Carlos Guiterriez Ferrete
Rodney Apple: [00:00:00] Carlos, welcome to the Supply Chain Careers podcast. Thank you for joining us today.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Thank you for having me. I’m excited to be on.
Rodney Apple: So we’d love to drill down into how you got started on your own supply chain career journey, if you wanna take us through that. We know that you, left Mexico in 2001.
You moved to Cambridge to attend MIT and entered the US job market, right before 9/11. Take us through, through that experience and how you got started.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: my experience started a little bit early, which that was the, the events that really moved me to take the decision to pursue a career in the US.
In 1995 around when I was, close to graduating, from college, I was kidnapped in Mexico City. I wasn’t, physically hurt, but it changed how I saw vulnerability and, and it planted something in me about leadership. 1999, I was about in my third job and it happened [00:01:00] again, second attempt at kidnapping, and that’s when decision became real to, find a way to move out.
I really created a plan. So I, I quit my job, sold my car, committed to a graduate program in the US knowing there were no guarantees. In order to prepare myself for that I moved to Madison, Wisconsin at the age of 27 and joined an English as a second language school just to improve my English.
then came MIT, which was definitely the hardest thing I have, done academically. And as you mentioned, Rodney, 9/11 hit right in the middle and the job market froze, especially for, people like me needing a, a sponsorship to stay in the country. So I got, a, a lot of rejections and came close to losing my student housing.
And e- eventually, a, a leader named Al Barrientos III, took a chance on me at H-E-B in Texas and that decision started, everything. a few years later in H-E-B, I went back to Mexico with a promotion for the visa purposes, [00:02:00] and 18 months in, I realized if I stay, I will probably never go back to the US, and that was my original, my, my original goal.
So I decided to return to a lower title in a department that didn’t necessarily welcome me, and asked to be moved later into warehousing. so two years later, I was running one of the largest facilities in the network for H-E-B. so that’s really the thread that showed during my career in the companies I worked for after grad school.
The same choice, show up, maintain what’s comfortable, or transform towards what’s possible. And, that’s the basis of the book I published, but some concepts that I’ve used in the past and I continue to use throughout my career.
Chris Gaffney: Carlos, I do wanna dig into one of the concepts that you speak to and you referenced just in this last story, is this, this whole idea of a lattice versus a ladder.
And clearly you had some extraordinary [00:03:00] motivations in your case, but you have made the point that these lateral moves, in some cases as you referenced taking a step back, ultimately creates, breadth, across all, m- all if not many key elements or key capabilities needed for success in leading supply chain.
So l- let’s talk about that from your vantage point and the perspective that you offer to those that you guide and mentor.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: No, I think la- lattice versus ladder is a great concept. I believe most careers are evaluated, by the title, and I think it’s the wrong measurement.
Definitely titles are visible, but capability is actually, what compounds and, quietly and it does over time. So chasing the title or chasing your next title too fast I think creates a trap. you start believing that if you’re not moving up, you’re not moving forward, and I think that makes or leads people to take bad decisions.
number one, [00:04:00] you learn faster because you keep walking into unfamiliar situations instead of getting deeper in one. you build better judgment, because you hit different problems, different cultures, you learn different operating models.
And third you build empathy, because you remember what it felt to be new and maybe underestimated. so I think the real metric isn’t the title, it’s range, which I define as the ability to diagnose quickly, build trust and lead across, complexity, which is exactly what senior roles actually require.
if you look back in my career, it didn’t move in a straight line. I moved countries, I start over more than once. I step into roles where I had to prove myself again and again, and none of that looked like, the traditional progress on paper. But, it’s exactly what build the range, and that range matter later in my career
Rodney Apple: so Carlos, you talk about owning your development, so like your personal development, and, the striking [00:05:00] that balance between what your employer, what your boss, thinks you need to learn and suggests you need to learn, and then, how do you develop that into a, a, a individual development plan.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah. I think owning your development requires a mind- mindset shift. you gotta think about that as, as, as you are the CEO of your own career, not a passenger waiting, for someone to notice you. That means changing your language, right? So there are a lot of people waiting to be trained, right?
