What if there were a way to know that your product was going to win in the marketplace – and to know it even before you begin development? In this episode of the Product Momentum Podcast, Tony Ulwick – CEO of Strategyn and “father of the Jobs To Be Done framework” – joins Sean and Kyle Psaty, ITX’s VP of Marketing, to talk all things Jobs To Be Done (JTBD). Tony walks us along the process of innovation through the JTBD lens, offering a systematic way to deliver an innovative solution with every product release.

Innovation, Tony says, is “coming up with a solution that addresses unmet needs.” When you talk to users, he adds, you’re better able to identify and address their needs. Then you can segment them to make sure you’re providing the right solutions to the right people.

“Innovation doesn’t have to be a guessing game,” Tony Ulwick says. “Once we have those inputs, we have the necessary insights to make innovation predictable.”

Listen in to catch all of Tony’s insights, including his thoughts on:

• When iteration is useful and when it is not
• Different types of jobs that products can accomplish (Jobs To Be Done)
• Other elements necessary for success

Register now for Strategyn’s next webinar on Thursday, October 21, @1:30 pm ET. Tony hosts Sean to discuss how empowered teams unite behind a shared product vision.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Sean [00:00:19] Hello, and welcome to the Product Momentum Podcast. This is a podcast intended to entertain, educate, celebrate, and give a little back to the product leadership community.

Sean [00:00:32] Well, hello, and thanks for joining us today on the Product Momentum Podcast. Today we’re joined by Tony Ulwick, CEO of Strategyn, father of the Jobs-to-be-Done Framework, prolific author, and a hero of mine for a very long time. Super excited about this conversation that him and I are having along with Kyle Psaty, who’s the VP of Marketing over here at ITX. We go deep on the framework and talk about how to use it in the context of software products, so let’s get after it.

Sean [00:01:01] Well, hello, and welcome to the Product Momentum Podcast. Today we had the pleasure of interviewing Tony Ulwick. He’s the pioneer of the Jobs-to-be-Done Theory (JTBD) and the inventor of the Outcome Driven Innovation process and founder of the company Stretegyn. He’s one of my heroes; I’ve read his books. I’m super excited to have you here today, Tony. Welcome to the pod.

Tony [00:01:22] My pleasure. Thank you for the invite, and I appreciate it.

Sean [00:01:24] All right. I also got Kyle Psaty joining me today from ITX, he’s our VP of Marketing and a super big fan of your work as well. Welcome, Kyle.

Kyle [00:01:32] Yeah, super excited to be here. You know, awesome product thought leadership that really bleeds into some super cool ideas for marketing. And I promise I won’t veer off sideways by geeking out on the marketing stuff too much, but really excited to have a chance to talk to you today, Tony.

Tony [00:01:48] Excellent. Well, you know, Jobs-to-be-Done is all about innovation and marketing, so I think it’s fair game. You can take it in whatever direction you’d like.

Kyle [00:01:54] All right.

Sean [00:01:55] I think that actually applies to a lot of the problems we have to solve in life, not just in the product or marketing spaces, but organizational theory in general benefits from the work that you’re doing, sir. So what’s the most recent thing you’ve learned that’s got you excited these days?

Tony [00:02:09] Well, you know, I think what excites me most is making headway into putting jobs thinking at the front end of the whole Lean movement. And you know, it’s all about cutting out the number of iterations you have to make in the overall process. And I know, you know, a lot of folks talk about failing fast and iterating and things like that. And you know, I know we’re going to be talking about this a little bit more so I’ll save that for a bit later. But I think the headway we’re making in distinguishing between design thinking, Lean techniques, Jobs-to-be-Done, and showing how they all work together, as opposed to fighting against each other, I think is pretty exciting.

Kyle [00:02:46] Yeah, awesome. And this was something that I know we had dropped you an email about because it really caught me, you know, sort of how do those two things interconnect? But maybe we could take a step back real quick and just talk a little bit about what is the Jobs-to-be-Done framework and just kind of tee it up for the audience who’s maybe not read your books or been involved as closely in following you?

Tony [00:03:06] Yeah. So you know, it solves a problem, right? And so let’s go back a few years. The problem that we created the framework to solve was to prevent companies from failing at innovation, right? So let’s step further back than that. Let’s define innovation. Quite simply, it’s coming up with a solution that addresses unmet needs. It’s the front end of innovation. It’s everything before product development, right? So if you think of it like that, the ideal output of the innovation process would be a product concept that you know is going to win in the marketplace and you know it’s going to win before you even start developing it. That would be the ideal output of the innovation process. And of course, you have the development process that follows.

