Intro

[00:00] Welcome to In the Arena. My name is Shaun Dyke, managing partner with DoorTwo. We thought it’d be fun to do something a little different today, so we’re going to take a different approach. You’re just going to hear me — my melodic voice all day. I have no partner with me in here today.

We received a series of curiosities, questions, and conundrums that people grapple with, so we’re going to do a bit of an AMA — ask me anything. The team curated a list of questions that came in, and in authentic style, I literally just got these. So this is off-the-cuff, real-world reality. Part of the fun is that these are real questions people are curious about and that we navigate as coaches in these spaces. It’s a bit of behind-the-scenes — you’ll hear me grapple with them as authentically as I can. I guarantee I’m not going to have answers to all of them.

The questions are grouped categorically around real challenges and curiosities. Let me give you the macro categories, and then we’ll go through them.

The first is the hidden gap: what separates those who make the jump to C-suite level? What executives won’t say — the behind-closed-doors truth. That’s a fun one, because there are countless things people think they aren’t supposed to say or ask. It’s quite common that when I get to close the door and be on a one-on-one call, those real questions come up.

The second is more tactical — career decisions, the moves that actually compound. What are the things that, when we build on them, have a material effect on the progress of your career?

The third, and perhaps the most challenging to work through, is the inner game: identity, fear, and the cost of the seat.

We’ll walk through all of those, answer them as organically as possible, and have fun with it.

Section 1: The Hidden Gap

[02:05] “When you first sit down with a high performer, can you tell right away if they’ll make it to the C-suite or top out as a very good VP?”

The most immediate and direct answer is no. You can’t tell right away — partly because that would assume they’ve chosen to stop learning. There’s a commonly used phrase: “The learners will inherit the Earth, while the learned will find themselves perfectly equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.” The space I get to work in assumes that individuals are self-aware and want to keep growing. So I’m meeting people at a point in time. I can read where they are, what their accomplishments have been, and what aspirations they have — but I don’t know if they’re going to cap out there.

[02:57] You do start to understand whether they have some of the raw ingredients. Is curiosity present at the levels we’re looking for? Do they have horsepower and intelligence? Do they have an appropriate sense of self-worth? Is their social identity clear? Or are they still in an egocentric space, struggling with self, trying to figure out who they are? If so, maybe that ramp is going to be a bit slower. But I can’t determine — and no one on the team would say they can determine — that an individual is going to cap out here. Not when we first meet them.

Now, if I’ve had the opportunity to sit with someone for a long time, we’re better suited to know that. And most of the time, the individuals recognize it as well — they know it’s not what they want to do. Most of what we do is coach three categories of people: high potential, high profile, and high impact. They’re looking to optimize in some way. There have been times I’ve been asked to sit down and help someone evolve something about themselves, but they just don’t want to. They’re not interested, and in fact, they don’t need to.

There was a gentleman I was coaching. He was very senior in the org — not at C-suite level, but really close. He was soft-spoken; his general way of talking to people was muted, quiet, genuine — but soft. He kept getting feedback that he needed a stronger voice, more command and presence. He was about five years out from retirement, and the question I asked was, “Do you want to get better at this? Do you authentically feel like this is something you want to do?” I really admired his honest answer, which was no.

[04:52] I was happy he said that, because the trade-offs in shifting that about himself are big. They’re really challenging. To take 55 years of learned exposure and experience and then fundamentally change something so organic and authentic in you — that takes effort and willingness, and he didn’t have an interest in it. In a scenario like that, we can mutually read that you’ve hit a point where you’re happy with where you are and don’t want to move beyond it. But there’s no way I’d say we can ascertain, when we first sit down with somebody, whether they’ve capped out. It would go against everything we believe, which is that all growth starts with self-awareness. If you have high enough self-awareness and you’re willing to invest in yourself and grow, then there’s significant potential that lies in wait.

A fun question.

[05:46] “You’ve watched hundreds of talented people get within reach of the C-suite. What’s the most common reason a genuinely capable person stalls one level below it? What’s the thing they never see coming?”

My first thought is that I don’t know there’s one thing — but there are some pretty common patterns.