You gotta change that mindset and start thinking about, I will learn this. I will own it. I will figure it out. I will ask. I think that mindset ne- needs to shift, a little bit. if you feel stuck, I think the, the honest first question will be, where have I been choosing comfort without noticing it?
I think comfort is the real enemy of development, not lack of opportunity. So the moment you stop stretching, I think is the moment you stop [00:06:00] accelerating. In practice, that means, four things for me. Ask the work nobody else wants, right? It could be the broken process, the unfamiliar metric.
fix the constraint that actually is holding you back not the strength you are wor- you’re good at. Think about golf. If you’re really good with the driver, stop hitting balls. You go and do practice more putting, right? You’re already good at driving. You just focus on the stroke that, that you’re not good at it.
seek out feedback that stings, right? you gotta look out for the constructive feedback, the feedback you’re not gonna like necessarily. build a weekly habit, right? at the end of the week, you ask yourself, “What did I learn this week?
where did I avoid discomfort? and what do I need to do next to improve?” when I moved to the US, I realized, my gap wasn’t necessarily intelligence work ethic, but it was communication. So instead of waiting for someone to fix it for me, I built and taught at [00:07:00] H-E-B my own class on warehouse financials for supervisors.
So teaching forced me to simplify and communicate clearly. So that one decision definitely paid off the, for the rest of my career.
Rodney Apple: Wonderful advice. Thank you
Chris Gaffney: Carlos, you had the opportunity, once you get into a business like an H-E-B, people leadership comes quickly, from my own perspective.
So you were gifted with that opportunity there. We always get into this debate of the distinction between a manager and a leader, and you have a phrase, the leading from the driver’s seat, as, one of the, the catalysts of the differentiation between them. in your words, what does that mean, and what’s important about the change when someone truly begins taking ownership as a leader?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I think, there’s a moment every leader hits, and I describe it as a difference between sitting in the passenger seat or sitting in the driver’s seat and taking the wheel. [00:08:00] You can be in the same car going to the same destination and still have completely different jobs.
when you think about the passengers, they can relax, they can take a nap, they can be watching videos on their phone, and drivers can’t. They’re watching the road, they’re anticipating what’s coming, they’re adjusting in real time, and if something goes wrong, nobody’s gonna look at the passengers, right?
they always look at the driver. And, most importantly, the driver is responsible for everybody in the car. So if you’re not willing to take that responsibility, do not sit in the driver’s seat. I think that shift is the shift really from manager to a leader.
it’s not about the title, authority can come with the title, but ownership doesn’t. and when you sit in the driver’s seat is when you actually take ownership of the outcomes. so what actually changes with this concept, right? when you wanna be a leader versus manager.
I think three things happen. First, your posture. [00:09:00] I think you stop waiting for clarity or permission and start acting on imperfect information. second is how your team sees you, when you consistently take responsibility when things go wrong and consistently share the credit when they go right.
and follow through, especially when it’s hard. And third, the part that people don’t necessarily expect is your authority actually grows. You don’t start with full control, I think nobody does, but, as, as leaders, who build real influence, they didn’t wait for that control to be handed to them.
I always say, if you wanna be a leader, you gotta start acting like a leader before you get the role
Rodney Apple: so Carlos, just following that, analogy with, driving the car. Let’s say you’re comfortable operating behind the wheel, but you’ve got some seats to fill, on the car.
maybe it’s a bus. It’s got to be a larger team. what’s some of, the signals that you look for, for [00:10:00] those that may be budding in their leadership? What’s that genuine leadership potential, versus someone that’s a just a really strong individual contributor?
what are those telltale signs?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah. Rodney, when I’m evaluating someone, I’m interested in the resume, but I also look for other things. I look on how they talk about setbacks. Do they own what happened or they explain it away? I think that tells me, more than just looking at the results themselves.
I think evaluating talent and spotting leadership, potential, I think there are two different questions. As strong performer, make themselves indispensable. the best selector doesn’t mean can be a good supervisor. The best supervisor doesn’t mean can be the best manager or a good manager.
someone with real leadership potential does the, I think does the opposite. They make people around them less dependent on them and they do it in purpose. so I… The signals I actually watch for, w- [00:11:00] especially for internal talent, I I watch, for, do they take ownership for something nobody assigned them?