Tony [00:03:46] But the goal is to get the right product into development and know that it’s going to work. So how do you do that, right? And the reason this started, I worked for IBM back in the mid-1980s and experienced a horrible product failure with the PC Jr. You know, we built a product we thought customers would want. They told us what they wanted. We built what they wanted. It wasn’t what they wanted. So how do you prevent things like that from happening? So that means that customer needs to have to be stable over time, at least through the development cycle, right. And it got us thinking, how do you come up with a set of customer inputs that remains stable over time?

Tony [00:04:21] This goes back to Leavitt’s framework as well. You know, people don’t want the quarter-inch drill, they want the quarter-inch hole. But it occurred to me that if you study the creation of the quarter-inch hole, instead of talking about the drill itself, you can now think about the process that people are trying to execute, or the job they’re trying to get done. And you can quite literally break down that process into steps and figure out how people measure success along each step of the way. And those metrics are the customer’s needs. We call them desired outcome statements. And we know for any given job there may be anywhere from 50 to 150 different metrics they use to measure success. And we’re trying to figure out, well, of all those parts of the job they’re trying to get done, where are they underserved? You know, where do they need more value created? And where they overserved? Where can we reduce costs? Because the ultimate goal of innovation is to come up with a solution that gets the job done better and more cheaply. So if we have those inputs that I just described, we have the insights we need to make innovation predictable. So the goal of the framework is to solve the front-end innovation problem and allow us to understand what the customer is trying to accomplish, figure out how to find, how to secure, and how to claim a unique and valued position in the marketplace.

Sean [00:05:35] So in order to be able to figure out what are those 50 to 100 metrics and how to value each for any given customer segment, how important is it to actually know and understand the customer segment? Because I think you said in your book, like every individual balances these things out differently, so you have to look at like, what’s the right balance of these 50 to 150 metrics?

Tony [00:05:55] Yeah, well, let’s take it in order. So, you know, the first step of the process is to figure out, well, who’s our customer and what job are they trying to get done? So, you know, maybe it’s an interventional cardiologist who’s trying to restore blood flow in an artery, or maybe it’s parents that are trying to pass on life lessons to children. The first step is to try to figure out, who’s the group of people we’re trying to create value for and what job are they trying to get done? Then we come up with that list of metrics. You know, how do they measure success along each step of the way as they go about and get their job done? So it’s really important to understand all the needs, not just a handful. Let me explain why. You know, most innovation is just, you know, sustaining or incremental innovation. And the reason it is is because most companies will just discover one unmet need and work to resolve that need in the next product iteration. So they’re only getting the job done a teeny bit better. It’s just incremental improvement.

Kyle [00:06:47] Just good enough, right? It’s good enough to release the next.

Tony [00:06:51] It’s something. It’s better than nothing, right? But the reality might be there could be 30 unmet needs, right? If you knew all 30 of those unmet needs and you knew which ones were underserved, which ones were overserved, you know, knew where to create more value and where to cut cost, you could have multiple breakthrough iterations. In other words, the next release could be the satisfaction of 10 of those needs, not just one. And the iteration after that could be the next 10, the iteration after that, the next 10. So you’re marching down this path where you’re constantly getting the job done better and more cheaply than the competition.

Tony [00:07:23] Now, the only way you can do that is if you know all the needs upfront. It takes a bit of discipline. So once we know all those needs, then we have customers prioritize them. And Sean, as you said, you know, not everyone agrees on what needs are unmet, right? There may be half the population that thinks, you know, these 10 needs are unmet and another half of the population thinks it’s another 10 needs that are unmet. So the way we resolve that is to, after we survey, we segment around the unmet needs. So we quite literally, instead of using demographics or psychographics or attitudes or behaviors to segment, we segment around the unmet needs. And the reason we do that, of course, is we don’t need a proxy anymore, right? A lot of personas are created with demographics and psychographics and so on, assuming that these personas have different unmet needs. Those assumptions are often incorrect. Let’s go at it directly. Since we know the unmet needs, let’s segment around the unmet needs and we can figure out, “Oh, half the population thinks these are the unmet needs, half thinks these are the unmet needs. Let’s come up with two products or two strategies if we want to target 100 percent of the population.”.

