Good morning everyone and a very warm welcome. Thank you for taking the time to join us this lovely Wednesday morning. We are very happy to have you with us for yet another Unpoint session as part of our broader series, Unlocking the Full Potential of Your Transformation. For those of you who have joined previous sessions, welcome back. And for those of you joining for the first time, my name is Helena. And over the past few years, I have had the pleasure of working closely together with Casper, diving into the world of transformation management. And I am very happy to be back again for the third time this morning. It's fantastic to see we have more than 300 signups for today's session. So I really hope that you're all sitting comfortably with a morning cup of coffee. Maybe you are commuting on your way to the job. Nevertheless, we hope that you are ready to spend the next part of your morning exploring transformation management with us. As with the rest of these sessions, our ambition is to give you as much value and as many insights as possible in this very short timeframe. So therefore, it will mostly be us talking. However, we encourage you to post your questions and comments in the chat, because we will end today's session with a Q&A. Before we get into today's topic, let me just briefly introduce you who you will be hearing from today. So the first star joining me today is Casper, who has been with us throughout the entire Unpoint series. And Casper is one of Implement's leading experts in transformation management. He works closely together with organizations on translating strategic vision into concrete action and value. During today's session, Casper will take us through Implement's best practice approach to initiating transformations. But to ground the discussion in some practice, we have also invited another great colleague of ours, Heidi, who will share a practical case example of a successfully initiated transformation. Heidi has been inside the transformation engine room many times before, both from the inside of organizations and as an advisor across different industries. So she really knows what it takes to run transformations successfully. She will give a more thorough introduction to herself a bit later, but I can promise you that you are in for a treat. So the purpose of the gathering all of us here today is of course to continue our journey on large-scale transformations. And as you already know, today's focus is on transformation initiation. In other words, how do we set up our transformations for success from the very beginning? So what we will do today is to zoom in on the critical early moments and explore how we approach them in a way that creates clarity, momentum and the right conditions for success. To do so, we have four things on the agenda for today. First, we will make sure that you are all up to speed with our series and know what our framework is all about. We are very fortunate to welcome many new participants in each of these sessions. So before diving into the more specific elements, we want to create a shared starting point and just briefly recap our overall transformation approach. From there, we will spend the majority of today's session diving into transformation initiation. More specifically, what it takes to get it right from the start and what to be mindful of in the early phases. Casper will walk you through implements best practice approach and then Heidi will bring you in or will bring it into a more practical context through a real case example. And as I mentioned, finally, we will wrap up with the Q&A. So once again, please feel free to share your questions in the chat as we go along and we will do our best to address them in the end of today's session. Now I've mentioned a couple of times that today is part of a longer series called Unlocking the Full Potential of Your Transformation. And across this series, we have explored six different transformation topics, and we have been very lucky to have some brilliant colleagues of ours share their perspectives, experiences and practical insights along the way. However, if you missed some of the previous sessions, don't worry, you can still catch up. Together with the slides that we're presenting today and the recording as well, we will share the recordings of all the previous events. With all of that said, I think we are ready to dive into what it's all about. And it is no secret that designing, steering and executing large scale transformations is extremely difficult due to the high level of complexity. However, here in implement, we have almost 30 years of experience working with transformations across all industries and different parts of the world. And that has taught us that we in fact can increase our chances of success. If we put it down to a very condensed format, it comes down to three main things. First of all, we need to focus on increasing impact. And we do this by reducing our time to benefit realization by being very clear on the vision and by lowering our risks. The second thing we need to focus on is speeding up progress. And we do this through efficient execution, increased agility and improved coordination and collaboration across the program. Finally, the third thing we need to strengthen engagement. Here we focus on faster adoption through engaging change communication and change management leading to a higher stakeholder satisfaction, stronger ownership and high motivation in the organization. So these three elements, therefore, is what forms the core of our best practice framework for how to succeed with large scale transformation programs. We call it the implement TPM. And it is designed to help you, first of all, ensure that your transformation is designed to create high impact, that your transformation is set up to continuously drive progress, and that the receiving organization is engaged to change. Often when we go out to our clients, we see, okay, the target remains a bit undefined. Maybe there is an overestimation of the execution capabilities and the changing organization and its people is forgotten. And to truly succeed, our experience at least shows us that these three need to work together in an ecosystem. Of course, while they are being steered by strong leadership and facilitated by an effective TMO or Transformation Management Office. Let's dive into the framework a bit more. Each of these three disciplines have three underlying objectives, which function as high level roadmaps for the concrete