wiki/mandates/vattenfall/100 Context/20250915 Last touchpoint before kickoff.txt

00:00 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oxygen and a bit of confidentiality.

00:01 Patrick Motsch: Oh yeah. You have Confederate there. There you are.

00:06 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

00:07 Patrick Motsch: You should also look upstairs look like this.

00:15 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, it looks good just looking. I just. I was looking at this Tesla. Maybe it's recording me, but apart from that I'm I should be safe.

00:26 Patrick Motsch: Yep.

00:44 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, almost done with. Presentation, I think. Good to good to go.

00:59 Patrick Motsch: Crucial.

01:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: You hear? A little background noise for me or not?

02:01 Patrick Motsch: From your side, I have no noise, perfect cancellation.

02:05 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Very good.

02:06 Patrick Motsch: Yeah.

02:47 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oh yeah.

02:49 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Oh, I had a bit of a difficult, very difficult Saturday and already better Sunday and now a better Monday. So I fell a bit ill Friday night.

02:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oh.

02:58 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But yeah, really severe headache. I could not. I could not sleep anymore from 4:00 in the night and the whole day it was like. Aw, incredible.

03:08 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Sorry to hear that.

03:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But this was in the end, better on Sunday and then now even better. On Monday I would say.

03:14 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK.

03:16 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And you guys? Where are you?

03:21 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oh, there goes my conference. There goes my confidentiality screen. OK. Outside, I'm outside. Yeah, I'm. I'm at the Tesla garage. There's it's an interesting situation. The like a lot of things stopped working like I I couldn't. It was all in one go. So firstly the rear. Left your door, couldn't open it anymore. That was quite impractical. Then the autopilot stopped working. It stopped tracking my position, so it also couldn't switch on the cruise control anymore because it needs to know the maximum speed for that. It also didn't have adaptive lights. I don't. It was like, no, no cameras anymore, nothing working. Very interesting. But yeah, they're looking at it. I meant to say so, yeah. Hopefully so I said. I need to be away at 5:30 because I need to get my my daughter from hockey training. Yeah, and it's fine. I mean, I have a very comfortable customer lounge here, but I prefer to to be here outside talking to you with a a few less people, many more cars listening, but no people. Yeah. So that's me, I had a. And now, yeah, I would love to take you through what we prepared for you and a line for tomorrow. Patrick, how are you?

04:54 Patrick Motsch: Yes, I had an an inspiring Friday was a wonderful day and Saturday, Sunday, many things happened in Brain and also in the restaurant for 10 days. First, first day from from a young woman that I supported not two years to make Cook Chop. She was starting from zero. She came from Kiev, you know. She was then coming to Switzerland with nothing, and then she finished all the school. Now, she's not 20 years and she has a wonderful job in a wonderful restaurant. So this was just just wonderful weekend. So this is how I feel.

05:27 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: It sounds good.

05:29 Patrick Motsch: And now we prepare the presentation and we are curious are curious how bad Peter will be with us or how we shape it?

05:38 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oh, maybe before we start. Peter, I think just to onboard you with regards to on the Modi, yeah was really fantastic. Let's maybe 2 minutes. So it was really fantastic interview I think was better than I said. Yeah, you know her a bit. So you've worked with her extensively as coordinator last year. So she's very much leaning into this tech AI enabled future, and she thinks basically. Yeah, it's a long time. In order to to really lean in as an organization. So she's an avid supporter and she's. A myriad of opportunities.

06:18 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): I'm not surprised.

06:18 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: She will stand us. Desired use case list. Also, you know her, but also knowing her, it's not, yeah. It's no BS, right? It's it. Has it has substance and so it's it's it's super nice. It was very energizing to to speak to her. She. Yeah. She talked about many things, like the possibility of adopting an AI first mindset and see where that leads us, that possibility to also. Or she said, what helped for Germany delivery was to put together process managers and developers, which is exactly what Edwin told us last. Friday. Right. So that was an integral part of the success of the delivery, turn around, which she led, obviously with great success. So yeah, these are just some of the things that said to me and maybe Patrick, maybe other things you'd like to put.

