teams have changed. And we have identified three key domains of changes out there, evolutions that impact our team life. The first one, team life is contextual. Teams are an integral part of larger organizational ecosystems. So this requires us to embody a holistic and systemic understanding of our teams. They are interconnected nodes within a broader network. Secondly, and I think many of us can recognize this. It's the dynamics and the dynamic structures of teams. We could call this the team membership fluidity. Structures have become increasingly dynamic. We shift in and out of teams. We are members of different teams. There is less stability and we have those ad hoc cross-functional teams. So we need as individuals to be more adaptive, but also as an organizational, we need to make sure that we have a setup that allows us to be more adaptive. It allows for performance, even though membership is not stable. And lastly, almost a cliche talking about digital disruption, but it is there. And what we would like to coin today is the term virtuality, looking into, okay, we are living a digital life in many of our teams. Is it constructive to where we want to go? Or may it sometimes be the opposite? Also tying to the collaborative overload term that we had before. Maybe we sometimes utilize technology in a way that makes us exhausted. So those are the domains of challenges. And when we then tie them together with timeless team dynamics, in our model and as a design input, we have then identified eight distinct challenges that people or teams need to meet today, address that in their development, and it is also opportunities. So now it's coined as challenges, but it is opportunities. The first four are those that haven't changed. The good oldies, the evergreens of team development. First of all, purpose. Do we truly share a clear understanding of our team's purpose, our goals? Are they explicitly linked to strategy? And do we hold each other accountable? Because without this shared sense of common direction, we risk fragmenting each person pursuing their own success, meeting their own KPIs, while inadvertently, while inadvertently, while inadvertently, potentially compromising the team's collective interest. And this is not just personal and behavioral. It's also structural and it's cultural. Then who does what and when? The roles. True alignment means that we are doing more than task distribution and that we are capable and willing to have the difficult conversations when performance falls short. And then lastly, the collaboration. Psychological safety, trust, constructive conflicts. It's not a luxury in our teams. It's a necessity. So those are the ones that we know. So those are the ones that we know. Then looking into potentially what has changed. Diversity. And this is more than just gender diversity. It is everything. Cultural preferences, personalities. Let's be honest. Are we leveraging our team diversity to really boost our collective intelligence? Or is it in reality creating more friction than good? And then we have the three that we saw on the previous slide. So virtuality. We are living a digital life. But is it helpful. But is it helpful or is it sometimes the opposite? The lack of stability shifting in and out of teams. Is that an obstacle? Is that a challenge? Or do we utilize that for innovation and for building a broader cross-organizational muscle? And then last but not least, work doesn't happen in vacuum. It's contextual and we need to understand what impacts us from the outside. But also, are we as a team capable of impacting what impacts us? Those are the key challenges. And now we want to see the challenges. And now we want to hear from you out there. In the format that we will post a poll in this platform. So you should not leave. It will be on the screen in perhaps 10 seconds. Should be up there now. And we would like your input looking at the four in the bottom. So the new challenges that we see. Which one of these challenges can you recognize the most in your teams? And I see some answers coming in. And I'll let you spend a few more seconds. Yeah. Lack of stability is currently the one with the 50%. Not that many votes yet. I'll spend five more seconds here. So please, those of you on the call, put in. And it could also be that you say, but we don't have that challenge. And that's perfectly fair. So this is kind of a forced exercise in that way. But we see lack of stability as the most prevalent. And actually, that's the one that we discussed the most before this session. That we thought that would be quite interesting. And then this would be an invitation for a team conversation. What do we mean by this? How does it influence us? And do we all have some biases here? But thank you for participating. Now it's a lot of votes suddenly. But still lack of stability. That's nice. Thank you. So we have the challenges. We have a new terrain that we need to navigate. And in order to be successful in that, we would like to raise awareness on three potential mindset shifts that we all need to balance to overcome or to meet the challenges and turn them into opportunities. It is shifts for some of us. It is not going from one side entirely to another. It's still a both end. But it is something that we need to consider when we do the interventions, when we design them. But also when leadership decides, is it worth doing the teaming? The first one, one-off team days targeting specific aspects of a team's life can be impactful, for sure. But they are not as impactful as a holistic process targeting different dimensions. So we need to understand if we deep dive into one aspect of a team's life, how is it tied to the entire holistic systemic understanding of the team, tying those together. Then team development. And we know that doing this for a living, sometimes get dismissed as a soft skill, a nice to have. It's almost a corporate equivalent to a wellness retreat. So people leave feeling good and then they go back to reality. We need to make sure that when we do the feel good interventions that are