and I've always believed for sustainability that until customers started acting on it, we weren't going to make huge progress. But I think now customers are saying, that's a company I can buy from, that one I will not buy from. And that's going to force a lot of changes. We see many of our clients struggling with integrating sustainability into their strategy. So far, it focuses almost entirely on operational issues. From your perspective, do you see the strategic challenge raising completely new strategy questions? I do. I think when you've got a field that is still relatively new, right, which is sustainability in strategy. I mean, people will struggle at first because it's not something they've always done, right? They've always done a budget and they've always done capital planning. And typically, they've done strategy. And when they say, well, there's this additional thing called sustainability, I think there's often a struggle with, well, how do I do that? And I think what is often the first thing that happens is that they make it a separate thing. So they hire a sustainability person and that person kind of works away at sustainability stuff over on the side. And as long as they don't spend too much money, people just sort of say, okay, we're doing that. They're issuing a sustainability report and we've got a sustainability cause or something. And I think that's where many companies are. I think as it evolves, more companies sort of figure out, you know, just doing that on the side for a little bit of money doesn't really make a huge difference in the world. And if we really want to make a difference, if we want to be a leader, we've got to say, well, the main thing we do is produce this product or this service. How do we do that in a more sustainable way and fundamentally better way for the planet? So from your perspective and listening to you, you kind of almost get the feeling that companies are stuck in a kind of the classical CSR type of world where we do some good, but just business as usual. So in your opinion, is there a need to re-imagining what sustainability really means for a strategy? I think it's going to happen where companies are going to tackle their strategy and have sustainability infused into that tackling of strategy. And a bunch of the same rules are going to apply, right? If you want to have a big positive effect, you're going to have to make choices that are unique. What special thing are you doing? Right. Are you going to be like Patagonia and you're going to take back the clothes and repair jackets and send them back to customers rather than throw that one away and use all the resources to make a new jacket? Now that's special. Right. So that's what's going to happen. Fewer are going to be seen as doing something special while lots of folks, their strategy will be, you know, essentially will do the same as everybody else. So is sustainability really forcing us to completely re-imagine the purpose of a business? And some might not even have the license to play in the future. I think it'll be partially how you do things will change more than what value you're trying to provide to customers. It's just how you go about doing that is going to have to change a whole lot. And the classic case would be like, you're right. If you're an energy company, you know, you might be stopping drilling for more hydrocarbons and building more kind of wind turbines. But still, it's not completely changing the nature of the business. You're still supplying energy to customers who need energy. Nike did this move, which was sharing their dirty secrets. I'd be interested in what you think about of that as a strategic move, but perhaps also about should we encourage more companies to come clean and show us our dirty secrets? I'm for transparency. The very first regulations in modern history were called sunshine laws, and they mandated transparency under the theory that the best disinfectant is sunshine. And so I think theoretically, that makes a lot of sense to me. I think there's a relatively small downside to governments mandating transparency. You mentioned the Patagonia a bit before, which is a kind of an icon in many ways. I think they went public very recently saying that their only stakeholder was the planet. Did you see that as the new thing or you see it more as a kind of an outlier and activist kind of crazy or? I think it's going to be the new thing. You just have to look at the stakeholder equation, not as a random set. There are these, oh, there's the planet, there's customers, there's employees, there's the shareholders, and there's just each of them are like a separate thing. You've got to ask the question, how do they work in a system? What influences what? And I think Patagonia is saying, oh, you know, our shareholder value is influenced by putting planet number one. And I think it's idiotic shareholders who say, that CEO said shareholders come first, we're here to maximize shareholder value, that's what we're all about. It's an idiot investor who says, oh, I want to invest in that because they really care about me. Smart investors said, you know, their formula that says if we take care of those three elements really well, we'll do well. That's not a formula I can bet on.