[06:10] We’re often working with people who haven’t yet reached the C-suite — they’re close, or moving up the ranks. It’s also important to calibrate something: there are C-suite individuals who run very effective organizations, but of a size and complexity where, in a giant global conglomerate, a director-level individual is handling a complementary stress level. So just looking at the org structure or layer needs to be contextualized by the size of the business. But either way, let’s assume we have a talented individual who’s stalling a bit moving into the next space.

[07:00] Almost always — and this is the fun part to hear — it’s a self-inflicted problem, not an other-inflicted one. It isn’t necessarily the organization holding them back. It’s often that their success up to this point is predicated on a pattern of behavior that served them and is no longer serving them. My behavior pattern was an asset; it’s now a liability, and I don’t have enough feedback to increase my awareness of it.

What do we mean by that? We had a gentleman on here not long ago named Keith Butler who said, “I realized at some point that self-awareness wasn’t enough.” I can know enough about me, but I’m probably going to need external perspectives at times to realize where I really need to push.

[07:52] What I see more often than not: they have a stylistic way they speak, engage, communicate, and develop people, and that playbook has worked. The challenge is the playbook is no longer working. There’s significant fear tied to abandoning it or feeling like they’re letting go of it. The competency model they’ve used to be successful — we now have to get them to shift that lens, and everything in them resists, because they want to activate the same things they historically have.

A comical example: at one point I was chatting with the curriculum head for a university. This wasn’t that long ago, though you’ll think it was based on what I’m about to say. Most of the instructors were still using overheads — the clear sheets you’d write on. You’ve got to have some age on you to even know that experience. They were trying to get them to move to something more current, and the resistance was elevated, because for fifteen years this was the tool they used. They knew how to put their competency on display with that tool set.

[09:18] That’s a barrier. If you feel like you’re going to look incompetent, or you’re unclear, and that creates a conscious or unconscious panic state, you regress back to the things you could do. There’s a fear around it. So if there’s something that holds people back, it’s often what made them successful before. They want to cling to it, anchor to it, and they have a hard time letting go to move on to the next thing. I’ve certainly fallen victim to that myself.

[09:59] “Is the jump to the C-suite about getting better at what you already do, or becoming a different kind of person? What actually has to change?”

Is it about becoming a different kind of person? Likely no — if we’re talking one tier up. You probably didn’t get to this point without a series of attributes that serve you and that you’ll carry forward. That sounds a little contradictory to the question I just answered, but it’s usually not a specific competency set.

Becoming a different kind of person? No — and maybe. What do I mean?

[10:42] If you worked in an environment where the stylistic approach you used was more command-and-control, and you move organizations, and the culture there doesn’t serve the customer promise in the same way, then you’re definitely going to have to demonstrate a different behavior pattern. That doesn’t fundamentally mean you’re a different person, but you may have to show up differently. This is where range comes into play. As a leader, can you take the pulse of the situation and make a material shift in how you show up? We often say you have an infinite number of ways to respond to the world around you, but we default to the most convenient ones — the ones with the most well-worn paths.

[11:30] So do you have to become a different person? Probably not. You have to activate different strengths you maybe haven’t used. Chris and I were having a conversation about authenticity — about people being their authentic selves, and what we think about that. My headspace was: it depends. If you’re authentically an asshole, probably not — that might be something you’ve got to learn to change. If stylistically you come across condescending or self-interested, and for whatever reason that’s worked inside the organization because the organization feeds it, then yeah — at that point someone needs to hold up a mirror to you, and there are significant shifts you need to make about how you show up.

[13:09] So what actually has to change? It’s context- and goal-specific. There are worlds where nothing has to change. I’ve worked with leaders — I don’t still work with them, for these reasons — who are self-interested and aggressive and not other-oriented. They go into an organization and tear things up. They’re competent and capable, and they manage to be successful-ish for a few years, and then they roll out, and their LinkedIn profile says something really cool, and they get recruited again and run that cycle again. I don’t encourage that. You leave a wake of damage in your path.

If you want to be successful in the way we’re talking about — having extraordinary impact — what has to change is your willingness to look at your current state, the context around you, and make a conscious choice about whether you need to evolve the way you approach your leadership to be effective in that environment. That’s a hard one, because you’re potentially shifting away from the things you’ve done in the past.

All right, next set. Need a cup of coffee first. Hang on. Okay.

Section 2: Behind the Closed Doors

[13:49] “What’s the biggest myth that ambitious leaders believe about life in the C-suite, and how different is the reality once they arrive? What do the best CEOs actually spend their days on, versus what a 35-year-old imagines the job would be?”