worth doing, that it is linked to a clear business purpose, so that we know why we do it and we hold each other accountable to implement what we did offsite, in our daily life. Let me share an example on this from my personal life. I had a conversation three weeks ago with someone who didn't know what I do for a living. And then he asked me, so, Max, what do you do for a living? And I said, among other things, I do very much in the team development space. And then instantly he replied, but, Max, then you must be in the forest a lot. And I was like, yeah, I'm in the forest, in the nature, but we do it with a purpose because that scenery opens up for conversations that we would not otherwise have and that is linked to performing better. And last but not least, we see a pattern where when team struggles, the instinct is to focus on the individuals. So we do a lot of skill building and exercise and all that. And then we trust that that can be utilized to the common good. So we put a lot of individuals together and then the sum adds to the collective capabilities. But here's the case. My ability to bring my skills to life depend on the dynamics of the team that I'm in. So I'm not the same person in every team that I'm part of. So we need to bridge the individual focus with the dynamics focus, bridging those. So the question to you will be to reflect upon this when you leave. Where am I today in my mindset? And should we in our organization do some shifting to have a more holistic understanding? That was all the input to our team model. And now Christina will introduce that. So also a warm welcome from me. And yes, thank you, Matt. I will talk into our new team model that we have called a refined delivery model. And the reason why we have called it a refined delivery model is because that we have actually designed a model that is not only theoretical, but also truly practical when we are working with teams. So we started up our development work in this group asking ourselves this question. So what is actually influencing team effectiveness today? And that is what this model have an answer to. So here you see the visualization of our refined framework. So this has a systemic approach to understanding teams and how they are not isolated islands in organization, just as Matt also mentioned. So this model symbolizes a system. So this model symbolizes a system. You could call it an integrated whole comprised of a set of dimensions of team effectiveness. And these are the ones you see here on the screen. And then each dimension then holds a set of key drivers that we have identified. And I will come back to what are these key drivers then. But this is also a layered model. And it consists of the team's inner life that you can say is the darker circles. Which is the team culture. Which is the team culture. Which is the external and organizational context. And both of these are influencing teams. And each layer in this model is also on its own. But it's also influenced by the others. So we cannot only see them again isolated. So when looking at teams, I think that many have a tendency to focus primarily on the inner life of a team. But I would like to share a real life story of a team that we have worked with. That will emphasize the reason for why we should also have a look at the outer life. And why it's actually equally important as the inner life of the team. So we were called in to support a newly established management team. And this is within the computer industry. And I think we did almost everything the business and psychology books recommended for building great teams. So we ran, you know, we did almost everything the business and psychology and safety. So we ran, you know, all of those feedback workshops. We clarified the roles. We strengthened psychology safety. We built trust in the team. And they were really happy about our work. And it seemed like a great success story. And we also left happy and thought that they were in a really good place. But shortly after we left, I was called by the CEO regarding another task. And then I, of course, checked in on the team. But then I found out that the team was a really good place. And the team was no longer existing. And that came as a huge surprise to me because I, again, I thought that they were in a good spot when we left them. But it turned out two things. That the product that they were working on, they were no longer competitive enough because the market changed and the competitor reduced their prices. And also, the second, there was a new regulation in the market that they were not aware of. And this was, and that's why the team is no longer existing. And that was also a huge thing in the company because they put a lot of resources into it and a lot of resources to make this department succeed. But why did this team that started off so well then end up failing? Well, it fell apart for one primary reason. The team was too inwardly focused. It was so inwardly focused that it kind of built a wall to the outer world. And by not being oriented towards the external context, the team forgot the world around them, you can say. So the external context is the geopolitics, it's the regulations, it's the market dynamics, it's the customer expectations, it's technology shifts, you know, all the things going on outside the team. And the team is the people that they really need to be aware of. It is factors that we cannot control. But it's also factors that the team must anticipate, they must translate, and sometimes they must influence them. So we need teams today that are externally oriented and adaptable, and making them better suited to handle those complex challenges that they face. Actually, another little funny element to this story, real life story is that, it also turned out that the innovation team placed in another department in the organization, they actually knew about this new regulation, but they just never got to share the information and talk to this team. So the lack of the team's ability to know how to cross collaborate, and to cross boundaries within