practices. So if we start with build for high impact, this is the foundation. This is about steering the transformation. We often convey that programs not just go wrong, they start wrong. Therefore, it's important that we invest energy and effort in creating a clear and compelling program vision that everyone can subscribe to from the beginning. Then, of course, we also need to have clearly defined scope with desired benefits and a plan for how to get there. Afterwards, we, of course, also need to design and establish the organization and staff it with the required capabilities to succeed. So this is the first dimension. This is building for high impact, steering the transformation. If we go to the second discipline, this is driving progress. This is all about directing the execution. This is the engine of our transformation driving things forward. So to ensure that our transformation drives progress, we must have a strong governance setup across all levels. This is what enables fast decision making and an effective information flow going up and down the transformation. Then we also need to establish, as I mentioned before, an effective TMO, because this is the heartbeat of the transformation. This is what facilitates the rhythm, the meeting cadence, the controls environment, the collaboration practices. And finally, we, of course, also need to have a streamlined project management approach across all the projects, because this is what enables one source of truth reporting data aggregation, again, feeding into our governance setup, allowing for efficient and effective decision making and information flow up and down the organization. So this is the engine of our transformation. Then we have the final dimension, which is engaged to change. And this is all about transforming the organization. Here we need to involve all stakeholders with engaging change management with clear and compelling communication. early on in the transformation and continue to do so throughout. We also need to equip our leaders to drive and to own the change also so they're able to engage their infected employees. And finally, of course, we need to assess what are the current capabilities, what and define what are the future capabilities needed. And then we need to build the capabilities to bridge the gap in between the two, because this is what enables our benefits to be realized and sustained over time. So fulfilling all of these objectives is what ensures that our transformation or that your transformation is set up for success. So this is very important to mention that it's not a one time exercise like the environment around it. Our transformation will also evolve. So we should therefore adapt our approach over time and revisit and work with this framework as we go along. If we take a step back and unfold the framework even further, it contains concrete methods that can be applied to fulfill the given objectives. So these therefore serve as the how to guides for the specific objectives. And if we take even an even further step back, the final level of the framework, it contains a comprehensive range of tools, concrete tools and templates to support the methods. All of this increasing our likelihood of succeeding with large scale transformations. Before we dive into the topic of today, we will just take a quick look at how we typically support clients across the transformation. And we do so throughout the entire lifecycle. We help with transformation initiation and ramp up. What we're going to talk about today. We help establish and drive PMOs and TMOs. We help manage and support program execution. We have our transformation X-ray, which we had a separate event on. Then we do course correction and improvement offices. And we build transformation capabilities and much more. So I think that brings us to the end of the introduction. So let's dive into what today is really about. And with that, I will hand over the mic to our one and only Caspar. Thank you so much, Helena, for the kind words. And good morning to everyone. It's a pleasure to be here once more and a pleasure to be here with great colleagues, again, staring the stage with those. And because I've actually been allowed here back for the seventh time, I put some extra love into the slide animation this time. So have a look out for those this morning. We've spent the first six sessions inside the TPM Engine, deep diving into the three disciplines you just got introduced to, or maybe was reminded of if you're joining us here again. But today I want to take us a bit back. Back to the work that should actually happen before turning on the ignition. The work that really acts as one of the keys to unlocking the full potential of transformations. But let me first start with the scale of what we're actually dealing with here. Because at any given time, one in three large organizations has a large scale transformation underway in one way or the other. So this means that transformation and the work of initiating them is no longer just an occasional event, but it's actually the operating environment of the modern organization. We are changing all the time. This means that we need to treat the discipline of initiating as a core organization capabilities, and actually one that we are teaching our leaders, our PMOs and our delivery teams. And not just something that we win when a new strategic ambition lands in the organization. And for those transformations, the current success rate is unacceptably low. Because roughly 78% are actually unsuccessful when we measure them on time, cost, and the impact that they actually set out to get. And what makes this number even more alarming is when we put it into a historical comparison. Because the now famous change management expert or thought leader John Carter estimated the failure rates of transformation around 70% nearly 30 years ago. And since then you all know that we have added models, we have added certification, more PMOs, better tooling, and most recently also help from AI. And yet we found ourselves roughly in the same pace. And this tells us something important. Because the problem that we are dealing with here is structurally, and that demands that we redefine the way that we design, the way that we initiate, and also the way that we actually manage transformation out there. And the difficulty of transformation is underlined by one of my favorite statistics of transformation that is conducted by Oakley, who asked 700 senior decision makers of organizations with