wiki/mandates/vattenfall/100 Context/20250903 transscript design meeting.txt

00:00 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Inclusivity.

00:01 Patrick Motsch: Yes.

00:03 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, I'm receiving very positive feedback on you from my my AI note taker, yeah. You feel seen?

00:11 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): So so I learned that even with prompt, even with prompting, you need to be nice, but this helps.

00:15 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: So I learned. Yeah, I learned that too, and I learned it also costs a shit load of extra energy. So that actually it's not efficient.

00:23 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Well, to be nice or to.

00:25 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, to be nice actually. Like efficiency wise, it's much more efficient to just be rude and direct. But I'm. I'm also I'm yeah.

00:34 Patrick Motsch: OK. So so I jump in this communication. This means when I want something, don't say please, because it's one word too much. You don't need it when you have the result. Don't say thank you because this triggers the next the next step. So just get the result and go.

00:50 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Exactly. Exactly.

00:51 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Interesting.

00:52 Patrick Motsch: That's AI.

00:55 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. Let's do let's do 1/2 hour chicken. I really feel like so disconnected from you guys, you know.

01:05 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, it's interesting.

01:07 Patrick Motsch: Yes indeed.

01:09 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): How is it for you so far, Patrick being being being having I think the most outside in perspective?

01:17 Patrick Motsch: How it feels until now with introducing me or with you guys or no, no.

01:23 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, no. This is the. So of course it's an assignment. And now you've started and we're on the way. So how is it for you?

01:27 Patrick Motsch: For me, it's very, very structured. How are is everything organised? Also, you're on your side. I feel that you are new in your job, but the connections I feel here. Especially as you run, the people are known. Who know who does what? Who is organising what? Who are strongs and weaks? We speak about the insights. You know, we are not speaking until now. Until these five interviews we had, I did not feel that we were speaking about fundamentals. Or perhaps they don't tell. Or perhaps it's not the topic, but in other sessions it was. Different there. We had also dispute we identified also that somebody said, AH, there is a problem and then we had also to make more interviews because of identified this problem. We also had the situation that certain people really did not know what authors did. They were disconnected.

02:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): OK, OK.

02:15 Patrick Motsch: That's the level I would like to say from my side. So from my side it's I would say it's calm.

02:23 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Sharon.

02:24 Patrick Motsch: Yeah.

02:25 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Now. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah, I mean, it's also quite. An overseeable size, so that's good. And and yeah, and as ever since I, I mean, Peter, you've been there longer than me. Whatever. I've really seen the great. There's, there's always been some form of passion and and a higher purpose. People are driven to contribute to fossil free in one generation. But specific pills to to, to immobility, to evis. Yeah, and. Yeah, and and and right now I feel the BU in in the configuration, I mean there are there are the BU Mt they're there are always things that you can improve but in general. Peter, you you have seen a few BBUMTS from up close and I think this one right now is seen a good place also.

03:29 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Cool, cool.

03:31 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: In general.

03:32 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah.

03:32 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And so I think that you're seeing that you're also seeing. The results of of hard work, let's say so. Also from Fabian I'm getting the BU Empt in this. In this specific configuration and everyone in the BU empt. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, but we can talk about it later. More perhaps, Patrick, but I think for now this the the intention of this meeting was to have a first conversation around how to structure the kickoff. And ideally you first have all the interviews and then do this session. But yeah, in the kind of the carousel of real life we we we we have not yet fully completed all the interviews and we have this session. We have another touch point.

04:26 Patrick Motsch: We already have much information to make. A first step, I think.

04:30 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: On the 12th, yeah. So there on the 12th, we we come together for a last time and then we can we can iterate. But I think yeah, I agree with Patrick. Yeah.

04:41 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): What is the? What is the aim for the kick off session? So what do we want to achieve in the kickoff? So because I maybe maybe share a thought. So of course with all those interviews and all those, all those topics and questions on the table, we need to make sure that there's also a realistic expectation of what we can deliver. So I would say also also when it comes to the vision, I would say even there we need to focus. Somehow. So it's it's so much topics from from, yeah. So point. So I would say, but that's maybe also something we can discuss in the kickoff. But but I would say when we start the program or when we have defined what we want to achieve in the program let. Make sure we are realistic in what we can achieve. Because we also don't want this to last two years. Yeah, so this is what something that that came to mind. So what is it really that we want to deliver, which is we need to discuss? And and this could also be part, yeah, yeah.