07:13 Patrick Motsch: Yes, that is that is shaped that it's from in to out and from out to in, meaning DSH experts to delivering all the units and on the other side the units are expert to integrate them with knowledge, with experience, with playgrounds, whatever they have.

07:31 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. So I feel that there's an opportunity also in the BUMC to really elevate and and transcend silos even more, to come around to steam one concept. And hopefully that will also dismantle some of these central for decentral dynamics, which are still. Kind of fear driven sometimes and if we could take them as opportunity driven, then I feel it will really help us to unlock the next. Virgin must have been adventure, yeah.

08:06 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Cool. And then we also had a good interview on Friday, right with Adrian.

08:09 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Amazing. Yeah. I spoke a bit about it with with Patrick, but definitely. Very happy to have him on board. I think Peter and I both agree it was wonderful to not only very capable, but also very, I would say, very approachable and easy to connect with. Energetic guy with lots of Dr. who? Who was there from the beginning of the BU. So I think he said back in 2009. I think he was asked to to develop. An app for the first time, for, for immobility, and so I started out that this is as a developer, grew the ranks and now is obviously managing a larger portfolio. But he he said he interestingly, he said, you know, we used to be kind of front running and. Now and then, as a result of certain. Things decisions, dynamics, BU is not BU in BU is not so much front running anymore, but he definitely sees that opportunity to get back in the lead. I would say this is translated to. In my words. If we. Yeah. If we accelerate on a few things. So that was very hopeful and at least wonderful to have him there, very capable and knowledgeable it and E mobility leader, how is it for you, Peter?

09:34 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, the the exact same. And of course, I knew it was already a little bit more little bit better, and I've also joined him in, in, in Poland, in Cutter, which last Week 2 days. I've also visited all the IT developers there and.

09:50 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, a really great move there, Peter, by the way.

09:52 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): To go there.

09:54 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, to go there and talk to developers, yeah.

09:57 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And it was quite interesting, Patrick, so. I would say 90% of the developers were there in person. Normally they're working from home, so it's it's also normally doesn't make sense anymore to go to Katherine because they are simply not there twice a year. They they they come together, they share learnings and best practices with each other. I've also of course presented something on behalf of sort of a management update, but it was interesting for me to see because I also had a lot of time, 1:00 to 1:00 to those guys during dinner and then lunch, et cetera. So to to discover basically that they're both quite knowledgeable on the IT side, or at least that's my interpretation. But as well on the business side. So I think they're not just IT guys. They also understand the immobility business. So I I put a few of my current challenges on their table to just check in. Do you? Do you recognize it, right? Luckily, they did right also on the payment terminal, so I I have a hard time. So they're just not user friendly, right? And they immediately acknowledge it and have 1000 ideas how to fix it. Same for CRM and user usability. AI was part of the the. Somebody presented on AI where we stand with AI, which you can do. So think this was a quite important thing for me to see because that means. That it's basically up to management to fix it because basically if they don't understand it, yeah, then maybe you need to hire better developers. I don't know if they're perfect. Probably not. But they are good enough, I would say. So it's it's up to us, I would say to maybe give them more freedom or whatever. I also checked it with Edwin. Have we made it too? Too complex for them to just act? I don't know, but let's see. It was in at least a good observation and I I liked it.

11:43 Patrick Motsch: Very cool.

11:44 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. And then also, I think you were on the back of the in the back of a taxi saying here, hey, what are three things that we can change tomorrow, right? What were those three things? Do you know those?

11:57 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No. So I gave everybody, so the magic stick, but it was more developed team. So they the development teams, they presented to me who they are of course already knew that a little bit, but OK. And then I asked all of them, hey, you have a magic stick. What would you change? What would you do? What you can do whatever, not the first team requested higher salary. The second team requested a bigger bonus. And then the 13 gave up. Yeah, it was actually a bit disappointing, but then? Then it was like. Uh, let me say it's. I wrote it down. Yeah, one team, one. One of the more. They have a limit of 50 gigabytes per day on data data lock analysis. They wanted more, more, more room, more bandwidth. Another team desperately wanted to visit the countries at least once a year to talk to users and visit stations themselves to test their products in real life. Yeah. Then the CRM team wanted more people. At least different kind of people. Yeah, another team wanted us to review the organization. Issue a little bit and look at testing. Another team asked for automatic station configuration because that leads to less basically shit any shit out kind of problems. And then the UX team requested a common component system or continue with that and better better way to work with customers. Also quite good. Then there was a team that basically put to the table. Hey, we're developing a lot of great stuff, but operations is not adopting it.