more than 1000 employees about their attitudes to organizational transformation. And this study quite interestingly found that about two in five CEOs actually would rather resign than drive another large scale transformation. And just think about what that tells us. Because a significant part of the people at the top of these organizations, the people that are best resourced, best supported, and best paid to actually make the change, would actually rather walk away than to take them on head first. And that starkly illustrates the difficulty of leading transformation today. It illustrates the complexity, the ambiguity, and the conflicting demands, and even the personal exposure that comes with the role of leading these in today's environment. And Helena, I have already mentioned this one time, but this quote from a Danish professor Bent Flubia is one that I often come back to. Because transformations don't just go wrong, they very often actually start wrong. And we use this because that actually also measures one of the key challenges that we see when we are helping on transformation. They are simply set up for failure from the beginning. Because far too many transformations get off to a bad start because we dive into what we know best. We want to show progress to the management. We spend far too little time in the exploratory space around the problem, around the execution approach and the crowd solution. And we often also neglect ensuring efficient involvement of the stakeholders across the organization. And as a result of this, we spend most of the transformation lifecycle actually trying to fix what should have been very clear from the start. Instead of spending our time where value is created mostly, leaders and the delivery teams end up spending their time on putting out the most recent fire. But this is, however, no surprise as initiation of transformation probably is more easy said than done. Because the nature of transformation is not that they are structured even though we would like them to be. They don't just appear out of the blue with a clear goal, agreed scope, defined governance and a sequent plan and aligned organizations that are just ready to act. And what makes it even more tricky is that they must evolve from and form in a context that is messy by nature. Because all organizations at all times are constituted by competing priorities, partial ideas, conflicting interpretation of what the future holds and what it means for both the organization and also the individuals. And this is what I try to illustrate here with the small bubble of different sizes and different colors, the different organizational interests that exist. And if we respond to this mess by just rushing into what feels like progress, hiring a program director, creating governance, creating processes and delivery mechanics, we just amplify this chaos. We create more activity without the more transparency that we actually want. So the real question here becomes what turns this chaos into something that we can actually execute on. And like with all complex tasks, initiation is a discipline that actually requires capabilities and a structured approach. At least that's how we see it. Because we must consciously map and understand and cluster these divergent ambitions and interests of the relevant stakeholders to shape a new approach. And this process is very critical because it sets the tone and direction for the journey ahead. Meaning that if we get this wrong, we probably would not end where we'd like to be. So the output that we are aiming here for in the beginning is an organizational commitment that actually can survive shifting attention that will most definitely rise in a transformation lifecycle. And this we have seen take time and often more than most organizations acknowledge to spend. And here was one of the things that I mentioned. Because this is a very, of course, simplified world what we try to achieve from many moving parts to one shared path. The point here is not to pretend that the complexity disappears from the organization because it, of course, never will in transformation. But the point is to actually acknowledge that complexity exists and spend more time trying to understand it and create the transparency across the organization that is needed before we actually get into execution. And now we want to just to show you how we then do this in practice. Because in our view, successful initiation comes down to three quite simple commitments of fundamental choices. We need to figure out why we need to change. We need to figure out what we need to change. And we need to figure out how we need to make this change happen and how we need to transform. And the order of how we do these choices is key because we need to log in on the problem first before we move into the solution and execution. In step one, we cover the why. And in step two, we cover the what and the how. And each step should be seen as an iterative process of analysis and workshop or co-creation and alignment across the organization and not just a one shot exercise with one day. And between these steps, we have two decision gates that is probably familiar for many of you from any given project model. And the job of these gates are the same. We want to ensure that we do not proceed until the work is actually mature enough to commit to. And we need to safeguard our organizational resource before we commit to them. And if we take the gates one at a time, gate one is where you actually earn the right to call something a transformation. Before this, it is probably just a idea in the head of some few people. And the deceptively hard work isn't within the analysis. By now, we can get the AIs to get us on the right track and help us there. But it's actually the important part is the alignment of the humans within the organization. And that is still something that AI cannot fix for us. Anyone and also AI can help us write the problem statement. But the real work is leading up the gate. It's making sure that the people at the top of the transformation actually agree on 4-team. What is the problem that we are trying to solve? And also, what are the effects of the problem on the... Try again. And what is the actual effects that hits the organization around the transformation? What is causing it? Looking into the root causes and not just the symptom of the problem. And also, which of these causes that we actually choose to target? Because we cannot properly not root all of this. We need