05:52 Patrick Motsch: I I like this question because I also like to start at the end. It should start when we go out of this room what we have, but I can contribute to this answer is when I already know that I have this interviews. I will. I will analyze them. We have this framework that we see the different domains. You saw this from this IMD model that I can look from my side and also you from your side share on for the leadership part. There are the topics. Just just to make the points, where are the topics and to name them. This is, I would say this is from bottom up. This is the bottom up view. The top down view I have is from the interviews from the roles, from the positioning in the organization. I can have the top down view. I already have a picture on this I. Can shape it also with the next introduce I would do like this and then what I would expect is that we have a topic list, meaning we have a handful, perhaps 5 topics. We say those are to address. And there are other topics that this maybe don't we don't address. And I would like when I prepare, I prepare this long list. It's a long list like short list long list in sales. It's a long list of topics, and for example five are marked to say you have to put the focus and just to jump in. Perhaps the first tranche to align on the goal to say when we go out for example, we have this slide with with the top. What the next step is to be done and the first step, what we have to aggress on this list. Is this the topics? It's just a first step, how I would I would I would start it. I would end it and what is between? It can have certain dynamics and if we can shape, I want just to bring in this. What do you think about this approach?

07:27 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah, really good. And and actually, I would rather say in the end we pick only a few topics or you say handful, but let's say we could, we could even say we only do two or three. And then make a big success and say this is maybe then techfish and 1.0 and if you're happy next year we work on 2.0 whatsoever then to say, OK, we've listened to you and we pick it up. All of it together and it will. Not be a success. It's because it's really too much.

07:56 Patrick Motsch: Very good point. Now.

07:58 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, and and in the choosing the topics we also in a way define the DSH signature, yeah.

08:08 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

08:09 Patrick Motsch: The audience also.

08:11 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

08:12 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Also yeah.

08:14 Patrick Motsch: I just. I just make an example. I just say it's wrong, but a theoretical example. If we see this journey that we need to do is perhaps leadership journey. We don't need it for this. Then we don't invite. We only invite, perhaps, that they are in the loop, but then we have other stakeholders. I say this theoretically. Just like this.

08:35 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, maybe going back to so. Still in the process of sending you an updated letter of engagement because. Well, we needed to get our legal act together, but we now also have a bank account. So I'm still looking for my vit number but for for.

08:57 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Page 3 you mean?

08:58 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, for H3. Yeah, but anyway, I did share this initially. I don't know if you can read this.

09:07 Patrick Motsch: Yes.

09:07 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: It's quite small.

09:08 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

09:08 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I can. Yeah, this is what we shared with you, Fabian, for the kickoff. And I think it's still quite accurate.

09:28 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

09:29 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. But I would like to come in the kickoff with a with a high level. Current state assessment. So you could say indeed I like this this longest of topics and then. For a few we can. We can go a bit deeper. Also. We can of course also prime it a bit from OK where we feel it would make the most. Difference and at most value. If we choose this topic or that topic for that topic, we can go perhaps a bit deeper. We know so much. Also with you on board that Peter of the organization, so I also feel we have a lot of wisdom there. And then also we could probably it would help be helpful also to already think a bit in in terms of team roles for this next phase because this this small group there has. Yeah, it helps to to to to have that conversation there instead of them going back to, to, to Austrian and Fabian to say, OK. We need this and that person. Where actually we also need people from. And. And procurement, yeah, so. This this would be I think, for me there's still this still holds and it's it's two hours. I'll stop sharing this now. So of course there was. There was a check in at the beginning. There's the next steps at the end. Let's say we have. Let's say we have 1 1/2 hours of of of work, maybe one hour 15 minutes, and it's kind of hard to. How to optimally use those? Yeah. So giving back the synthesis or main, you know, insights of the interviews which which, which includes then also or leads to this long list of topics. Then having a conversation around those topics, right. Choosing two or three as focus points. And then going to the team and and how might that look in terms of Team, team? And and and and and roles. And then already I think realistically that should should take us to the end of the meeting.

12:19 Patrick Motsch: I would like to add 1 point for for the result. So one component of the result is also based on on the topics that we defined. I would say on the on the achievements or objectives that we define that we define the people that we need to elevate elaborate now the details on this. So we can have like these two topics or these two deliverables at the end of the key calls on this.