A lot of leaders think the people sitting around that big table, having conversations about strategy and where the business is going, operate with a pronounced level of clarity and confidence. It’s completely not the case. Period.

[14:23] I was sitting at my dinner table the other day. We’d made some decisions at DoorTwo — some were working well, some weren’t. The kids were getting up and clearing the table, and I found myself a little adrift in thought: “Did I make the right call? Were those the right things? Did I over-rotate? Did I put too much energy into ideas I had confidence in but maybe not competence in?”

[15:04] That exists constantly at the table. It is not the space where certainty exists. Hope exists, optimism exists, but there’s so much absence of certainty — and no one to go to. Those who sit in those roles don’t have someone to turn to most of the time. It’s that group that needs to figure it out. And then hundreds or thousands of people are directly affected by the actions and inactions you take, plus who knows how many indirectly, through family systems and the people around them.

So one of the biggest myths is, “I’m going to get there, we’ll sit around with this incredible group of leaders, and we’ll figure out how things go.” That’s true — but it’s going to be way messier than you think. There’s no perfect script or plan or path most of the time.

[16:35] Another thing: I wish it weren’t the case, but it’s politically charged in most C-suites. People listening won’t be surprised. The hope is that you’ll get together at this table with amplified candor, high trust, and open dialogue. There is that, to a degree — in healthy organizations it’s certainly present. But there are also pre-meetings, back-channel dialogues, and preparation that has to happen. People have to be conscious; sometimes you politically say something or step on someone’s toes and it doesn’t go well. Anyone who believes that’s not true is missing a core part of the human condition. There’s ego, identity, insecurity, trust issues — all real. All the stuff you’ve grappled with going up in your career still exists there, probably muted, probably better navigated, but clearly still there.

[17:23] So what do the best CEOs actually spend their days on? We say there are three things a CEO can’t delegate: culture, strategy, and competence. In an ideal world, C-suite individuals ensure that culture is curated with intention, in service of the customer promise — not accidental, with intention. We say it all the time: culture is not what you profess; it’s what you tolerate and reward. So they spend time looking at the behaviors of the leaders around them and reinforcing what they need to see.

[18:02] The second is strategy: are we putting resources toward the big bets and big wins — highest and best use of the talent and team — and channeling them effectively?

[18:32] The last one sounds weird: competence. Are we positioning ourselves to scale effectively? Do I know that the people I’m delegating to actually have the competence? We say all the time that leaders mistake confidence for competence, because we have eager individuals trying to grow who say, “I’ve got this, let me roll with it.” We give them a project, and we didn’t do a fair job of ensuring they were ready. We wanted to extend trust — which we should — and believe in their capabilities — which we should — but we also need to make sure they’re competent and capable to deliver.

Those three spaces are where I’d encourage CEOs to focus. Is that where most C-suites focus? We probably know the answer — most of the time, no. They reach too far down into the weeds. They operate at a lower altitude than they should. That’s usually distress-driven, panic-driven, state-of-the-organization-driven. They reach back in and start doing things at a lower level, partly because they know how to control that — they did it at some point in their career — and partly because it’s satisfying; it hits the achievement itch. But in reality, we’re far better served pulling up in altitude, understanding you’re going to work with major ambiguity, that no one is going to give you the answers, and that you have to be a good guardian of culture, strategy, and competence.

[20:09] “How much of reaching the top is competence, and how much is politics, relationships, timing, luck, or something else entirely?”

It’s all of it, to a degree. Clearly, you can only get so far without competence — you’ve got to have the horsepower and capability.

[20:19] Politics always has a negative connotation. If we re-languaged it as stakeholder management and influence, then yes — that’s critical. Timing, of course. Luck? Luck doesn’t quite land for me. There’s a phrase: luck is when preparation and opportunity meet. If we mean I’m prepared and an opportunity showed up, that’s competence and timing — but I don’t think it’s luck.

Is it something else entirely? One of the biggest pieces — as we say all the time — is that all growth starts with self-awareness. A big piece of that is: are you aware of the impact you have on others? When you walk into a room, do you know the effect you’re having on the room and the people in it? That’s a good one to process in the moment as you listen. Do you know whether people want you in their room — that you invite clarity and confidence for them — or do you create insecurity, self-doubt, or a self-protectionist mindset?