to figure out what good looks like. So having objectives, benefits, KPIs, and also for who. And figuring out whether these needs to be different for the different target groups. And then we need to be sure that this is true. We need to look at our ambition about the desired end state. That they are surfaced and also that they are tested. So the output here is not a polished problem statement. But it should be one that top management and also the benefits owner will actually defend. And furthermore, you should have some kind of draft of a core story. That enables you to actually compellingly communicate this to the wider organization. Because if we move to the solution designed without sufficient understanding of the why. We will end up spending most of the transformation actually arguing whether we are solving the right problem. And of course, that is not what we want. And for gate 2, it has two halves. We have the what and the how, which needs to be treated in conjunction. The what is about picking a solution. It's about generating different options. It's about actually stress testing them and assessing their desirability, their viability, and also feasibility. And critically, here you must validate your assumption around the solution. Because every solution rests on things that you think might be true. And making those beliefs explicit and test them before we bet on these of the transformation is very key. So the output for this part is actually a solution that has earned the right to be built and not something that we just believe in. And if we move to the how, this is where you actually decide on the execution vehicle. So the vehicle is where you will get from where you are now to where you want to be in the future. And of course, despite these sessions revolving around program management, you need to be mindful that program is just one option. A portfolio of individual projects is another. Operational change inside of business units or the business units is a third. And the choice whether you take one or the other, of course, depends on the solution and how the complexity of the organization, the scope, the dependencies, and also what changes actually require. But here it's all about ensuring the executive ownership. You need to have shape of the ways when we would like to release value in the organization. You need to have drafted the business case so you can get the funding. And you, of course, also need to ensure that you have staff for the ramp up in the beginning to get you off to a good start. And the output here again is then the vehicle that is actually ready to execution. So we have probably scoped, probably resourced, and also probably owned requirements to start. And I think with all of this theory out of the way, I think it's about time that I invite you to the stage and share a bit of practical examples from us. Thank you, Casper. Thank you, everybody, for having the opportunity to be here today. I will start with an introduction of myself just to give you an example or give you a sense of where my experience come from. I have worked with Transformations for several years, both inside organizations and as a management consultant. I have worked across multiple companies and multiple industries. I have led transformation initiatives as a program manager, and I have been responsible for a strategy execution department. And I have supported multiple leadership teams in making Transformations work. What I'm sharing today is not theory, but it's elements that in my experience is something you need to be mindful of when initiating a transformation. But let's face it, transformations are complex. This is why today I deliberately focus on a few critical elements, which I believe are very important when starting a transformation. Specifically, I will focus on translating strategy into actions, so people actually know what needs to change. Combining business insights with transformational capabilities, because you need both in order to make change happen. Articulating the trade-offs, because this is where real tension appears and where things can become difficult. And aligning on the performance dip, because this is where transformations will lose momentum if you're not prepared for it. I will illustrate this through a case where we chose to spend more time upfront to make sure that the transformation got off to a right start. So, now to the case. This company started with a high-level strategy. The executive team had defined an overall ambition for the next five years. They had also defined a set of strategic themes, which were winning the customer and simplifying processes. Just some examples of the strategy. But at this stage, nothing was really concrete. They didn't know how to approach the execution and they didn't know how to prioritize. And that's where they called me. In my experience, this is also where a lot of transformations struggle. I often hear management teams saying, we have been working with this strategy for months now. We all know what to do. Let's execute. And the responsibility is pushed out to the project managers and execution starts. But what happens is leadership is not really aligned on priorities. The trade-offs are not clear and it hasn't been agreed. The resources are not really committed. And the transformation capabilities are missing. So, based on experience, we knew that we had to do something different this time. We asked the sponsors in the leadership team to describe the strategic themes in more details. We asked them to answer questions such as, what problems are we actually trying to solve? What needs to change? And what is needed to enable the transformation? Each theme was described on a simple one-pager. And it resulted in several initiatives. And then we prioritized. We reduced the many initiatives to fewer initiatives. And the remaining ones we placed on a roadmap for future execution. And one of the most important things was, we communicated this prioritization to the organization. And this is where leadership really needs to step in. Because prioritization is not just an analytical exercise. It's about making tough choices. And you will experience that not everybody will agree with your choices. And this will require alignment and sometimes very difficult conversations. And this needs to happen at leadership level. And this will require alignment and commitment to the prioritized initiatives. So, for each of the initiatives, we created a strong ownership model. We assigned an