12:42 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

12:42 Patrick Motsch: Level to say we don't define how we want to do it. We define what we define objective.

12:47 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

12:48 Patrick Motsch: And based on these objectives, we define who we need in a in a joint team to bring it one step further. And like this, we could already shape high level in this team a little bit the road map to go there but not on the content it's then. On the on the.

13:04 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

13:04 Patrick Motsch: On the organization and on the leadership.

13:08 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

13:08 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, yeah. And I would like to add it's maybe also just governance. So not only who, but also also.

13:18 Patrick Motsch: Hey, cool question Sharon. Perhaps Peter also question on my side, not knowing you when we continue now, this will be a project and running or a program. However you call it. Do you have governance structures to steer this or will this be a new governance? This initiative.

13:37 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): I would change a new project.

13:39 Patrick Motsch: It's just a new project, OK? So I asked differently, Peter, besides all other projects that you have, is there a common steering for the projects or how does this work you know?

13:55 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, we do. We do. We have Tollgate Tollgates decisions in in vital for the question is if we should fully embrace that, I don't know.

14:04 Patrick Motsch: For this level, see what you mean. Too much administration then, for this initiative, huh?

14:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah. And and I would also like to have a lot of action, to be honest.

14:16 Patrick Motsch: The point is, that's why I was asking for a program that you have structures for program, because normally the program is on the on the, on the steering or on a management level, and based on the program which is running also many years, perhaps you run initiatives and. Then the character would be. When we go out of this kickoff and also an additional meeting or two or three meetings. Whatever we need, we have defined the initiative with the scope. And then based on this project are launched and hopefully not too big. Just as an IT.

14:48 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep, Yep. Yeah. You're thinking about sub projects here.

14:51 Patrick Motsch: Yes, and it will be programmed with projects. The program is running as an initiative to support the strategy on this level. We measure the value and we launch projects and tapering back results. And on this level is also the feedback cycle.

15:09 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Interesting question. No, I I also see that Patrick was just wondering, Peter. Yeah, what's most optimal, but so trust. Trusting your leads, yeah.

15:24 Patrick Motsch: I knew I can ask this if it's if it's fixed, I learn and and if not, just to understand how it works. But we don't need to know this on the kick off, by the way.

15:36 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. No, but it's it's a good point because there's of course, the moment, every, every time a project or program is launched, there is always a question like do we really need it or can we not make it part of. Running governance, let's say. Yeah.

15:59 Patrick Motsch: Because we if we.

16:01 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah. So the question is, is the kick off is other participants in the kick off Steering committee. Oh yeah. So or is it? Is that needed? Yeah. So that's, that's the question.

16:09 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: That's a question and I I would say. See what? OK. So like it depends of course on on the on on how we want to take it. But assuming that. Cross. Cross BU so like it procurement BU collaboration is needed then that would probably point towards a something of a steer Co that is a bit. Elevated outside of normal. Governance, however, then programs that. Projects that are, let's say, created out of this program. Some of them could just land in normal operations perhaps.

16:56 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yes, I was thinking while you were talking about maybe a dimension which could be interesting. So we're part of this is also the new leadership team of DSH, and we're discussing the constellation. We have a view, but at least we know Stefan and Steven will be in. So Steven is my manager, the head of Digital Steffan Lutz is the head of hardware. They both run a team. So so Steven, you will meet him for sure in this project that Patrick is leading is steering all the POS. All the product owners and Stefan has all Chargepoint engineers. Kind of people in his team, I think one of the one of the things that is currently for sure true is that they are not really leaders at this moment. I would say. So I of course I'm here for a limited time. If you talk to them you. Cannot say, oh, they're visionaries. They are well put them in front of a group and they will share. They will tell what they what they thought about. So you could also see this maybe as a. Mini training for them. How to work on this? So, for instance, if something if an AI strategy or something or Gen. AI for CRM need to be developed, this could very well also be a task. For instance for Steven and and and Edwin or something and so or or all these hardware topics. Stefan Lutz is Mr. Hardware himself. So can't he play a role here and and and by means of the program also immediately form a sort of team? With these players, because Stephan will work with procurement and Steven will work with IT, which are exactly the people we want to bring together in one team. So yeah, just.