13:44 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And.

13:45 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): So this is interesting if you talk to if you talk to SNos, they're complaining about DSH. This team was heavily complaining about the local unit saying we develop all kinds of things. They're just not using it. They're not adopting it. And then I raised the question, why is it so difficult? And yet I also don't know. So interesting. Yeah, that was basically it.

14:07 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: It's thanks. I mean some of that would be fixed by putting the process. Process manager in a room with a developer, right? A lot of that.

14:21 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah.

14:22 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And that's interesting because it also, I think ties well into Neil's news perspective on how he wants to run central process management, which is exactly to to empower the local units because there are more people working there anyway. So he he also doesn't have the capacity. But more importantly, he doesn't have the knowledge.

14:44 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And the CRM team asked for 1/4 of time for maintenance because they said we have so much legacy. We're only focusing on new things and we have a lot.

14:55 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I will be back in one minute because I'm getting an update on my car here, sorry. Sorry, please continue.

15:01 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But basically saying you need to, you need to. Yeah, we need. We need to work on fixing some legacy stuff in our system. Or bit of code optimization. And now we're currently running into all kinds of bugs every time. Because we don't fix this root cause.

15:17 Patrick Motsch: Yes, I understand. And they fix it 10 times because they did not solve it one time correctly. But this this issue I know from many companies that this wish I know this is like the wish for more salary or to wish to have to have more time or something like this. What I like on this issue, this is also a training issue to make the fixes means you have new people or new new mates in the team that you train for this and they make it in parallel to optimize the efficiency here. Could could could support some some project management or something above. Because cessation or Sprint? Just for fixing is not added value cannot.

15:50 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, shut up.

15:52 Patrick Motsch: It has to be connected with some with some. Perhaps they have to fix some some product or some service that they connected always with cleaning up legacy. This would be the right way.

16:03 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah.

16:06 Patrick Motsch: But a good point important. And what else did they have?

16:09 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep.

16:12 Patrick Motsch: You know.

16:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah. So not more than that. I just mentioned so. But I think so. It was also not per SE about this exercise. I think it shows that we can do much more with this group.

16:27 Patrick Motsch: Yes.

16:28 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And I think they're all mentioning that there is, there is a distance between the business and IT. And then I'm thinking, hmm, but we have still quite many people on it, right. Product owners manager mighty. Process. So I think it's not a lack of people, maybe even too many.

16:50 Patrick Motsch: It's clear. You mean, what do they do? The whole day. It's to be or. To be honest, it's it's also a little bit on this side how to organize, how to organize the work, and how to get input, or how open to people inputs and what to do with it. Is it is or is it that they're all loaded?

17:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): I would say we could also benefit from a few experiments. So why shouldn't of course we have all this confidence and all these things with process management and the boards and development committees, but you could also say what if we experiment to maybe give a lot of mandates to a team for a specific item or something whatsoever just. Fix it. I don't know.

17:33 Patrick Motsch: Accept accept just a test.

17:35 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But let's let's maybe not also to solve now, but it's interesting. It was interesting.

17:39 Patrick Motsch: I like this idea.

17:41 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: What did I miss?

17:44 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah. So.

17:45 Patrick Motsch: Experimenting.

17:47 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I like it. Thanks. OK, I'm updated. Yeah, I think. You know, Peter, what I what? I what I'm pretty sensing. Is a desire also from from the organization and and maybe also in me but. To to get back a bit of this. Part of five. Again, just just throwing things at something, and of course we need. We cannot do it in the same way as when you started because you're much more system, much more like a. Interdependency, etc. But at least the energy that that we. Yeah, just to get going to talk to each other, to start cooking, to start Co, creating to to transcend this. What's central? What's decentral conversation? But just to get in a room and fix the things that are most hurting us. I think there's no answer on that. Yeah, but I think one of the great thrusts is to have procurement the BU and it. Room tomorrow and I think that will already also create a certain. Perspective. That's that's that's novel I would say. And then and what connects us all I think is very much a common desire to to be successful, so. Yeah. So let's make it work, shall we take you through the presentation that we prepared for tomorrow?