Tony [00:08:29] But we can make our decisions, right. Maybe one segment is underserved and the other one is overserved. Maybe you need a differentiated strategy to target that underserved segment and you need a disruptive strategy to target the overserved segment. These are all the things you have to know in advance of coming up with the product concept. So that’s the order in which we do this. So knowing all those 100-plus need statements is critical. Having customers prioritize them is critical. Segmenting around them is critical. And now what we’ve done basically is marketing 101. We’ve defined the customer, we’ve defined their needs. We figured out which are unmet and if there’s segments of people with different unmet needs. And now we can start devising solutions targeting those specific segments that we want to go after.

Kyle [00:09:09] Right. And then the customer segment isn’t just an idea of a person or a group of people. It’s literally a group of people that have a commonality and that’s the unmet need or perhaps the need that’s being met well that you can reduce cost on.

Tony [00:09:22] Yeah, that’s exactly right. You know they have different unmet needs from each other because you’ve defined the segments around the unmet needs. So I’ll give you a quick example. You know, we worked in the dental space, dentists doing the tooth restoration, and this exact thing happened. We found highly overserved segments when dentists were working on patients that had healthy gums and required just a small filling. But they were very underserved when they worked on patients that had unhealthy gums and required a larger filling. And the reason, it turns out, is that in that situation, patients tend to bleed more, which makes visualization more difficult, which makes keeping the area dry more difficult and contouring that larger filling more difficult. So they become underserved because they’re in that particular situation. So now that you know that these two different scenarios exist with these needs-based personas, you can create a strategy for each, and they’re very different. And if you were just creating a product for the average, you’d have something in the middle that wouldn’t appeal to either group effectively.

Kyle [00:10:17] Right. Vanilla ice cream or something like that, right?

Tony [00:10:20] Let’s not make fun of vanilla ice cream. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Sean [00:10:24] It’s my favorite, actually. All right. So these hundred, one hundred and fifty needs, are they the same across any product segment or market segment that you’re analyzing? I always see the needs as falling into like one of the two buckets, like the primary needs or the job they came to you to do, like, they thought about, “Hey, I need this job done like at this moment in time.”

Tony [00:10:45] Yeah.

Sean [00:10:45] There’s a bunch of parameters that are associated with their decision around what product to use. But then there’s second-order needs, the kind of needs that like Maslow talked about, you know, like the psychological needs that really help us build like long-standing relationships with our customers beyond solving that problem today.

Tony [00:11:03] Yeah, you’re making a great point. You know, we often get the question, “how do we make customers love us?” Right. So customers do have emotional jobs they’re trying to get done as well. So we break out the different kinds of needs into categories. So what we talked about so far is the core functional job, which is the key to success because if you’re not creating value at getting the core job done, then nothing else is going to matter. But on top of that, customers have emotional jobs they’re trying to get done right.

Sean [00:11:28] Right.

Tony [00:11:29] You know, how they want to be perceived by others, how do they want to feel as a result. We want to know those as well.

Sean [00:11:34] Those are the jobs they’re not going to tell you they have. Like, “I want to feel like I belong” or “I want to feel like I’m learning,” right?

Tony [00:11:41] Well, you’d be surprised because when we ask customers those questions and we do it in this order, you know, we talk about the core functional job and they look at all the outcomes they’ve come up with. Then we say, “so, when you’re getting the job done, how do you want to be perceived by your peers and friends and others and how do you want to feel as a result of getting the job done?” They’re certainly able to communicate these emotional jobs as well. There are different statements in different forms than the outcomes on the core job, but they can be captured. People know what they are. And again, you’re just making the list at this point. When you’re doing the qualitative work, you just want to know, “well, what are all the emotional jobs.” And you may get two or three from one person and two or three different ones from another and, you know, overlapping from the rest, right. But you’ll end up with a list of maybe 10 or 15 emotional jobs that people want to consider.

Tony [00:12:28] But there’s another area that we look at as well and we call them the consumption chain jobs. And this deals with the actual product consumption where people buy a product, they receive it, they store it, they open it, they interface with it, they repair it. Now people aren’t buying products so they can maintain them or repair them and store them, right. They’re buying products to get a core job done and to satisfy their emotional jobs. But if you create a product that is hard to set up and interface with and maintain and so on, it can fail those reasons as well.