18:42 Patrick Motsch: This idea of the steering, which this with this group from the from the kick off or whatever, he whoever it is because first we elaborated to get it initiative and when it's going to be to define capacity and resources to staff project then we also have a short. Connection on this.

18:58 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

18:59 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, and I think.

19:01 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And sometimes it's true for projects in votevo that we say, OK, we start with this question and then we say no, there needs to be a serial code program manager, PMO office and we hire 3 for project managers. And as a result the, the, the, the direct man. Are leaning a bit backwards. So leaning back because the project is solving it. And now I think we want leaders to have a very active role.

19:27 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. And I think when when. Yeah, when? When? Fabian asked me to to support with the target operating model, said Tom. I took former colleague from 4 Chiefs, Fira and and and Vera working close collaboration with Andrah and Andra. Really Andras, for the follow his his colleague of Peter. Previous chief of staff to Fabio. And and she really well, that whole program was designed so that line managers. Took the took the ownership and responsibility and it was Co created and everything. Not not to say that the whole thing went perfect, but I think from the set up it was very smart because it was very lean from the, you know, number of people involved externally. It was very much relying on on internal line organization. With, with, with the advantage of people. Yeah, not not being. So much caught by the not invented here syndrome. So it was much more easy to kind of adopt and to start working with it. Then I would have other otherwise, if BCG would have come along and said this is your operating model would have been a lot, lot harder and and I think for this we we. Should if if we know that this logic applies, then we should. Use that to our benefit. To the benefit of this initiative, at the same time, I feel. Everything that we're you know, which which gets attention. Grows, so we we should at the same time not make it too dilute. So it's finding the the optimal balance there and and you could say, OK, that's the new to be to be formed. DSH empty. But it it really depends a bit also on the outcome of of the kickoff, I would say. It's a bit too early, but we we could for sure. We need to have the conversation in the kickoff and then and then see see what happens. At least we we could even in the kickoff, define two or three flavours. Right. But then we're at least aligned on the flavours.

21:56 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Mm-hmm.

21:57 Patrick Motsch: To be honest, I'm not quite sure whether after the kickoff we just launch program and projects. I could imagine. First, there are some rounds in the small round to shape the topics. I just give some give 2 topics. Perhaps, we say we make now a clear product strategy and a sourcing strategy, something like this. And then we all, together with procurement and in the IT we have to define what it means. Or I take another topic? We say bid 85 now hybrid teams. Interdisciplinary for different from different departments. To work on a topic, how to shape this? I think first not to go too, too much deep first first to define this this leadership and this strategy topic that it's clear and also not to forget I heard in many in many interviews now communication before we launch something then to make a communication with everybody also. To get some feedback from the base or from the other managers to know what they think about, to consult and tend to go out. So this was an idea that music, just some some things are not yet further in structure or logic. But I see these topics around that we that we defined them properly before going out because then we have half solved this this journey.

23:20 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, yeah. And as long as we at a higher level, make sure that we and others other relevant people understand how it all is connected. We can work on this then and on that then and and on that then. It doesn't all need to happen at once. If if we. If we yeah if.

23:44 Patrick Motsch: Yes, the alignment and the communication, I think I would say based on the interviews until now, we'll see. What is the others? This is 1 crucial I would say take crucial topic the define of the lead and the communication on these topics that we are all aligned and this round is a good round. Because you don't have in.

24:02 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): What are you saying to define the lead per subtopic or or overall?

24:05 Patrick Motsch: The leadership role from your side, where are you taking the lead for what topics and that all others know you have the lead here?

24:14 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah, yeah. OK.

24:15 Patrick Motsch: You know, that's why it came in my mind. Is this topic about sourcing. For example, solving has to do with procurement, with it, it's to do with you with, with the business side, there are many top there. This is a topic you can give it to to different people or you can have it shared, but if nobody does, does the lead, it's not organized.

24:36 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, yeah, yeah, true.

24:36 Patrick Motsch: I mean topics like this and I will myself also search topics like this that are not already in one in one unit or in one organization. Topics between that we miss now because as I understood you are quite good in what you already do. The leadership is clear for the different topics, but there are topics that are between somewhere not clear.

24:58 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. And also how how it is all connected? It's not.

25:02 Patrick Motsch: Yeah, he's here.