19:13 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep.

19:14 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Or or do you? Would you prefer something else? I mean.

19:18 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): So I so I looked at the deck you sent on Friday. So I pre read that one. So that's Michelle already. Looks looks good. I think from an agenda perspective and also the way you want your structuring it. Actually I really like it.

19:35 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK.

19:37 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But I think we also discussed the topics right. So where do we want to end? In a sort of list of priorities that we want to work on are to find the themes as as next step. So I don't know if you think you continued also to work afterwards right on the deck, but.

19:49 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, we did. We did. But maybe, maybe, let's I'll take you through it and then let's see how. How to proceed with?

19:58 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): This is also new. Like it yeah.

19:59 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: How to proceed with it? So this is. Basically, slide one, slide 2. Probably, yeah. I think it still kind of works in terms of timing. But well, check in quick. I would say just to land and calibrate on what we like to work with there, we seem to see the initial insights. This is kind of three leveraged slides, but I am planning on. We would like to just send it after this meeting to the audience with your permission. If you think it makes sense to to to not to be perfect, but to at least have as prereads and to. To calibrate. So strategic context, I mean these are not strange things. It's consolidating it's oversupply challenge. Which is heavily, which makes it heavily competitive and merges are thinning. And then there's the long term forecast, which still remains strong. I mean high level high level. Here we this that when you saw this, when you also saw.

21:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep.

21:14 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I think it's still true. Patrick, we didn't. I mean, you also have some insights you put put on this? Maybe last check after this meeting that we get, yeah. Yeah, exactly.

21:32 Patrick Motsch: I make a last check on this also with the last interview today with Anna Marie to check whether some some magic inside of the trispatin sum, it's it. That's it on this level.

21:39 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And then we distilled some certainties. And uncertainties and this is new. And we did this together with. I think we used Gemini for this. And we have a powerful prompt that simulates. Yeah, strategy consultants, and this is. This is what what it came up with. This is definitely a slide to read and that's why I'd like to get this presentation out so people can read it. Because when it comes to.

22:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Since it's a lot of slides, we might want to send it out saying OK, please read these three or four slides.

22:21 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, yeah, sure will do that. And certainly as an uncertainties are important when it comes to building scenarios. And so we need to calibrate on what we see are are the critical uncertainties. And then when you have those in place, there's a methodology that we propose that would, let's say, flash out the different scenarios and then we can also. Strategies and we can. Do let's say. Then Windstream that we have certain scenarios, we project on those strategies and then you can get. A. A very clear idea of OK, which strategies will hold in which scenarios, and there we can leverage AI, but we'll come to that later. The case for change. This was already in your the one that you read. I mean, there's a lot of. Things to say. About the case for change, but ultimately I think. I guess I wanna check with you. For me it's. His first title was navigating perpetual transformation. That there's a lot of difficult words, but ultimately I think. It's also about reclaiming the leads and the leads can be interpreted in many ways, but I mean more the lead in terms of, yeah, there's five. There's energy, there's this can do mentality and then it might of course also lead to delete or what do you say 1? Of the. The top CP OS or however you define it, it's reclaiming the lead, is also an internal stance that I'm. Addressing here. And I adapted to. Yeah, I added to the first point that that it's really or to the overall value that it's really about becoming an AI adaptive organization. And I feel there we have. Potentially energizing narrative. Which? Energizes the right people, I would say. It's it's about more than AI, but at the same time, when it comes to. Unlocking potential for a large part we feel for large part it is also about AI and for sure. It's about the ability. To to be adaptive in that space, I said. So that's kind of then comes out AI adaptive organization.