Do they start making people around them better without being asked to? and when I give them feedback that actually stings, not the typical pat on the back, do they get curious or do they get defensive?
“Oh, how’s your attendance?” “It’s great. I’m always here.” “How’s your productivity?” “Oh I’m over the, the minimum expected.” “Your, how’s your safety?” “Oh, I haven’t had any incidents for a while.” “Okay, great. That’s what is expected to you. how many committees are you part of?” no.” “How many of the extra days do, do you sign up to?
are you part of a project or s- what else are you doing? Are you cross-training in another function?” Those things that are not part of their normal job description they’re not doing. They just think performance should be taking me to the next level and that’s… I don’t agree with that.
You gotta go above and beyond and you gotta start, doing the things that that you feel you need and that nobody’s asking you to do. I think, those [00:12:00] three things I mentioned, you know, tell me whether it will make everyone, the, this person can be, can make everyone around them better tomorrow.
Chris Gaffney: I’m gonna continue down the leadership path and I know you’ve seen it, I’ve seen it. One of the things that’s a great conundrum because it, y- an individual is impacted, but usually a team is impacted is when a leader allows underperformance to fester, because that individual is diminished, but the other employees may feel an, an, an inequity like, “Hey, this person’s not being held to the same standard,” and that creates a cultural issue there.
In your mind, h- how did you approach these type of situations in terms of raising the bar of expectations while at the same time, maintaining that environment where people feel like that they’re supported and have the opportunity to be developed and maintain their own motivation?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I think most leaders assume raising the bar costs you [00:13:00] support and morale. And I found in my experience the opposite. I think teams feel safer when standards are clear and consistently enforced. That’s a, something very important.
’cause otherwise ambiguity creates more anxiety than accountability does. So here’s why think tolerating underperformance is so expensive. I don’t think any leader wakes up to and decides to lower the bar, you are, you- we’re all busy, we’re all under pressure and sometimes we feel like holding the line in that moment feels like it will cost more than what it’s worth.
So eventually, the teams learn that the standard was never real, the, really the standard, and because the culture moves with the line. And that sentence sounds practical, right? But it’s actually expensive because the moment you hire to relieve pressure, instead of raising the bar and meeting your standards for selecting somebody to be part of [00:14:00] your team, you have turned a staffing problem into a culture problem.
that’s how you raise the standard and keep people supported at the same time, not through pressure, but through clarity. I don’t think people lose motivation when the standard is high. I think they lose motivation when the standard keeps moving.
Rodney Apple: What are your thoughts, Carlos, as it relates to developing leaders that can eventually replace yourself? that’s one of the highest forms of leadership.
But, how do you intentionally build that type of bench strength? ‘Cause we see a lot of companies, struggle in this department- Yeah … especially these days. And, why do you think people, leaders struggle with this, with this bench strength building?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah, I think results can scale, systems can scale, and processes can scale, but leadership only scales when you build more of it.
so I always say strong teams execute, but strong leaders multiply. So the way I actually build [00:15:00] bench strength is by giving people real ownership before they feel ready. Not recklessly, but, intentionally. Examples like le- let someone run the meeting, let someone own a metric, let someone, drive or be a project leader.
that requires time and commitment, right? ‘Cause, we’re all busy. We all have, our responsibilities and doing something extra, sometimes people are not interested in doing or leaders are not in- interested in assigning and coaching and monitoring.
So in my opinion, that process builds confidence through doing it versus, not through being told about it. and when I’m coaching them through it, I’m not just acting like, “Hey, did you get this done?” I’m more interested in learning who they are becoming and what are they learning, by doing it.
I think it’s because it’s a maintain or transform choice. staying the hero is the maintain [00:16:00] option, holding the knowledge, solving every problem yourself, not willing to invest the time or they… some leaders just wanna keep the control. That probably feels safer in the short term, but transforming means, handing over real responsibility and, most importantly, living with someone, learning through a mistake.
You gotta let your team make mistakes because that’s how they experience that situation, and that’s how you coach them through it, and that’s how they learn. Sometimes we are stepping in right away to prevent the mistake when, some mistakes need to happen for developing your team.