25:05 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, maybe a way to look at this, Peter, is to. Yeah, indeed. Say hey. Where? Where can this edge at most value? And then kind of deducting from that logic, that's OK. And that means we take this and this and this topic. And that then conversely, again puts the focus of DSH on those topic, and therefore it also shapes DSH around those topics.

25:37 Patrick Motsch: I like this ID share on because this also triggers. Perhaps we expect from DHA from UDS and from UDS and from UDS? This is the role and they get what they search, how DSH is in the lead to say this is what we do. This is what we need. So we expect from you that.

25:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, because choosing from a long list can also be kind of confusing exercise. But taking it top down from using value as the as the key. Driver and then saying OK and this is how we how we are going to deliver that value. This is also where we want to get your feedback and be measured on our performance and then that that creates that signature that we're looking for. And and I I have a feeling that it it will cross digital services and hardware, right. There are some cross some. Yeah. There are some cross some will be kind of. Maybe allocated in one of the others, but also there's there are some cross department topics as well.

26:49 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And this will be interesting. Who are those? Because I can also imagine there's quite a natural split. But OK, we we will find out, right.

26:58 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: It would be good to to have at least one cross department topic, yeah.

27:03 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Because otherwise the question is why are you? Why are we one? Exactly who do?

27:08 Patrick Motsch: Then it's just by make it.

27:11 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

27:11 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: No, and it's it has been a question within PMPM for longer. Which was the the previous name for DSH. Why are we?

27:23 Patrick Motsch: What was the name before?

27:24 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Product and process management.

27:25 Patrick Motsch: Whatever process now, OK.

27:28 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: In yeah. Productive.

27:29 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But then also, yeah. Was it a little bit different consolation but true, yeah.

27:32 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Then there was also Evo's team was also in there. So failure management, yeah. Um. Yeah. Is it an idea, Peter, for you to kind of reflect on like, yeah, how do I see this actually what? What? How do I envision DSH? Where? Where do I envision? DSH to really drive value.

28:04 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Mm-hmm.

28:05 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Maybe just as reflection to to be with for for a couple of days and then you can start drawing out your department. And of course. We should still be open to kick off adcom's into dialogues into interviews, but then, at least.

28:23 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But to have this as part of the kick off as well.

28:23 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

28:25 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Mm-hmm. Yeah, I have of course some thoughts. I can put them to paper for sure.

28:31 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: I yeah. I mean it's finding a balance between coming up with. With something to kick against or to kick around or to play with. And and. And having a having an open conversation, but I think it we we don't need to go in. Yeah, we we can go in with quite. A with a with a with a picture to be validated or with some hypotheses to be validated rather than to say hey. Yeah. What should we do from these 20 topics? Yeah.

29:08 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

29:10 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And then we can we can also just share share our logic and then people can, yeah. Say yeah, OK. It's easy to follow or some questions here or there, or I mean ultimately your you are also DSH leader. So I think it's also your natural and your natural place.

29:29 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): OK.

29:29 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: How does that sound for you?

29:32 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, fine. Perfect. I also believe that that there is a leader from too and the from. We already shared a little bit, but we haven't shared the two or at least the Envision 2 which would be good.

29:49 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: And do you? Do you already have ideas around that aspired state?

29:54 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, but I need to. I need a bit of thinking, but yeah for sure because you can also put them in in a few dimensions right about also about leadership, about. Proactivity, or about all the all the things, yeah. The baby's the three, four things or something. Good job.

30:16 Patrick Motsch: Oh.

30:17 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Up. Yeah. So what we can do? First, write down a rough structure on the kind of meeting agenda. Kind of. Yeah, just a structure we need to fill that that with content. And and iterates over e-mail until we have and of course speak to each other and until we have that meeting on, I think September 12th of my head. Let me check. Yeah.

30:57 Patrick Motsch: Final Touch point Friday 12 at 1:00.

31:01 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: At at 1:00. Yeah. Yeah. Next week, as I have 3 days of non-stop workshops. So, but I'll find time in the in the after, you know, in the evening hours and and stuff to and Frederick and I will. In continuous dialogue as well.

31:23 Patrick Motsch: Yes.

31:24 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah. Next week is for me also very busy with more or less the same. And then.

31:30 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. Do you have a big week next week?

31:32 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Are we?

31:33 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Of course, yeah.