the organization was simply not good enough. And that is also why we have the organizational context in our model. The organizational context is, you can say, the terrain and rules of the game set by the company. So on one side, it is the more fixed conditions, such as the strategy, the structure, the budgets, the policies that we have, and the governance in the organization. And on the other side, it is the operating environment of decision rights, stakeholder expectations, cross-team dependencies. So that is what the team also needs to be oriented to. How do we work within our own organization together with teams in other departments? So in short, you could say that the external context is the weather, and the organizational context is then the terrain and the rules. And then the team's job is to pick the right route, adapt, and where possible, improve the path. Then we, and then the team. Then we, this is the outer life of the team. Then let's move a bit into the inner life of the team. In the inner life, we have the culture. And in many models, you actually see that they separate culture and structure. But we believe that the structure is the way, is a part of the culture. So as, so as the collaboration and the individuals is a part of shaping the culture. And of course, it's also being shaped by the culture. So that's why we have put all of these elements within culture. Under structure, we have the things you probably already are aware of. Like Maz also said, it's about the purpose, the goals of the team. How do we work with roles and responsibility within the team? How do we make sure that they feel psychological safety and so on, which is under collaboration, of course. Also regarding, and you also pointed to that out there, the virtuality. How do we make sure that we have the wide way of using the technology? And then we have, and we should not forget, of course, the individuals in the team. What kind of energy do they show up? What kind of engagement do they have? What kind of capabilities do they have? And also, the emotional intelligence. So these are all things that we should not forget about when working with teams. And these are all the ones that we call the key drivers that we have put into the team model here. And last, we'll also talk about how we have used these key drivers in our team survey so that every time we work with teams, we make sure that we actually assess all of these key drivers before going into the development of the team. What I would like to deep dive a bit into now is the last element that you see here. It's the dynamics in the middle. And it's also stating here that the dynamics in the middle is affecting all of the other dimensions. And again, all of the other dimensions is, of course, also affecting the dynamics. But when we talk about dynamics. But when we talk about dynamics, it can be a little bit fluffy. And how do we even observe it? And I have heard people using this term in many different ways. So we need to be a bit more specific when talking about dynamics. Because what is it? And there is actually a scientific way of observing a team dynamic. And it's not about having a good or bad team dynamic. It's actually about having the right dynamics. to solve the right task. So you cannot be normative to say, this is a good dynamic or this is a bad. No, it's really depending on the team, what they need, and what is the task that they are trying to solve. I would like to illustrate how powerful and subtle team dynamics can be. And I would like to do it with this little example here. Hope you see the So this is a good idea. So this is a good idea. So this is a good idea. So this is a team of five working in marketing together. And as you can see here, we have a team leader called Sarah. Then we also have Jonas who is working with analytics. We have Marco who is working with design. We have Maya who is doing campaigns. And all of these five are working together. So what I would like now is that we try to imagine that we are jumping into a meeting that the team is having just to observe some of these dynamics going on in this team. So here it starts. So Lynn, she just joined the team two months ago. And when the team starts to discuss a tight integration, she's glancing at her notes. And then she stays quiet. Seems like she found something. The old trial which consists of Sarah and Jones and Maya, they keep referring to how they've always done it. And Marco, he even cracked a joke about if you weren't here last year, you don't get a vote. And everyone laughs. And Lynn smiles too. And everything seems fine. But she never voices the risk that we could see that she actually saw from the start of the meeting. So what is actually steering Lynn's behavior here? What dynamics actually is the force here? It could be the dynamic about feeling a feeling a need to belong. We could call this dynamic the in and out dynamic. So humans behave in a way so that they don't get excluded. Humans need to belong. And that also plays out in business teams. So sometimes we could even hold back disagreements just to make sure that we will stay inside the team and not outside the team. A really strong dynamic. Now moving on. And when data comes up, everyone turns their heads towards Jonas. Right? The one working with the analytics. Because he's brilliant with data and his expertise give him de facto authority. Kind of like probably he knows best. But Maya actually has a customer insight that is suggesting another campaign approach. And she also tells the team about it. And people listen to her. But as soon as she's done speaking. But as soon as she's done speaking. They look back at Jonas. Like he should make the decision. So the decision drifts towards what is measurable. Because that's the expertise of Jonas. And due to his brilliance in that area. It's also becoming the winning argument here in this team. So what could this dynamic be about? And how could we word it? We could call it the up and down. It's also becoming the winner. We could call it the up and down. So that they look back at