executive owner and a benefit owner. And we also assigned a project manager. The benefit owner was a senior person from the business who understood the business in details. Someone who had credibility in the organization. And someone we made accountable for the benefits and not just the delivery. And then we added the project manager. Someone with transformational capabilities. Because leading a transformational project requires skills that are different from running the day-to-day business. We needed someone with the skills to plan and drive execution, to mobilize stakeholders and to manage risk and lead the change. What often happens is that organizations, they choose between the business or a project manager to lead the change. And both approaches have limitations. So, what we did was, we paired the two. Sorry. I was just being a bit too fast. So, what we did, we paired the two in a strong partnership. We had someone from the business who knew about how the transformation would impact the business. And we had the project manager who knew how to execute the projects. But they lacked a little bit of knowledge about the business. And that's where the business owner came in. We also ensured that the project manager was fully dedicated to the initiative. Because we knew that the business owner would need to continue with some of the day-to-day operations. And it was our experience that this worked really well. Okay. Now the next slide. And then we created the project charters. So, the purpose of the project charters was to make the initiatives very concrete from the start. Everybody needed to have a shared understanding of what we were trying to achieve and how. And the project charters, they were defined with the scope, the expected benefits, the expected new behaviors, and the key activities. And most importantly, the trade-offs. And this is one of my key takeaways today. You need to be really clear on the trade-offs. And you need to discuss them upfront. Because everybody agrees on the ambition. And everybody agrees on the expected benefits. But it's when you talk about the trade-offs, the consequences of these strategic choices, that it becomes much harder. This is where tension really appears. And I have seen projects stall because trade-offs were realized too late. And I have seen how key stakeholders have blocked progress several months into a project. So, a concrete example from our case was, we had the ambition to simplify core processes, to reduce the administrative work, and ultimately reduce the cost. And everybody agreed this was a great idea. So, we decided to implement a new system to help standardize and automize these processes. Again, everybody agreed. Great idea. However, we also knew that this would mean shutting down self-developed Excel tools and specialized systems. And we knew that leaders would lose some of the specialized reporting that they were used to. We knew that this would create resistance. So, we chose to address it upfront. It's much better to have these discussions early than in the middle of execution. Political discussions that hinder progress will delay your benefits and it will create real frustration in the organization. And furthermore, agreeing on the trade-offs upfront also strengthened our change management efforts. Because we became more clear on where resistance and the difficult conversations were likely to arise. So, it allowed us to address them deliberately rather than reactively. And then we spent time upfront to discuss how the transformation would impact performance. We use this figure because it shows what transformation looks like over time. Transformations means shifting from focusing on things that we're really good at today to things we need to become good at tomorrow. We're very good at the things we do today because we have practiced for years. But transformations mean learning to do new things. And while we do that and develop the new things, we will see efficiency drop. And this dip is normal. So, we spent time with the leadership team to discuss this performance dip upfront. We created a shared understanding of what happens during a transformation. So, we knew that we would stay committed even when efficiency went down. One important point was not to pull back initiatives too early or to reallocate resources back to operations before the new ways of working were in place. We knew that if we lost momentum, we would risk staying in the dip for too long, where we were trying to do the right things, but we were not really efficient doing them yet. So, the focus was to move from this phase through to the next phase as quickly as possible. Once the transformation succeeds, the organization is focused on doing the new right things, and over time efficiency will increase and very often it will be even higher than before. So, the elements that I have highlighted here today, they're not rocket science, and probably not even new to a lot of you. However, the key takeaway is, you need to spend time on this upfront. It's time very well spent. So, just to recap on some of the elements that I have been through. You need to make the strategy concrete. You need to translate it into clear actions. You need to combine the business ownership with a strong execution capability, because you need both. It's about being very explicit about the trade-offs and addressing them early. And it's about aligning on the performance dip to ensure that the leadership stays the course through the transformation. These were the elements that I believe that you need to spend more time on to start a transformation right. Thank you. Thank you so much, Heidi. You're welcome. For sharing your insights. So, now I would like to invite you to a more comfortable setting, where we will continue with the final point of today's agenda, which will be the Q&A, if you are up for it. I am, definitely. Lucky us. Welcome back. Now, in a slightly more comfortable setting. During today's sessions, we have shared a lot of our perspectives and experiences. And what we would like for this final part of today is for you at home to share your experiences. Or not experiences, but questions and comments. And then we will try to address them. But to kick things off, I have, we can start or begin with the question that I have brought. So, you emphasize the importance of prioritizing time upfront. But what does that mean in practice? How much time should the organizations actually spend in the initiation phase? And maybe Heidi, you