31:34 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, it's it's insane. And then right, right after it's, I traveled to Poland also for a day with it because it's also in the same week. So it's five days of traveling to four countries to four countries.

31:46 Patrick Motsch: Whoa. Oh no. On one side, wonderful on the other side, you will be so tired at the end.

31:52 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, quite ridiculous. But OK. No problem, because it will be good also to share a little bit in advance right to your team. The structure and what we're going to do in the kickoff.

32:02 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Exactly, yeah. So if we could. If we could have that, I I think the Friday 12 September is is quick enough, if we have the the meeting on September 16th, so we can we can align on it then. But for sure to present the structure and yeah we could even if if we have. Come to specific. Insights. Or maybe we have two 2 pages to share up front or whatever. Yeah. Let's see.

32:34 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): OK.

32:35 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Maybe. Maybe that's Patrick. Let's let's also stay connected on on. Yeah. How do you see that pre reads or what we could and could not share. I mean, so I'm thinking of like insights of interviews and a bit of. So a synthesis from the interviews obviously would be good to to to send us pre read any any other things from you, Patrick and Peter that that are on your mind. That we could present other than the structure. Agenda. I mean, no.

33:07 Patrick Motsch: Oh, I haven't. No, it would be too much also to give more.

33:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Gender synthesis. Yeah, I know.

33:11 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK, cool.

33:13 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): This is good, yeah.

33:15 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: All right. Are we complete for now?

33:18 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep. It feels like we're going in the right direction.

33:23 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: OK. Yeah.

33:27 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): So I'm like a lot of feeling and sensing and I I feel it in my stomach when it's not going well or when I have a lot of doubts. But I I feel like. Yeah, it feels good. Not that we found the answer, but it feels like we're on the right path. Yeah, path. Yeah. For you for you guys.

33:45 Patrick Motsch: Absolutely. Thank you. Very good thing that we do here. I like it full of emotions. You know it is. I like. It's not a joke.

33:53 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Cool, cool.

33:55 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, I know.

33:55 Patrick Motsch: Not really.

33:55 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: We're we're definitely fully in here.

33:57 Patrick Motsch: I'm happy that you feel like this, yeah.

34:00 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Your stomach hurts.

34:04 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Oh my stomach. Yeah. No, I'm really enjoying it. It's a bit. It's it's quite a few back-to-back meetings today. So my head is like a bit zapped, but also another client just now and then another client in 9 minutes. And so it's also kind of doing this, but that's kind of, yeah, that's just how how my work is organized. Now when I isolate it to to your question and to this. Yeah, I'm I'm super happy and I think. We're playing the stakeholder game. I love playing the stakeholder game and I think we're playing it very well. I'm I'm a bit. I'm a bit reflective on on on on on jetsk suggestions to to include or reach out to CNS strategy. I definitely like her suggestion, but I would say for a later stage to to, to. To reach out to the Cindy's AI team, I mean you, you can do that anytime, Peter, right. But I mean as as a as a program, I would say we don't need to pull them in right now. It's it's not only about AI, what we're doing, but when we when once the that project or program or spin off. Starts to focus on AII think that's great. Yeah, CNS strategy. Baby, I think that will just over complicate it, but I'm not. How do you see that, Peter?

35:38 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, I didn't like it at all. Suggestion no.

35:42 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: No.

35:43 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): It was like.

35:46 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, because then it like you start getting to get into hardships politics. And the one thing I like about the BU is that it's kind of nicely isolated. It's too small for people to really get get all emotional about and there is a lot of politics, Patrick, certainly so on the, on the, on the business area level.

36:06 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, all of a sudden she and I. No, she in the strategy, no one knows. And also it's important. I think immobility is still, I think, quite innovative within the corporate Cindy. Yeah. Cindy's unit, of course, with all the respect, because they deserve a lot of respect for what they're doing.

36:21 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah. And they have a different PNL.

36:23 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But it's a very stable business. It's two and half million customers already for 50 years and of course they're optimizing it. It's not. You get what? You know what I mean, right? It's so different. No physical assets.

36:33 Patrick Motsch: Cannot compare, OK.

36:36 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No compare.

36:37 Patrick Motsch: Yeah.

36:37 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And now I interrupted you, Patrick, when I ask for your stomach. But you were still talking, so I apologize for that, I think. OK. No, no, I know. But then before I think you were still just.