Jonas. And then he's the one to make the decision. So the last dynamic here is. We can see is that the meeting goes on. And Sarah makes an update purely task based. No one in the teams know that she's splitting time across two initiatives. And that she's actually running quite low on her bandwidth. She doesn't share that with the team. She just keeping inside. Right? We also see that Maya and Marco seems to have a closer relationship. They are the only ones hugging each other. Coming into the room. And what does this tell us? And how does it make other team members feel that they are hugging each other? Especially if we are looking at this last dynamic. Which is the near and far dynamic. So this dynamic. So this dynamic is about. Who is close to each other in the team. How much do we share with each other? So how much does Sarah actually share regarding how she actually feels? That she's running out of time and she feels pressured? And is it actually a problem that someone is closer in the team than others? No. Not necessarily. But it could be. If it also affects the way we maybe solve time. But it could be. If it also affects the way we have to deal with each other. But it could be. And as soon as we have someone in the team who are even doubting that. Who are even thinking about. Does that then mean something regarding how they will solve this? Then of course it is an important dynamic to deep dive into. So these three. So these three. Is all the dynamics. That we could observe. When working with teams. And this little team story. Was just to exemplify. That these three dynamics. Are what drives team behavior. They are super powerful. We need to be aware. We could have done all kind of teamwork skills building. You know. Those feedback sessions. Trust communication. Conflict management. Conflict management. And so on. But without working with these dynamics. These skills. Would never have been put into play. Because we know that the dynamics. Are controlling behavior. Very strongly. So by understanding. How the individuals are affected. We also need to know. What how does the dynamics look. And what can we do to change them. And one important thing is that. First of all. We of course need to know. How to observe them. And this is a very important thing. One way to do it. One way to do it. To have these three. Dynamics to look for. So with that. With that. And next. We will. Let you know. How to work with teams. In real life. And last. We'll give you some input. On that. Yes. Let's have a look at. What it could look like. When we. When we. Work with team development. It always begins. It always begins. With an analysis phase. Which typically. Looks like this. The analysis phase. Is essential. As it sets a direction. For the following team development. Development. After the initial contact. With you. With the client. We typically set up a meeting. To understand the context. Of the team. Inner context. And the outer context. What are the challenges. That the team is facing. What is the strategic context. Etc. And not least. Also. To understand. The team's ambition. Many times. We hear. Okay. We would like to. To get this team. To become a high performing team. Good. What does that mean? How much time. And energy. Do you want to invest in. In this team. Becoming high. High performance. So after this. Initial meeting. And calibration. We are ready to proceed. With the analysis. Which consists. Typically. Of these three elements. Firstly. It's the team assessment. And that has several components. To it. Alone. Which I'll share. In the next slide. One of the results. From the team assessment. Point number one. Is that it generates. A team report. And based on these two first steps. So the team assessment. And the team report. We set up another meeting. Or workshop. To define the right path. For the team development. And of course. Our initial discussion. Around the team's ambition. Context. Etc. Also play a role here. On the following slides. I'd like to dig. Just a little bit deeper. Into. These three steps. These three elements. Of the team analysis. Starting with. The team assessment. The team assessment. Often has three. These three main activities. We very often create. What we call a team mirror. And the way to go about that. Is that we conduct interviews. With each team member. To get individual perspectives. On what is the team strengths. Challenges. And the��ent.e. Challenges. Etcetera. Developmental areas. And. Apart from the strengths. And developmental areas. It typically also helps us. To surface. Some of the elephants. In the room. So the tough conversations. The tough topics. We usually. Don't bring up. We would like to surface those. Together with the entirety. Second element. Here is team observations. That's where a consultant. Observes the team dynamics. That Cristina just. So, the up-down, the in-out, the near-far. And this observation, team observation, needs to take place in the team's natural environment. For instance, we would come out and sit in the corner of a team meeting or any other work situation to observe the team. So, these first two elements, they consist of qualitative data collection. And there's also a quantitative assessment to it. And that's where the third box comes into play here. That's the team survey. That is designed around the team model that we just shared with you. So, there are specific questions targeting each of the drivers in the model. And as a result, it creates a team report. Now, you could ask, why do we need another team assessment and another report? Well, we believe that there is a need for a more holistic, more comprehensive assessment and report that at least we've been able to see before that addresses both the context, the culture, psychological safety, and the dynamics in one go instead of several fragmented analysis. And we think our team report offers just that. Of course, a team report cannot stand alone. It needs other data. For instance, the qualitative data. But let's have a look at the team report. So, first page in the team report produces