Kyle [00:12:59] Right. That’s where we get the like impact Apple has had on the way unboxing feels with basically every hardware product you can buy today. You know, it’s got to be like real crisp and things have to be smooth and there’s like a magnetic latch, you know, and that gives you a little bit of emotional belief, you know, a little bit of a kick as you get it open.

Tony [00:13:17] Yeah, because it’s functionally simple, right? It’s so functionally simple, you feel like you’re an expert at setting this thing up. Why? Because they automated the whole thing for you and you don’t have to set it up.

Kyle [00:13:28] Right. I have one on this emotional jobs topic, and this is a conversation I’ve had a few times with friends from the software product space. You start talking about, like, video gaming or entertainment or food. And as a product person, I think about like trying to create and innovate in, like, building a fantastic movie, say. Man, there’s so many emotional jobs that get layered into that, right? Like, how do you think about some of these categories, like food or entertainment when Jobs-to-be-Done framework is applied?

Tony [00:13:58] Yeah. You’re asking a great question because these scenarios are more like on the fringe, I’d say, but it does work. So let me explain. We do a lot of projects with food. We did a project on reinventing the banana with Chiquita International years back.

Kyle [00:14:12] Come on. That’s awesome.

Tony [00:14:13] Yeah, I thought it was a prank call. They said, “we’re trying to…” But it was true. And you know, the way we do work in the food space is, you know, like they said, for example, you know, how do we improve the banana? It’s interesting. I’ll give you a little history on the banana. There’s 10000 different varietals, and you typically see just one varietal. And you can actually change the chemical structure of what people are getting in those bananas by picking different varietals and how you fertilize them, how you grow them. So there actually is flexibility in changing it. So it’s not actually a commodity in the sense that, like, you know, sand would be or something like that. So there’s some flexibility in what you can do to change the product to get the job done better.

Tony [00:14:54] But nonetheless, what we did is we said, “Well, you know, let’s put it in the snack framework and say, Well, let’s look at all the jobs people are trying to get done when they pick a snack. Why would you pick almonds over a banana? You know, why would you pick chocolate over popcorn?” And on and on. And we came up with a list of well over 100 different jobs that people hire snacks for. And then we did the analysis to figure out well, “which of these jobs are most important and least satisfied?” And we found segments of opportunity based on the analysis that we did. And one interesting thing there is we found that a segment of people that had a handful of jobs that related to getting to sleep at night and staying asleep at night. And we had this discussion with Chiquita, they said, “you know what, you know, bananas have naturally occurring tryptophan in them, so we actually could come up with a variety that would help people go to sleep at night.”

Sean [00:15:47] Be rolling over after Thanksgiving dinner.

Tony [00:15:48] Yeah. Well, exactly. But, Kyle, you could probably guess at this. You know, why didn’t they do that, right? They didn’t want to go down that path. And of course, they felt it would impact their brand of banana, which is viewed as more of a morning energy food as opposed to a nighttime relax before you go to sleep food. But the point remains, you know, that opportunity existed to create a product that would get a different set of jobs done.

Kyle [00:16:10] Wow.

Tony [00:16:11] So you can innovate in spaces like that. You know, we’ve worked with teams on gaming as well. And the gaming experience is functional and it’s emotional. So there’s a fine balance. I’ve drawn a quadrant before where you have high function, high emotion, low function, low emotion, and in between. So, you know, certain products have different levels of function and emotion. Like if you’re down selling bricks, for example, it’s rather low function, it’s rather low emotion. But if you’re selling automobiles, it’s high function and high emotion.

Kyle [00:16:43] Right.

Tony [00:16:43] And if you’re selling clothing, it’s kind of over the top left where it’s kind of functional but quite emotional. But this gives you paths to innovate as well, because if you can make clothing more functional, then you getting more of the functional jobs done. You’ve heard of functional foods. They’ve been very popular for the last 10 years. You know, people are creating different food products to make them more functional because you can add ingredients to products to help get more or different jobs done. So that’s how it’s applied to some of those, you know, markets that are bit more on the emotional side than the functional side, but still, the application works quite well.