If I left tomorrow, does the team sustain performance? If the answer is no, I build dependency, right? if the answer is yes I build leaders
Chris Gaffney: Yeah I will ask a follow-up on that one because I think, it… I think it’s implicit and in many s- cases explicit in the discussion so far is that you believe that, you [00:17:00] win with people.
in- interestingly enough, in an organization that’s results driven, and you and I have re- worked for results driven organization, it can be a bit of a paradox when you say, “We gotta let people make mistakes,” ’cause the boss may say, “Yeah, but that’s dollars dripping on the floor if that happens.” And, you’re making a bit of a long play that says, “No I’ve gotta have, I’ve gotta have some things occur so that over time we get better.”
And I don’t know how you give the air cover around that or how you’ve talked to your leaders about this philosophy.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah. It depends on the situation, but every, every change has the J curve, right? So when you implement the change or a new process or something different, normally performance goes, it’s hurt a little bit a- and then will improve, right?
So that is a great opportunity to, let people own some of that change and, experience that J curve during the process and use that to, to coach them and let them make mistakes.
But in some other cases, we gotta think [00:18:00] about what opportunities can we offer our team for development where we can afford, being late or do it three times, right? So not everything is critical or impact, the financials of the organization.
Chris Gaffney: we’ve talked about your book. You mentioned the title, Maintain or Transform. I want to dive into kind of a, a key central point in that.
And, our audience either has or aspires to walk into a situation where they’re inheriting a team, an operation, or even an organization. And the question becomes, in your assessment walking in the door how do you determine whether you say, “Hey, this is a, a CI situation,” right? “They’ve got good things going, and I gotta be in a continuous improvement mindset,” or say this requires transformation, and I’ve got to break some eggs”?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I think when I inherit an operation, my first question isn’t what should I change? I think, you gotta [00:19:00] learn the business, you gotta learn the people, you gotta get a, a really good idea of what has been done before, what was… what didn’t work before or what worked well before.
just to, figure if this is an execution problem or is a model problem. I think most leaders skip that question, and then performance gaps show up, and the, the instinct is to jump immediately to redesign, either new systems, we need new structure, or we need new everything, right? So I think that’s usually a mistake in, in, in one direction or the other.
Over-transform, and you can create disruption you didn’t need. And under-transform and you can cap how far the business can actually scale. So s- in some situations, you gotta look at the whole operation, the whole problem as a whole, but, sometimes you gotta look at it piece by piece. So some parts just need stronger standards and better execution, so the model is fine and the [00:20:00] discipline isn’t.
Or sometimes, the, the whole thing needs a complete rebuild, either through network redesign or defining inventory policies and or how the process actually works. a, a real example in my career, I’ll share quickly. when we launched a new product category into existing distribution network, the question we kept coming back was, how do we absorb this volume without breaking what is already working?
that lead us to design a hub-and-spoke model in California where we transformed how inventory was positioned for the new category while protecting the standards and execution of the core business that didn’t need to change at all. so I think that’s a real skill, not necessarily defaulting to transformation because it feels more decisive or not defaulting, to maintaining because, change, like always, is uncomfortable.
But I think the, it’s a diagnosing which parts of the operation actually need which is [00:21:00] the answer.
Rodney Apple: And Carlos, as it relates to transformation, and, we certainly have seen over the years, many of them fail. a lot of it has to do with, getting, everyone along with the change and then the and sustaining it. and one of your principles is that people don’t necessarily resist the change, they resist the confusion or silence, not sure what’s going on.
What have you learned about bringing people along through a major transformation as opposed to that change just happening to them reactively?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I don’t think people actually resist change, as you mentioned. I’m always a believer that they resist confusion and silence.
So when people don’t know what’s happening, they fill the gap with assumptions, right? Period. And, that actually turns fear into disengagement. And when you are going through a transformation process, you need an engaged workforce. So I don’t think my job is to eliminate uncertainty, right? I don’t think nobody can promise certainty during a real [00:22:00] transformation process, but my job is to eliminate confusion.
So I always start with the why. Why this is happening, what problem it solves, and what staying the same would actually cost us. And people don’t need perfect answers. sometimes leaders struggle because they don’t have all the answers.
They need clear direction. And even if I don’t have every answer myself, I can still, tell people what I know, what I don’t know, and when they will know more. I think that transparency builds trust faster than, certainty ever does. I think another lesson is that change isn’t just a message, it’s a system.
