Dr. The first one is actually my favorite, and that is because I've noticed that seniority correlates negatively with listening and asking questions. And I've noticed that in meetings, when there's a classic leader there, that person tends to feel that in the beginning of a meeting, they need to talk and explain what they want to happen. And there is a fantastic principle that's called the weight principle. And it means, why am I talking? And if you can sometimes just catch yourself before you have that great input that you really love yourself, and just ask yourself, why am I talking? Should I maybe ask a question so that I saw myself more as a facilitator of a conversation, rather than trying to make everybody understand what I want to happen? And I think that applying that weight principle could help in many situations, so that could also be one. The second one we could think about is, as we talked about, start by stopping. And I think it's actually a very simple thing to do, to identify whether it's a process we're running, whether it's a meeting that we're constantly running, whatever it is, a tool we always apply. I think the only way to simplify our management model is to stop doing certain things. And the only way we can get to that is actually by experimenting. Because only by experimenting can we get to believing it. So we simply need to stop running that meeting to figure out, after a month, what is it actually that we're missing when we stop doing that specific thing. So experimenting is not just trying new stuff. Experimenting is also stopping certain things. Then there's a third one, which is talking more why than how. And it's the notion, at least my experience, that most of us have a tendency to overemphasize the how. So we end up doing micromanagement and getting our hands into things that we should literally outsource. So we need to get used to spending much more time as leaders in thinking framing issues and framing issues and framing issues and choices and framing issues and choices and see ourselves as facilitators and framers rather than heroic decision makers, which is very much the case. And that means that I need to refrain from the how and be much clearer on the why and be much clearer on the issue. We need to outsource the how simple and trust that it ends in the right spot. And then lastly, a principle that we've begun to play with when we do leadership training. And that is the notion of everybody knows what it is to prototype. But very rarely do we prototype our future self, which is actually an interesting thing to play with. And you saw a Gino, she's a behavioral scientist, and she's actually proven that engagement correlates with experimentation. So on an individual level, unless you experiment and you do new stuff, your engagement goes a little bit more, your engagement goes a little bit down over time. And the problem is that we all have companies is about playing into certain rules. And then besides those rules, I also as a leader, kind of read into my behavior what I think you expect that I do. So I have an outer voice, and I also have an inner voice that tells me what I can do and what I can't do. And in the end, that box is very, very little. So we need to prototype our future self, which literally means that we identify things that we want to experiment with in our own behavior. And then we do a sprint over, say, three months, where we basically try that out and make sure that we have somebody that we get feedback from that can assist us. So that was an attempt to say, if you want to push this agenda internally, there's a ton of things you can do, or at least four that I could come up with. But also, if you want to do something in your own leadership behavior, maybe you could get inspired by at least one of these four in creating post-bureaucratic leadership in your own organization.