Sean [00:17:16] Neat. So one of the ways we use your framework when we’re running our workshops, talking about products and jobs that we’re trying to do, is to create this list of jobs to be done, and then we break it down. Because one of the things I’ve found is that every job today, for the most part, every job is being done. Like they’re solving those first-level needs in some way today. Like even the banana, they’re getting their snack. They’re going to get it from somewhere. So how are they solving that today and how might we help them solve it better in the future? And then if you have all of your needs broken down, you can try to figure out, like, this is where we have this opportunity. So we know there’s a market need. Here’s where we could brainstorm out how could we solve this need better? Do you find any utility in looking at the past?

Tony [00:17:58] Yeah. Well, when we get to ideation, you know, we’ll have our list of unmet needs that we want to go target. Some of them are outcomes. There might be 10 or 20 and we go one by one. And the question we generally ask is, “how is this being satisfied today? Are there features on current products? Are there features on your product? Are there features on competing products? Are there features on products in other markets?” And so on, until you start thinking through, like, how can you actually satisfy that outcome? So I think that’s certainly fair game in the way you structure your ideation sessions.

Sean [00:18:29] All Right. So you foreshadowed about iteration.

Kyle [00:18:32] A little cliffhanger.

Sean [00:18:33] A cliffhanger there. And it seems like everywhere you turn, everybody’s talking about iteration, iteration, iteration, and your methodology to me seems to be more like, “Hey, before you go out there and start iterating, let’s put some energy into thinking.” So what’s your take on this clash between these two very different mindsets in terms of getting to market?

Tony [00:18:52] You know, it’s interesting. Iteration is not productive, right? No matter how you cut it, iteration is not getting it right the first time. So you don’t want to have to iterate. The goal isn’t to keep iterating. The goal is to minimize the number of iterations. So how do you do that? Let’s again break apart the innovation process from the development process. The innovation process produces a concept that you know is going to win the marketplace, right? There shouldn’t be an iteration there. So once you get into development, you should not be iterating on what you’re creating. You already know what you’re creating. Here’s where iteration is OK: what you’re iterating on is the design. You know, what’s the best way to satisfy those needs that you’ve identified in the innovation process? And there may be different experiments that you’ve run and different ways to solve the problem, but you’re not iterating on what the product does. You’re iterating on how to get it to execute that function.

Tony [00:19:46] And what we often see is that people have half-baked concepts that are going into development, so they’re iterating on the product concept while they’re designing the product concept. That intertwines development and innovation processes and making them both completely inefficient. That’s when we say don’t do that, right. Make sure the product concept that you put into development is coming to satisfy 10 unmet needs. Now how can you do that? Well, you have to know the 10 unmet needs you’re satisfying and make sure you come up with solutions that address them. Definitely doable. And then when you’re in development, that’s when you can iterate.

Tony [00:20:20] There’s another nuance here, too, when you talk about invention and inventing technology and you have to experiment like Edison did, for example, in creating his technologies. He went through lots of experimentation. Now there again, failing fast makes good sense because you’re trying to discover, you’re trying to invent something that performs some function that could never be performed before. So iterating in the invention process makes perfect sense. Iterating in design and development makes sense. But still, you don’t want to keep iterating multiple times, right. But iterating in the innovation process doesn’t make any sense. It’s just a waste of time and unnecessary because innovation doesn’t have to be a guessing game if we can figure out what the unmet needs are in advance and make sure the product addresses them.

Sean [00:21:05] So what you’re suggesting is there should be a better process, and you have one of the answers for putting the thought, the energy, into what problems should we be solving, what jobs should we be doing? And that should be done before we go to iterate.

Tony [00:21:19] Right. So the iteration doesn’t come in conceptualization. Once you conceptualize the final product, it’s fixed. You know it’s going to win in the marketplace because you know it’s increasing the satisfaction level of multiple outcomes. Now that’s fixed, right? Now you go into development, you’re not touching what the product does. You’re iterating on how to get it to do what you want it to do. So how do you make it easy to install? How do you make it easy to interface with? How do you make it easy to transport? Right, all the consumption elements that are important during the design process, iterate on those. But even there again, I can argue that you can go out to customers and find out all their needs associated with installing a product. Right. And if you know what all those needs are and which are unmeant, you could focus on those most unmet installation needs and cut out the number of iterations even on the design part of the process.

Sean [00:22:07] So the iteration is also important on the backend.

Tony [00:22:09] Yeah.