36:51 Patrick Motsch: On my stomach feel I had. I had good. No, I had good lunch. It was. It was very good lunch. I have a good stomach feeling now.

36:54 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): OK.

36:56 Patrick Motsch: I'm so proud to, you know.

36:56 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): OK, good, good, good.

36:58 Patrick Motsch: No, definitely all good. Very happy. What I heard people, it just gives me information, but I'm also very always very dissatisfied. I cannot use it. No, it's not. Isn't true to tables a little bit special? This I said it also in the intro in the known before this was special. I did not get the inputs for the next steps to do something with it. It was rare. It was many things said, but it was it was not, not food. So like this I feel empty stomach. But the other interviews.

37:26 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, yeah.

37:27 Patrick Motsch: All of them they gave gave really valuable inputs.

37:30 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And we are connecting with Edwin and she will. He will for sure give the right answers instead of Jetska so.

37:37 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: But just just for my understanding, Peter is then is if you look at like hierarchies is yet fabulous beer or is jet ski your beer, your beer OK?

37:48 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): But in practice, practice, she's basically connecting to connected to Fabian much more. And Edwin, much more to me.

37:57 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Why?

37:59 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, I don't know. But I think, Edwin, the only was from Edwin and she's all over the place. Who's he's basically such a busy guy. But. Yeah, and. And then below Edwin is the author, Rebecca. That's yeah. So let's figure it out. But I know Edwin. Yeah.

38:19 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Sorry.

38:21 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Ashwin is highly involved and actually I thought jet ska was as involved too. But I think we now found out. Insufficient.

38:30 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I found. So when I was working with John and PMPMI found of course, I met Rebecca. And then later daughter also joined from it. I never really enjoyed. How to say?

38:52 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, I think what you're going, I think I know what you're going to say, it's operational.

38:56 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: She was well, it's very operational. Yeah. So if you if you talk about tech vision, she none of both of them are not who we need. I don't. Edwin might be but but not Rebecca. Not daughter. And also when it comes to. Yeah. I never felt that there were true part of the management team where that was.

39:25 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): No, of course not, no.

39:25 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: It was sad, but I didn't feel it. And then in the beginning with when Rebecca was alone, we had this offsite 2 day off site and she was in and out and in and out. And it was clear that she was all these questions about what is my place here? And am I just a messenger? Bringing. Post meal from from from it. To to immobility and and vice versa. It felt like she was an empty shell just passing on messages. So we need to be clear on what we expect. And and how to form form this DSH empty. Because I I from previous experience I think it's it's it's it's it didn't work ultimately. Now that also had to do of course with with John's style of leadership for sure. But now that we are restarting this DSH empty, I think it's a golden opportunity to. Said it right right from the start. You know.

40:21 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, I don't. Edwin would be much better.

40:23 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah.

40:24 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Let's connect to Edwin and and. Yeah, I agree. Yeah.

40:29 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Maybe connect to him already with that intention in mind that actually, yeah, and start also sharing some of these thoughts with Fabian. Because if if Edwin is really busy and he is our man, that might need some massaging as well to to to get him to free up sufficient time and and mental and emotional space for immobility.

40:55 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah, but he he's already heavily involved in, in immobility. I would say.

41:00 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Sounds like we're we're, we're conjuring a plan. I really did. No, but I mean I think. I think he is our men.

41:10 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yeah.

41:10 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Swiss and and if everything is on on on rails in one or two years, OK, let's see. But for the foreseeable future, I I think we really need him. If if if it's about making a step change.

41:26 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): And it's interesting because it it could be that Edwin is currently acting on the level of Steffan and Steven, and I mean with that. Also, maybe quite practical operation, I'm not sure much leading, so I think he has a lot of knowledge. So Evan has a lot of knowledge. He's also the guy. If we want to, for instance, work on AI, all those kind of things in it. He's our guy. He has a huge network, he knows everyone, but maybe a bit like Steve and so I haven't had so far that he's really sharing. Something where? He said. This is what I believe. So maybe yeah. Let's see.

42:00 Jeroen Haverkorn van Rijsewijk: Yeah, so, so then he can be an integral part of that journey, right?

42:04 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Yep, Yep. OK. Thanks a lot. See you later.

42:08 Patrick Motsch: Thank you.

42:08 Ommeren Pieter van (SB): Bye.