a heat map. And below the heat map. And below the heat map, there's a spread of the responses by the team members. All team members get to fill in a 40-question survey. The green dimensions would typically indicate team strength. The red dimensions are potential improvement. And the yellow areas, perhaps both. We need to address all the dimensions to verify if they, in fact, are red, yellow, or green. The report also produces a closer look at each of the dimensions and the drivers that it consists of, presented in a spider web. And again, with the spread of responses below to see if the team agrees or disagrees to what extent that is the case. And there is even a more detailed layer below, not displayed here, where we'd be able to see, go into each and every response to see what is the result of that. We then analyze the report and identify some areas for further investigation. In this case, example here. The team seems to have developmental potential when it comes to the organizational driver and collaboration driver. They're marked red, at least, in the team report. So, something to investigate there. Looking at it a bit closer, it seems that there might be potential for the team to influence the internal organizational context to improve the team's conditions, basically. At least, it comes out as a green in the report. Also, the report indicates a very strong base of individuals when it comes to competencies, emotional intelligence. However, without the ability to leverage the individual, capabilities and collaborate well, the collaboration driver was Mark Red. So, we would go in and analyze the report and combining this with the qualitative data from the team mirror and the team observations and produce a set of topics to discuss further with the team or representatives from the team to get it verified or to take another direction. And then, based on that, we would try to identify the right development path for the team. It might create a high-performing team, just letting you know. But still, it might do something very good for the team, addressing a certain pain, for instance. Next example of a team path or team development path is slightly more comprehensive, either due to the team's ambition or as a result of the assessment uncovering a deeper need for team development, or both. Such a team development path would typically include several offsides, to go deeper with topics, to go deeper with topics and have different team conversations. It would also consist of various activities in between the offsides to support the team path here and the team development. For instance, personal profiling, team observations, or the like. And finally, there is the more immersive experience here. If the team ambitions are very high, we might design an extensive team program over six to nine months' six to nine months' time, typically, again, with several offsides and various supporting activities in between to support new team behavior. These are three examples of what it could look like depending on needs and ambitions. Taking that, I mean, even further, I would almost call it a dream in part on your behalf. And that dream is to turn team development into an organizational capability. This entails a uniform method across an organization of developing teams that will result in having the same language around team development, transparency around measures across the organization, common understanding, for instance, of how organizational or external context impacts the team. This is very effective when we see this happen as teams typically perform and thrive much faster in such organizations. It requires, of course, a certain level of investment as we would need to identify upscale team development champions typically within the organization to support the teams continuously. However, well worth the investment as we at least observe it. Okay. Okay. What I would like to leave you with today before we close off in a few minutes' time, summarizing a few points from this webinar here. One thing is that teaming is business. It consists of people. People is the enabler of the teaming, of the team performance. It is creating structure and being agile. So, structure, the who, how, what, when, we need to know that, but we also need to embrace the chains that is inevitably coming our direction or in any team's direction. Teaming is technology and human connection. Technology is a given circumstance for many teams, if not all teams, but we need to use it right and weave in space for human connection despite. Teaming is performance and balance. Teaming is performance and balance. We need to make the performance sustainable. However, make room for reflections and restitution to keep performing. Teaming is looking inside and is looking outside. So, this is the systemic lens we're applying here. We cannot just focus on the team, what goes on outside as well. Teaming is looking inside. Teaming is looking inside. Sorry. Teaming is synchronous and it's asynchronous. We need to make the process fit, create a common heartbeat across the team. This will unite the team and make the team able to navigate the disruptions when they come and they will sooner or later. Change of team members or the like. Okay, finally, this was the little teaser that I gave to begin with for the few ones, so the fast ones. We have an invitation for you before we close the webinar. Some of you, we would like to offer to develop a team report followed by a conversation with one of us to discuss potential strengths and development areas. Just a disclaimer, we have a cap. Our finance department told us on how many reports and feedback sessions we can do without charts, so no promises. But the invitation is open during next week. We'll send information in the email going out later today or on Monday on how to sign up for this. We'd love to engage in conversations about your team. And with that, we've come to an end of this webinar on a beautiful Friday morning. We'd like to thank you so much for joining and have a great Friday out there. Thank you. Thank you.