[21:38] If you don’t have enough self-awareness to know how you’re being experienced, and enough agency to adjust it, then your competence becomes a liability. Your relationship management becomes constrained because you can’t shift. And timing doesn’t matter, because you’re not in a ready state. So reaching the top is a function of all those things — competence, relationships, timing — but they’re not static. They’re constantly evolving, and it’s only through self-awareness, orienting yourself in the context of the moment and making material changes about who you are in response to the environment, that you succeed. A dynamic ability — your range, brought present — is one of the most important elements in reaching the top.

[22:36] “When the door closes and it’s just you and a CEO, what do they admit to you that they never say publicly, or even to their inner circle?”

This is amazing. I’ll use a CFO as an example. This person had been successful at everything in their career path — competent and capable in high school, top of their class in college, and now CFO of a large organization. By all the measures tied to process and structure in the financial world, they were doing great. But they were losing out because their relational capabilities were incredibly low.

I’d met with them a couple of times, and, as you’d expect, everyone postures. They struggle to allow themselves to truly be seen — there’s a lot of insecurity. By the third meeting, I’m at a bar in Boston with this guy. We’ve had drinks and dinner, we’ve been chatting for a good hour and a half, and he’s still dropped into that posture of perfection. At some point he goes silent, and he starts awkwardly looking over his shoulders, around the room, like someone was listening. Then he leaned across the table and said, “Man, sometimes I don’t know what I’m doing.” You could tell it was a real acknowledgment for him — a real vulnerable moment. And in my head I’m thinking, “No shit, man. That’s all of us, all the time.” We just project that we think we know.

So what do I get when the door closes — if we’ve created the space for people to genuinely know we have them, that they can be transparent about where they’re winging it, where they don’t know, where they’re stumbling? We get real-world exposure, real-world challenges, the business problems they’re navigating — but also the hard conversation they had with their spouse at breakfast, or the stress about a son trying to get into college. Behind the closed door, we get the real human most of the time. They let us see the parts that aren’t perfect. I describe it as the barbed wire and the bruises — we’re just not perfect. I’ve been knocking around trying to show up capable and confident, projecting certainty, and when we close the door, you see a collapse — that word sounds aggressive, but I’ll use it — into the whole human. It’s no longer the CEO or the CFO. It’s the person.

[25:48] I think of a boss I had at Nestlé. He’s an incredible human, and a lot of my career success is attributable to him, so I’ll keep his name out of this. He got promoted. At Nestlé’s corporate headquarters at the time, there were very few actual offices — mostly cubes. Offices were reserved for VPs and above. He gets promoted to a VP role and he’s moving in. He’s a capable, competent, fairly stoic guy. All of a sudden I hear him shout-whispering from his room: “Shaun. Shaun.” I look up. “Come here, come here.” I walk into his office, and all of a sudden [26:42] this eight-year-old is there with me. He says, with all the enthusiasm in the world, “Somebody left a lava lamp in here.” The previous executive had left a lava lamp in one of the cabinets, and he found it. He was proud and overjoyed that he’d been promoted into the corner office. You could see that his normal projection of confidence and competence, while real, sat alongside a vulnerable guy who was proud of his success and looking for a moment to share it — and it came through in the form of a lava lamp.

[27:27] We get real people when the door closes — real individuals working through genuinely difficult scenarios. If you asked people in our firm, I think that’s what we feel most fortunate about: that people are willing to take their guard down and let us into what they’re genuinely working through — as the whole person: the leader, the spouse, the parent, the friend, the son or daughter. [28:05] We get to help them amplify their whole leadership in all facets because of their willingness to let us see that. And they do not share it with their inner circle most of the time.

Section 3: Tactical Career Decisions

[28:27] “How do you know when it’s time to leave a company versus stay and fight for the next level? What’s the signal most people miss?”

It’s really common that the people we work with are grappling with their current-state satisfaction, their capability sets, and the needs of the organization. They’re trying to figure out: is this where I’m retiring? Is this my next step? The funny part is they often don’t want to signal that to anybody, because they feel it would signal a lack of loyalty. My encouragement: I promise you, every single person there is working with that same curiosity. Is this working for me? Do I still find satisfaction in it? Does the needs-state of the business still match my capabilities? That happens all the time.