Sean [00:22:10] With technology anyway, there’s probably an infinite number of ways we can actually get things to work. And one may be more efficient than the other, and we also have to iterate on that because technology changes so fast.

Tony [00:22:20] Yeah, that’s exactly right. So you’re iterating on the design, you’re not iterating on the concept of what the product does.

Sean [00:22:25] Right.

Kyle [00:22:26] Right. I think that gets confused a lot, though, right? Like this notion of like ultra-rapid release and “just observe the user,” it’s become a proxy for just talking to the user about what their needs are and what jobs are they trying to satisfy. And one thing I love about your ideas and the framework is that it just forces us all to get back in the mindset of talking to the user, talking to the customer. And, you know, obviously, you got to talk to them in the right ways. I’m wondering if you have two or three tips about how to get answers that are really productive from your users when you are talking to them.

Tony [00:23:03] Yeah, I do. And it’s much simpler than you’d ever think. You know, people buy products because they’re trying to get a job done, right. All you have to ask them is, “What are you trying to accomplish?” Whether it’s the entire job when you’re trying to figure out, what is the entire job you’re trying to get done. You’re figuring out at a high level. We create job apps too. We go step by step and say, “OK, so what’s the first thing you’re trying to accomplish? What’s the next thing you’re trying to accomplish?” And so on. Even at the outcome level, what we’re doing is we’re saying, “when you’re executing this part of the job, what’s the first thing you’re trying to accomplish? What’s the next thing you’re trying to accomplish?” And the other question we ask is, “what are you trying to avoid?” All our statements get formatted as outcome statements, which we’ve written a lot about. They have very specific structure, and they all get organized in that same structure so that we have a complete set of customer needs. So whether you’re, you know, on the design team in UX or UI talking to customers, find out what are they trying to achieve, what are they trying to avoid? Those are the two key questions. And don’t talk about products, right?

Kyle [00:24:05] Right. Don’t ask them for their solution, right?

Tony [00:24:07] Yes.

Kyle [00:24:07] Yeah, this is awesome. Really appreciate that.

Sean [00:24:11] Yeah. One of my favorite books in the innovation space, you might recognize it’s written by yourself, it’s called What Customers Want.

Tony [00:24:18] Isn’t that an old relic, Sean? I mean, that’s like from 2005, isn’t it?

Sean [00:24:22] I’ll give it to my people when we hire them. But other than that, what are you reading these days or what do you think is a great book in our space for people who innovate to read. We always look for recommendations from our guests.

Tony [00:24:32] Sure. Well, we have the 2016 version of the book as well, which is called Jobs to be Done: Theory to Practice, which is pretty instructional as well. So we certainly like that. And you know, we like the path that Alexander Osterwalder has gone down with his Business Model Canvas. And the reason I say that is, you know, we often see like three axes come together in order to achieve success. You have to have the right market. It has to be a good market. You can’t create a billion dollar business in a million dollar market, right? So you have to pick the right market. Then you have to pick the right growth strategy. And that’s what we’re talking about today, you know, picking the right segment to go after, the right unmet needs to target with the right solution. And then the third piece is the business model. So once you know you’ve picked the right market, then you know you have the right strategy, adding in that business model component, I think, is really rich. And those three components, when they come together and you’ve done all three correctly, it really mitigates the risk, which is the ultimate goal.

Sean [00:25:33] Awesome. Well, Tony, thank you so much for joining us today. It’s been a real pleasure. You’ve been a bit of a hero of mine in the innovation space for a number of years, so I’m excited to have you on.

Tony [00:25:44] Thanks for the kind words, Sean. I appreciate that.

Sean [00:25:46] And maybe we can meet in person one day.

Tony [00:25:48] I’d like that.

Kyle [00:25:49] Thanks so much for being here.

Tony [00:25:50] Thanks, Kyle. I certainly appreciate it. Good luck with your marketing efforts.

Kyle [00:25:54] Yeah, we’ll be using your ideas. Thanks, Tony.

Tony [00:25:56] All right. Take care.

Paul [00:26:19] Well, that’s it for today. In line with our goals of transparency and listening, we really want to hear from you. Sean and I are committed to reading every piece of feedback that we get. So please leave a comment or a rating wherever you’re listening to this podcast. Not only does it help us continue to improve, but it also helps the show climb up the rankings so that we can help other listeners move, touch, and inspire the world, just like you’re doing. Thanks, everyone. We’ll see you next episode.