Without clear roles, milestones, and early wins, that change turns into noise. So I saw this directly when we roll out an automated system to help selectors pick slow-moving items in a large distribution center. The operational case was definitely [00:23:00] there and it was clear, but the human reaction wasn’t.
So people worry about, head count and whether the standard was about to get harder or not. And, the first few weeks were rough, right? You’re implementing new technology, everybody process life changed. but what got us through was not necessarily the technology, it was over-communicating the why, right?
and making sure people saw small win or wins early, so they believed that the plan was real.
Chris Gaffney: Carlos, another leadership question, that’s I think a big question for lots of people of this concept of leading at scale. For some folks, leading a site is a, a career accomplishment. For some people, multi-site leadership is a big accomplishment. But leading a, a massive network or a portion of a large network is a different skill set.
And you’ve led i- in roles thousands of people over, many sites, more [00:24:00] than 50 sites, and that’s a different game. And so I’m curious from your perspective, what changes when you’re operating at that scale? and, to your point, how did you prepare for that and how did you grow through that?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah, that’s a great question.
At scale, when you look at the at scale in my past role, over 50 locations, thousands of people in my team, you physically cannot be in the room for most decisions that affect the business at any given time, period.
So I think what changes is this, your job stops being about what you personally do and becomes about what the organization can do consistently without you in the room. I think that shows up for me in, in, in two, different ways. So first, standards and systems have to do the work your presence or your team’s presence [00:25:00] used to do in the past.
Standards and systems. so for example, we standardize how facilities were laid out and built, throughout the Rice network and set a simple set of five metrics, which we call Focus 5, with the intent so any leader at any location knew exactly what mattered without me or my team repeating it every week.
And second, it comes down to whether the leaders you have developed are trusted to make the same call you or your team would have made. So that’s part of the go back to the development and empowering your team to make decisions and, own the outcomes and hold them accountable to those outcomes.
So if I have to personally weigh in on a decision at location 31, I think I’ve already failed to build the bench that scale requires
Rodney Apple: Yeah, switching gears over into the technology sector, and, as you mentioned, [00:26:00] you’ve, got a lot of experience implementing various, technology solutions and, automation equipment as well. but as the supply chains become more, automated, with, AI coming into the mix, in, in a meaningful way, what becomes more important about the people, the talent, skills and leadership? What becomes less important?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I think it’s a very good question, very relevant in these days.
I think for me, every automation project or every, technology implementation project I’ve led has taught me the same lesson. the technology case is usually the easy part. Not 100% of the times, right? But the majority of the times, that is the easy part. The hard part is the part that actually determines w- whether it works or not.
It’s trust, it’s communication, it’s helping people navigate the system that just changed ordi- underneath them. as things get more automated, I think three things become more important, not less important. first [00:27:00] is communication because even when changes, or even when change is framed as pure efficiency, normally technology does that, people hear something else.
second is judgment, right? Because someone still has to decide what the system can. You think about some systems, the systems are helping people make decisions faster, right? Not necessarily will replace the people making those decisions.
They always have to look at the exception, the edge case, the situation nobody coded for. And again, it depends on the, on what technology are we talking about. And last is standards, right? ‘Cause automation doesn’t necessarily remove the need for a leader who holds the line on what goods look like.
I roll out, automation at multiple sides, long tail picking systems, full warehouse conversions, and every one of them succeeded or struggle based on the people side, not the technology. The machines were rarely the hard part.
Chris Gaffney: Carlos [00:28:00] we’ve covered a lot of ground. One of my favorite questions, as, as you have described the breadth of your experience from Mexico to MIT to working in, some of the largest distribution companies in the US, if you had to send a note that would show up in the mail to your younger self 25 years ago, like some Back to the Future movie, w- what would you want to have shown up in that letter that would’ve made a difference for you?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah. If I’m honest with my younger self, I would say, “Hey, move, move toward what’s difficult, not away from it.” Not necessarily that I have done it. I think I did it throughout my career, but i- in many cases, I really was struggling to make the right decision. move away from comfort,” right? The comfort feels like safety, but over time is the most expensive thing, there is. I would say what doesn’t cost you anything doesn’t build you into anything either. I will [00:29:00] tell him, to ask for the assignments that nobody else wants, the hard operation, the complicated thing, the project with no playbook, and that, that’s what it actually builds capability, a- and capability differentiates you 10 years later, right?