[29:41] I tend to have a conversation that asks: do you feel you have genuine visibility and awareness of the current state? A chief strategy officer I worked with at a big business was frustrated — things were suboptimal. We sat down and said, “Let’s name those. Let’s figure out what they are.” We went through where relational dynamics weren’t where they needed to be, where investment decisions to support the strategy weren’t being approved, where historical politics were tied in. It took weeks to define the map.

[30:30] Once you have the map and awareness, you now have responsibility, because you have to make a decision. We stay fully informed: we know the reality, the trade-offs, that these things aren’t perfect. I’m going to have to influence relationships if I want them to change. I’m eyes-wide-open on my current reality. My message in those situations is always: “Great — now you get to do the coolest thing. You get to decide if the trade-offs are worth it. Is your satisfaction still at a level where you want to lean into influencing it toward a different place? If not, you now get to make an informed decision to exit when it makes sense for you.”

My more aggressive lean-in: what you don’t get to do — for yourself and the people you lead — is stay and bitch. You know the current reality. You’re aware of the complexity. You either choose to stay in the ring and keep swinging, or you choose to get out of the ring. My analogy: imagine you walk into the ER doctors’ lounge, and a bunch of ER docs are grabbing coffee, saying, “God, I just wish people would stop getting hurt.” That’s your job. As an executive, your job is navigating ambiguity and uncertainty, bringing clarity when it’s not present, problem-solving and decision-making. That’s hard. It’s a challenging reality.

[32:32] But your decision to stay or leave ought to be based on an inventory of the current reality, eyes wide open. Floodlight the situation and fully see what’s happening. Then make a choice: do I want to stay? Do I believe I can affect the outcomes? Can I make the satisfaction level work for myself and the people around me? If you believe you’re no longer at that spot, or the trade-offs aren’t worth it, [33:01] then the writing’s there.

Here’s the funny part: it’s quite common that people are just looking for permission. They know it. They’ve reached the point where they don’t feel they can stay in the hunt and be successful, but they’re looking for someone to tell them they’re not failing if they make that choice — that they’re allowed to move on. Obviously, in my coaching work, the goal is to help them affect the outcome in the best way possible; and if they reach the end of potential or possibility, then they get to make an informed choice and move on.

[33:35] “When someone steps into a bigger role, what should the first 90 days actually be about, and what do most people waste them on?”

I have a strong view on this. I always tell people who are transferring into an organization about a concept — I believe it’s from Japanese martial arts. I’m not practiced in martial arts, but I know the concept. It’s three words: Shu-Ha-Ri. Shu is S-H-U, Ha is H-A, Ri is R-I. They’re three stages you occupy when learning a martial art, and they map well onto joining an organization.

[34:59] In the Shu stage, you learn all the forms and approaches as they are — blocking, defensive, offensive methodologies — all the ways the art is currently practiced. You’re not questioning it or trying to change it. You’re learning it, because the legacy methods were probably put in place with sound logic by well-considered people. So learn that part.

The next stage is Ha — the renovation stage. Now you take what you’ve learned and see how to adjust the existing forms to improve your odds offensively or defensively. In the business context: are there process modifications, tweaks, or changes we can make?

The Ri stage is the innovation stage. That’s when you fully understand all the forms, you’ve renovated them as best you can, and now there are net-new elements you want to innovate — things that haven’t been done before that will make you better. But that’s only after you understand both Shu and Ha.

What normally happens: people come in on fire. They start questioning why things are done a certain way, saying, “This doesn’t make sense. How did this policy get in place? That’s stupid. You know what we should do…” — dropping in all this Ri-stage innovation. When you do that, you usually get organ-rejection. The organization gets frustrated, because you’re not listening to what’s happened, not giving due regard to the experience and legacy that came before you.

So in the world of Shu-Ha-Ri, it’s all about the Shu. Pay attention to that early. Absorb and listen. The organization will push you away from it — they want action, they want change. You’ll be baited into the Ri stage, and the challenge is maintaining the composure and confidence to know you’re better served living in the Shu posture longer. So hang out in the Shu stage long enough.

Section 4: The Inner Game

[37:05] Last section: the inner game — identity, fear, and the cost of the seat. “The cost of the seat” is a great phrase. I’ve probably touched on some of these already. There aren’t a lot of questions here, so let me hit one and expand on it.