can start off. Thank you, Helena. It's a really good question. And the answer obviously depends on the complexity of the transformation and how many is impacted by the transformation. But to relate it to my case, this was an organization with more than 1,500 employees. And it was a rather complex transformation. We spent approximately five to six months upfront, detailing the transformation, detailing the project charters, but also having a lot of alignment meetings. First in the executive team where they had to align within themselves. And then we extended it to the broader leadership team, making sure that everybody were on board and they understood the changes that needed to happen. And this was also where we discussed the trade-offs. And that obviously looped back on some of the things that we wanted to do, because we needed to make sure that everybody were aligned and we understood the trade-offs and how that would impact the organization. So around five, six months was what we spent. And maybe a follow-up question to that. How do you know when you have spent enough time in this initiation phase and your transformation is ready to move into execution? I think that you need to have the leadership on board. Both the leadership, the executive leadership, but also the extended leadership. So a lot of the middle managers. You can see when you start to have most of them understanding what it is that you need to do, then you are ready to move on. You will not be able to have everybody on board and you can't spend too much time getting everybody on board because there will always be someone who are not ready to change. So you need to have majority on board. And when you have that and they start to understand the changes, they may not necessarily agree with them, but they understand them. That's when you know you're ready to move on. I think there's something about that. Again, what you're also alluding to here is maybe like the 80 to 20% rule that, that of course we cannot go for perfection here in the beginning because then we'll never get off to a start anyway. But there is something about actually being able to individually within the top management and potentially also the extended leadership, being able to actually articulate both these three questions that we talked about in the beginning, the why, the what, and the how, actually individually. So asking them in different rooms, being able to actually come up with almost the same answer. And if they're not true, then I think that we have a clear indication that, that we don't have the alignment here. And we just see that that does take time because we do interpret things in different ways. And then we have a question. Now you, you presented our best practice approach to how to initiate or kickstart transformations. And are there certain industries where this approach is more relevant than others or does it apply broadly across industries? Maybe you can start, Kestin. Yes. No, I would definitely say that the whole point about taking away from this session is to spend more time upfront applies to all industries and all different regions. Because what we see is that the time that you actually invest upfront is something that you gain back in reducing the rework and scope changes and all of these things in the end. So even though it might be very difficult in the beginning to actually explain the why we need to do this, we just see in all of the statistics and all that we do that the time you are spending in the beginning is actually multiplied in the end. So whether we are talking about implementing a IT system or building a factory or doing a more like a workforce transformation, we still see that you need to have a clear view of these three aspects. Of course, the design of would be very different whether you're looking at a factory or you're looking at a new organizational structure. But the main point about being clear about these questions is the same across. How do you see it? Does that align with... And I can echo that. I have worked across multiple industries and multiple companies and we actually see some of the same pitfalls across all. Okay, so now we talked a lot about creating alignment between the leaders and in the leadership teams before initiating the transformations. And how do you concretely do this if we talk more practical? How do you ensure that they are aligned? Maybe you can start, Heidi. Yeah, so in this concrete example, I was talking to the CFO and the CEO, and he said, we know what to do. We just need to execute. And when I spoke to the other members of the leadership team, they said, we actually don't agree. So I knew that I had to get them in together and we needed to spend more time on detailing what was the strategy really about and how did we want to solve the strategic challenges that we had. So we spent time and, as I said, we used the one pages as a first step and we discussed it. And to be honest, in the first meeting, the leadership team hadn't really read the one pages. So we had to schedule another meeting and we had to force them to actually read the one pages and to have an opinion on the trade-offs and the trade-offs were. And we also did it with the project charters. Again, that was a more comprehensive document, but we forced everyone to actually read them and have an opinion on the content. And that took time. And we had to have several iterations on this. And I think that, of course, in Implement, we believe a lot in the whole co-creation. So I think there's something about actually facilitating these conversations quite structurally so that, again, it's not just becomes a belief, but we actually present opportunities for the different parts of the organization, not only the top management who might believe where they want to go, but also the more middle managers to have a situation where they can actually put forward their perspective in a good way. So again, actually facilitating this co-creation across. Makes sense. That was it. Now it's almost a quarter past nine. So thank you so much, Heidi and Caspar. Thank you. And thank you all for joining this lovely Wednesday morning. This was our seventh session in our series, Unlocking the Full Potential of Your Transformation, and the last one before summer. However, we will be back even stronger on the other side of summer with another session, which will focus on AI and project management. With that said, thank you so much. Have a lovely Wednesday and enjoy the summer weather. See you.