Not the easy wins are the ones that make a difference o- on your career. Leadership isn’t a race. It’s a journey shaped by experiences and not by timelines. Every decision I, I made in this country, was towards, uncertainty, not towards safety, not because I was brave or because, but because I understood uncertainty was the price of transformation.
So multiple times when I struggled to make the right decision, I w- I would like to hear from my me in the future, right? “Hey, it’s worth it. It’s tough, but that- that’s gonna build capabilities in your career that would later differentiate you.” And I think that’s what happened with all, everything I did in H-E-B and C&S.
My first [00:30:00] year at Reyes as general manager, I was able to, run the operations for the whole country and later become chief supply chain officer, not because I was expert in everything, ’cause I knew a lot, and I did a lot of jobs and move around, laterally, in some cases downwards, and, all those experiences, shaped me who I am now, and that was a big difference of me, moving forward in my career.
Rodney Apple: Good stuff, Carlos. You made me think of a book that I was handed along with, I think, every other employee, in their onboarding experience, when I started in 1995 in staffing. It’s called Danger in the Comfort Zone. I’m not sure if you’ve heard of that or not. but it is, very much about some of the concepts that you’ve talked about today, just getting comfort with, that comfort zone versus exploring, the, the paths has, that haven’t been chartered.
more about your book, could you maybe just give us a quick, overview of, what led you to, to, to write the book? What’s it about? Who would it benefit? What will, readers, learn from reading the book?
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Yeah [00:31:00] I think the idea of the book didn’t start as a book.
it was a leadership journey conversation. my son was at The Citadel, a military college in South Carolina, and they have what they call Leadership Day, where students go to different companies in the region to learn about the business and what they do. and they ask leaders to put together a presentation to share their career, their career path or career journey.
I volunteer our facility in Summerville, South Carolina to do this a few years back, and I put together a 45-minute presentation about my leadership journey and, that… It was very well received, not only for the students, but for the, for my team at that facility, that they knew me but they didn’t know a lot of the things about my journey.
so I improved that presentation, and I was giving it away in the company, to the point that in, in 2024, we have a, a massive operations and supply chain meeting with, over 180 leaders across the country, and [00:32:00] I put that in the agenda, and it was very well received. in the last year, I’ve been in a professional transition, but during that time, I revisited the idea of s- doing something more with that, presentation and that translated and ended up into writing a book.
pretty much putting my, the 25 years of leadership lessons into the book. I wrote it in English and published it in March, of this year, and I just translated into Spanish and published it a few weeks ago. and I’m working as we speak in the audiobooks. It will be my voice now writing the book in Spanish, and, but I’m still thinking about the English version.
I think the book is about, how lead through change, how build, strong teams a- and how to lead through complexity, I think. It doesn’t matter if you’re early in your career or you’re a mid manager that potentially, feel trap or stuck and they need a different cons- different concepts to reengage in their career or [00:33:00] you’re an, a more experienced leader, thinking about new concepts to continue improving and leading at scale.
Or maybe you’re a leader like me in the middle of a transition and you wanna just learning, some concepts for what is next in, in your career
Rodney Apple: So congrats on the book. It’s Maintain- Thank you … or Transform. Maintain or Transform, and it- I’m assuming we can pick that up at, the usual suspects, Amazon and, your bookstore- Yeah
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: I think the best way is in Amazon. You can search by Maintain or Transform. There’s, the hardcover, paperback, and e-book, available. Or if you wanna read it in Spanish, just put Mantener o Transformar in Amazon. It’s the same three formats. and I think we can put the link in the show notes, but you- Yes
in Amazon you’ll find it.
Rodney Apple: Carlos, thank you so much for making the time today, and we appreciate you joining the Supply Chain Careers podcast and sharing all of your wonderful nuggets of advice and your career journey as well.
Carlos Gutierrez Ferrete: Thank you, Chris, Rodney. Thank you for [00:34:00] having me.
I really enjoyed the conversation, and, I look forward to, collaborating in the future again.