25:11 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): With respect to the examples. For revenue uplift, I would say maybe it would be wiser to mention. Flexibility here instead of FI 2G. And the reason for it is that FI two, I would say flexibility is the first step, the fi 2G, the next and then you could say, OK, we start with the end in mind. It is also a lot of uncertainty around future G4 AC for instance. With all the losses. And so it's it's looks like quite far away. While the first first step should be or could be flexibility, so we're offering flexibility to the to grid operators, right frequency regulation or smart charging on our urban networks or when we install HPCS with batteries. And by the way, feature G could be something, but so maybe maybe at least mention also the flexibility part. P2G could trigger a lot of people saying ah, but this is so far away and it's so doubtful and.

26:20 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK. Yep, fairpoint.

26:25 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But this is a key key topic.

26:26 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. I think it's later. Umm. Right. So obviously here we will have a conversation right in the ring. There's a lot of wind here. I hope it's not respectful me a bit, but. And then we would go after that. We were going to methodology. A piece which is also a bit of a keynote, let's say. So we would be, let's say, sharing our thoughts and then? This would also be input for shaping phase one proposal. Yeah, but so here, here, there would be a case for change. There would be a a discussion which we will capture. And then here we're going to a bit of a keynote. Which is to say, we want to go through surgery for breakfast and then we say AI, AI use all of it. Benji culture change management and and your operating system, and I mean, of course it's a bit with with a bit of spice but and and we we don't have a crystal ball. But ultimately, we do really believe that there's there's so many opportunities that someone will take those opportunities and if it's not us, it's it's someone else, right. So either directly or indirectly, we, yeah, AI will eat a lot of that. Here is our F rated circle. Our upgraded wheel. We place strategy around leadership in the heart. Because we feel that is kind of also all-encompassing like leadership. And we entered people because we feel the people and capabilities. Yeah. So it's about. It's not only it's not only people, sorry. People and capabilities. Alludes to a future where. Which is not so distant in our. View where you actually have great human and synthetic teams now. You could say, yeah, it's just an agent. Yeah, sure. But if you have if you. If you work on a daily basis with with 10 different, perhaps 50 different agents, then are you still fully only human? And if those agents? We say no. It's actually it's good to have a hybrid at some point at least have a vision now on it and then when? When it when it comes around, which is really next year, I think we're already seeing obviously many, many examples of of agents doing work. Then there should be. There should be a plan to how to on how to work with them and if agents are autonomous, then obviously they should also adhere to principles. So how do you hold an agent accountable? Well, we need to think about that. And there are ways to do that. But that basically means that you monitor all the actions against a set of defined behaviors, for example, and. So these these kind of programs need to be. At this, AI governance needs to be also somehow part of this. Because we're not just looking for the next six months, we are looking to create a tech vision that will hold for the at least one year to five years. Is that what Fabio told? And then we really also need to take into account. So that's why. We have added this change it a bit. There are still many, let's say, personal. Desires on maybe a bit more of that, a bit less of that. You know, Tobias wanted customers more prevalent. Anna Marie wants. Partner customer ecosystem more prevalent tech infrastructure, all of that. And then finally wanted to arrows. Inside, not outside what? And those things. But we said OK, fine, but let's say taking all of that and looking through our eyelashes, this this comes out for now. Also wanted to keep it as simple as possible at a meta level.

30:58 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Mm-hmm.