[37:19] “Watching senior leadership up close, what price do people underestimate about wanting the top job?”

I ask people all the time, when I start working with them: do you enjoy leading? Do you like leadership? You’d be surprised how many say no.

[37:43] So then why did you become a leader? Societally, it’s career progression — there tends to be a monetary increase when you take the new job, so it sequentially was just what you were supposed to do. But in truth, they like running solo more. They like doing their own things, controlling their outputs, the achievement center around it. Somehow they’ve found themselves in that spot. So I like to begin with: do you even like leading?

Let’s assume the person does. Those folks say, “It’s where I derive my joy — helping individuals get better, seeing teams accomplish success, influencing people to incredible places.” I’ve always said I thoroughly enjoy helping people recognize their potential and then realize it — getting out of their own way to get there. If you’re truly in that space where you love that, then yes — let’s progress toward that top job as you see it.

[38:49] What’s the cost of that seat? You’ve heard it many times, and it’s true: it’s lonely there. Heavy is the crown. Pick your phrase. There’s a burden. There’s an expectation that final decision-making stops with you, that you have the foresight of where the business is going and you’re guarding that. Of course you’re curating knowledge from your team, but ultimately you’re the tip of the spear.

Feedback dries up. A CFO I coach said to me, “I really want my team to be candid with me.” And he does — he wants them authentic and honest. And they are. [39:44] But it’s filtered. His question was, “Why won’t they?” My message: sometimes in these top seats, you just hold the keys to too many kingdoms. There’s a fear for people, and you have to work at it a long time to get them to be truly honest and transparent. So one cost of the seat is that you can lose transparency and honesty from people, because there’s a fear tied to your role.

[40:15] I want to be clear: it’s often not you. It’s your role — the seat you occupy — that creates that anxiety. So you lose transparency, and you lose feedback. People aren’t as willing to give you constructive feedback. You can create spaces and invite it — and I’d highly encourage you to surround yourself with people willing to do that — but you often lose it. There’s a desire to please the person in that chair, and they filter honest feedback.

[40:52] It can also be pretty lonely. Honestly, that’s why many of the C-suite individuals we work with use a coach. They don’t have a peer set in the same way, especially the CEO. The board expects something from them, the team expects something from them, and they live in a limbo state in between, without someone to socialize ideas with, vent challenges through, or get honest feedback from. The world shrinks in and gets a little closer. For verbal processors or people who like to team-problem-solve, some of that disappears.

Someone could argue, “That’s not true for me — I’m a CEO and I get to collaborate.” That’s all true; there are those moments. But there are also times where it is on you. The burden falls to you to make the decision, to keep information to yourself and not cascade it because it’s not ready yet. There’s a felt level of hard effect that lands on you, so the cost can be intense.

Like most things, there’s a payment in life — a cost to something. There’s that phrase, probably overused, about choosing your hard. It is hard to be in that spot. But you also get to make material decisions that affect people in incredibly positive ways — not only customers, but the people you work with. My partner Stephanie and our partners Jeff and Susan talk about it all the time: we’re incredibly fortunate to run a business that tries to curate environments where the people willing to work with us want to. That means we have to be good guardians of how we treat them. We swing and miss, certainly — hopefully less often than we hit. But we appreciate the opportunity. So is there a cost? Yes. But the benefit side of that equation far outweighs the cost for most people who choose to step into that seat.

Close

[43:09] In full transparency, I wasn’t sure I’d enjoy this format — just firing through these questions. But I actually found it quite fun and thought-provoking. It forced me to think about some of these pieces and how I approach them. I’m hopeful it created thoughts, curiosities, or provocations for you too — or maybe even answered some.

If you have questions, send them to us. The easiest way is info@doortwo.com. If they’re questions you want answered on the podcast, we can do that here. If they’re general questions about leadership or the topics we like to discuss, don’t hesitate to send those too, and we’ll do our best to get answers back to you.

If these topics and conversations resonate, the encouragement we’ll always give: subscribe to our podcast. We also have a newsletter that answers some of these questions, shares provocations, and summarizes the topics we discuss. You can sign up at doortwo.com/signup.

I thoroughly appreciate you taking the time. Time is hard to come by these days, so being willing to listen and invest in yourself is pretty powerful. Look forward to chatting with you next time. See you on the flip side.