31:01 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And I will tell a bit more about. This tomorrow but. You you've been part of this journey, just focusing on this when people in capabilities, what's in their. Now, how does this look over time? Or if you if you were to say, OK, where do we start? Well, here we are now making a big deal. And. Sorts the strategy, but ultimately we will go into leadership quite quickly. Data and AI quite quickly, and then once we know what we want, then we'll also be translating to operating model and into more like the people, people, agenda, people and capabilities and ship points. For example, what Edwin mentioned last Friday is that, hey, maybe we should or I really think you should have a data scientist. For example, on the team edit is typically also something that you want. But and and maybe there are more. Maybe there are more of those things. This is just to give an example how that we don't. We're not going to start work or we don't propose to start work on everything immediately, but rather take it step by step. Start with strategy, then involve start. Start translating that into an involving leadership and then pick up the rest. Now this is what we proposed, right? So conduct interviews. Have to kick off, then analyze results. Create a tech vision. Where we have with sub sub actions to that. And we think we still. We should still do that. That will look like this and analyzing results and Patrick will talk. Please tomorrow cause and effect diagramming best angles and fields and actions and and very concrete. Goals, results, values and then. How to capitalize on that? Yeah, including the expected investment. Going into creating a tech vision. We'll start with setting a strategic posture. So you can. You can have different postures, have a more or less aggressive, and we should calibrate on that. Also, how much are we focused on the different horizons? Right. If the first horizon is softer and cheaper, or the second one is better and smarter. And then the third arises, it's valence and autonomous. We also need to calibrate. How much are we leaning into which horizon? Because that will help us to find the right language and also set the right expectations. Well then from that we create a high level vision. Yeah. So that's also a bit of. A creative part of that, and of course. As studying the proposal that. We'll then translate that into a different road map. First treated, but that is phase two. The road map parts, the phase one is. Coming to that high level phishing. And now we our suggestion is to go on a bit of an adventure. Where? We work, AI ignited and scenario based now because what we say is. We don't know. There were, but it's it's so ambiguous that it's very hard to say. Now this is the vision and that's the strategy. We we given the the the volatility in in, in, in tech tech development and and we're really all of us were in this collective experiment kind of finding it out together. We we think that's. That, that will kind of be a be a hit or miss approach and and what we rather say is let's. Go for. Yeah, the best of AI and people. So the thinking power of AI and then working with scenarios that leads and then we can stress test certain strategies which strategies hold on or which scenario. Based on Oxid scenario planning approach now has done this. Real life. During COVID with with an organization. And it costs weeks. But thanks to AI, you can kind of supercharge it. And you can just do it in a few hours with the right prompts. And I mean few hours, of course it will. It will take a few workshops, but it's it's kind of a few days rather than weeks. Now what we would do, let's say what we suggest to do on top of what we had. What we what you what you show on slide 15 here is that we also start working on this AIS scenarios based track. Where we define. Well, first set scope and drivers and create scenarios. Then we're going to wind tunneling and then on the back of that also we have indicators. An adaptive plan, obviously. Which which then should be taken into account, but also have the, the, the the indicators for that. To see hey. Is the scenario actually changing and if so, then that probably means we should ramp this up. And and reduced it and then we get a new strategy out of that, so to speak. Yeah. And so that you can calibrate. Not every day, of course, but with. Yeah, with the frequency that makes sense. It's relatively little effort.

37:21 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Mm-hmm.

37:21 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: If we're still, if if we're still, if our approach is still in check with regards to this scenario that's unfolding. But that's the logic here. Not to make it. Practical. That would be one workshop.

37:43 Patrick Motsch: I just reads to the Contras that you know.

37:45 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. OK. If you that to make this practical, there are like tonic overcoming of steam. OK. I'm in a macro new housekeeping this evening, yeah. Yeah. Thanks.

38:19 Patrick Motsch: I'm here. I'm. I'm here again.

38:21 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: All right. Thanks Patrick. OK. Sorry, that was the guy from the garage. But so you have a step one and two. That would be one workshop. Let's say 90 minutes where you flesh out. This what are the certainties? What are the uncertainties? What are core core assumptions? And what are the most prominent? Environmental. The conditions and and and and other drivers. And then there's a, let's say symbiosis between the the human team in the room and an AI that would be also in that room. Let's say we would have access to that. Tool and based on that we we would then create the scenarios. And then. Test those again in Workshop 2 with with with the human team. And then we would wind tunnel those. And. Yeah, basically unpec does. And start to embody those different. Strategies and. Ultimately, if you're at that stage where there are very concrete, so I think the you can do a lot of that virtual, but if it comes to when it comes to leadership and embodying different strategies. Yeah, we feel that will probably be very much serving if that would be, let's say the BUNT or at least, I mean, yeah, I think it would be probably just a BUMT. But, but at least it's a a significant subset of that and NIT and procurement in one room where you have an inperson intervention. I would say Peter with given the importance of informal. Moments probably, you know, like 1 1/2 day with an evening dinner in between. Something like that. Where you really go into. Hey, what does this look like and what what do we feel? How? What does it look like? How are we going to drive this? So that's at least one component of of of this. And then, yeah. And then monitor indicate this is obviously something that you would tend to. On the back of this.

40:56 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep.

40:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: So this is kind of the high level. And so and so there's also to answer this topic. Or or or main themes. Approach. It's we we feel it would. I mean, yeah, we feel it would make more sense to do it this way because you are kind of leveraging all the on on the leveraging human and AI intelligence to work with what you know. While staying adaptive at the same time. And and that's that last part is is is harder when you kind of. It seems. And then organize yourself around the themes. It's it's a bit more risky we feel. Of course we can do it. But at the same time, we really feel we are going into, we're transitioning into a bit of a unknown territory, a bit of new era where. Less than before we we we can predict what's coming.

42:11 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And what does that mean for tomorrow?

42:17 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Well, for tomorrow that means that you know, if that means that. We would have a discussion on is that the case? Yes, OK. Do we agree, do we disagree? Because that would kind of define. The the phase one approach which we we will spend the next few weeks detailing that phase one approach. And it makes a difference if it's. AI ignited and scenarios based make make makes difference from let's say a theme based. Or so there are some, of course security aspects. Is it possible to get that AI? In in the room. If so, how? Because yeah, we work with copilot, but as Ana Marie also put it. Vas rather risk 1st and so. She she feels she is. She feels that she's limited. Also, just between between us here. Like many people she uses. AI and and she she she also said agents in her private life, which is just at our disposal. And then there's Vodafone and the Vodafone reality is you're working with an out to dated version of copilot. So you're kind of continuously working with old instruments. She calls it 2000 and late. So is there a way to? Is there a way to organize a A secure protocol compliance? Environment where we can access also latest AI models. Well, and so that we're not just talking about a possible future, but we're also kind of we're seeing the boundaries and we're not pushing but exploring what's possible beyond what's given to us at the current moment. So that kind of those kind of topics, I would also and we with Edwin there in the in the room, we can have a a real conversation about it and not just the hypothetical 1. So those are kind of considerations that. Yeah, those are kind of questions that we need to have answered before, before in, in order to to define the phase one approach.

44:46 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah.

44:50 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: After that, there's Stephen governance. I haven't created a slide on that, but that's just something. That we need to talk about, which will be of course informed by the whole discussion on scenarios based or theme based. And then we have the, yeah, let's say next steps on a very high level but this is what we already know. But it's just to kind of. Repeat. So that that that's basically what what we had prepared. It's Peter. I'll I'll just stop sharing to get your, let's say first and I know it's it was a lot also some new information, but I'd love to get your impression. And and and. Yeah, and and well, how to approach it?

45:36 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, so this looks quite sophisticated. Which which is maybe also fitting fitting the theme of fitting the assignment. So 80% is a bit. So I'm I'm a bit. So like like as I said at the beginning, I really like the proposal also for tomorrow's slot. It looks very solid and it's really good to give back about the interviews and then and exactly how we're going to do it is still a bit. I would lie if I would say I fully get it, but I'm I'm also at the same. I'm also at a point where I know that I can also trust the process, right? So this bit of an angle, but I want to also honestly share it with you. So it looks very far through. That's for sure, right? So this looks very thought through. But I'm also a bit trusting on on you guys here.

46:35 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yep, there are points now. I'm also thinking.

46:39 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But I'm I'm more than willing to take an experiment, right? This is love it. I mean, we can fail, but then we do it another. Yeah. Then we try something else.

46:47 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, I would say.

46:48 Patrick Motsch: But but Peter Trump, in here at Trumpinia, one question, would it help? Perhaps, if he had one? Slide to show what we did in this Phase Zero and what will be the next step like.

47:02 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: What do you mean?

47:07 Patrick Motsch: Sorry, I had to go ahead. But I mean, I repeat, would it help perhaps when you say to shape that we make one slide to show what we already, which is what is the next step like like in some boxes would say to to make more hands on or or what is it that? Would help you.

47:30 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Hmm. No, maybe. Maybe it also requires the voice over over again, right? So to fully get it. I mean it's it's a new approach that's basically it.

47:45 Patrick Motsch: Huh.

47:45 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

47:46 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): I like new things, but it was just like did I just just understand that you are two steps or maybe five steps ahead of me and ahead of the group here?

47:56 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

47:57 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): That's the only thing I want to share.

48:00 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: That's totally true, we.

48:03 Patrick Motsch: Great. That's good.

48:03 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: We have thought about it. Long and hard.

48:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah, but this is also what you can see, right? That's good.

48:14 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Right. Yeah. And and of course, we're only now taking you in so. So that's also what I would expect, let's say. I'm wondering. I'm thinking out loud if we can. So if we can get because he did this in a room with clients, that whole scenario they're thinking. That might be. Let me see if I can see. This availability. So. Yeah, yeah, might work, actually. Then he can. He can also talk from experience because we created this with the three of us, Peter on our side and given that he is done this. In in in the room with clients. I think from from his you know he's only successfully. We'll make it feel very strong. I would say.

49:34 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

49:34 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Because I'm also, I mean we talked about it a lot and I can see it, but I haven't done it. And then I know that when I haven't done something. I'm I'm I might also sometimes be questioning it myself. How? How does it look? And and you on the receiving end you will pick that up. So let me I mean I can do it if it needs to be, but looking at his calendar, I think we might get him for at least at least one hour. And that that would be. That would be sufficient. Then maybe he he can be there for the whole thing. Would you be open to him being there at pizza?

50:13 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Sure. Yeah, absolutely.

50:14 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, because he's he's an integral part of this whole thing anyway, OK. Good. But then I'll check that. I think that will. That will provide a lot of clarity.

50:30 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep.

50:30 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And he does have a brilliant mind. So I'm not saying that everything is. In. It will still require a lot lot of the slides, all of the slides and a lot of talking, but he can explain it. I feel in in from this embodied experience, which will probably benefit the whole. Yeah. Getting a selected sense of clarity around what what this is and unless we have questions, it's easy to answer them on based on the real life itself. Let me try and figure that out. And I'll get back to you, yeah. OK, good.

51:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Then it's only about what do we send out as a pre read.

51:19 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

51:22 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Would your proposal be to send a full deck, including a recommendation, what to read or?

51:28 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, I would say that.

51:33 Patrick Motsch: Up front, I would only send apart until next steps that we also go through with the team that the backup slides. I would not send yet because they are not yet ready. They will. They will probably also change based on the decisions that we do, for example, as it is analysis, it also discharges. We do. It is this documents they will change. I would not. Because it's too much details.

51:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: You mean the methodology slice?

52:00 Patrick Motsch: Yes, after after the last slide that we have for the next steps, those those like these details, I would not yet send uncommented. I would not.

52:10 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: So right now we have. We have the check in and we have initial insights. We have the case of change with methodology and then there is and that's all those slides. And then we have the team governance team and governance phase one and then we have the next steps and that's it. Yeah. You mean the you mean the the appendix with the possible scenarios and everything? Those are just like. No, no, that.

52:40 Patrick Motsch: Yes, all day. And also the preanalytics that we also based on interest because the two last interest for example not yet integrated. For me, I would be carefully coup around picture not so wrong, because 80% is even more this I mean.

52:53 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I also didn't share them with Peter now, so I'll I'll.

52:58 Patrick Motsch: This I did not know. Then Peter then I'm relaxed now. Good, because we have all completed documents, yeah.

53:04 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I mean, we have. Yeah, we have example slides, example scenario slides. Peter, if before asking OK. But how? How? How can it look in practice? And we have, we we created a few to a few few examples but yeah, OK granted.

53:22 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): With pre reading it's always like either we ask to pre read and then we quickly touch upon the meeting but don't extensively or we don't ask for pre read and then we can extensively discuss things right? Let's let's let's have that little bit in mind. But it's also 2:00 already. So how much time do people have for pre reading for tomorrow morning? It's also, yeah, let's see.

53:43 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, but OK. But then then we can do the synthesis of initial insights and the case for change. We can. That's four slides and then the whole methodology we can present tomorrow that work.

53:56 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep, Yep.

53:56 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK. Great. Then I will do that. Patrick, I'll give you a call.

54:05 Patrick Motsch: What?

54:05 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Now for to kind of wrap on the insights and. Oh, if I have outfits and I'll send out the the prereads. Yeah, cool.

54:19 Patrick Motsch: Perfect.

54:19 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Thanks a lot guys. Looking forward tomorrow.