Jen's Favorite Training Toys

Today I’ve got my Corporate Trainer hat— if you do too, I want to know:

Do you use toys in your classroom session?

I’ve been bringing what I call Fiddle Toys to my classroom learning sessions for nearly 20 years and they’re always a hit.  I find that giving learners something active to do with their hands not only helps them stay mentally focused, but it also is a help to those who are kinesthetic learners. Even grumpy, non-engaged participants will eventually loosen up a bit and find a reason to touch one of the items placed in the center of their table.

Because toys do wear out, I’ve been looking at refreshing my stash. That’s prompted a reflection on my criteria for appropriate Fiddle Toys.

My fiddle toys must be:

• Durable
• Quiet
• Safe—can’t pinch people or somehow “rub off” on them with ink
• Something that doesn’t invite too much “play”/interaction with another person

Also, a common toy that I’ve seen used is something “filled”—squishy items filled with gel, liquid or sand.  I’ve tried them all and have given up. Believe it or not, I’ve seen all three types destroyed by someone with just a tad too tight a grip.  You can imagine the mess.  At that point, the toy creates more distraction than focus. 

The biggest hits over the years of “typical” toys have been:

-Mini-Etch-A-Sketch

-Silly Putty

-Rubick’s Cube

-Slinkys

-Pipe cleaners

I’ve had also great success going to my local novelty shop, Kent Novelty. The prices are so much cheaper than any other retail outlet.  As a bonus, a trip to the novelty store is an instant stress-reducer. I took a picture of what’s in my Toy Bag (you knew I’d have one, didn’t you?) My favorites are shown above. A few other tips:

1. Aim for 2-3 extra toys per grouping of six people.  Nobody likes to feel like they got the “last toy of the bunch”.
2. Pay attention to the most popular toy and be sure there’s one at every table. I’ve even heard people negotiating for different toys during breaks.
3. Make the toys part of an ice-breaker. Put the same toys with varying colors (say, “stretchy guys”) on the table. Ask everyone to take a toy and create new discussion groups according to the color of the toy they selected.

So, if you’re looking to increase your classroom participants’ focus and participation, try tossing a few toys in to the mix and see what happens. Encouraging people to be childlike (curious, experimental) with the toys make indeed decrease their tendency to be childish (immature, uncooperative).

KNOWING WHEN TO ZIP YOUR LIP IS KEY TO SUCCESS

Given that my company’s tag line is “master the people equation”, I’m always on the look-out for clever “equations” that tie to human dynamics. Of course, people are far too complex to be reduced to one “correct” answer like a math equation. Still, it’s fun when I discover one that seems to make sense if not in scientific way, at least in an intuitive one.

So it was with great delight that I read colleague Kevin Grossman’s Facebook post. Kevin is a Principal Partner for The Glowan Consulting Group and a fellow leadership development consultant.

“If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X+Y+Z, where X is work, Y is play, and Z is keep your mouth shut.” ~ Albert Einstein

A prominent 20^th century scientist weighs in on the human condition, acknowledging both work and play in an equation.  The added bonus of knowing when to keep one’s mouth shut is the “twist” that makes this equation so clever. Call it “The Z Factor”— the Zipping of the Lip.

Zipping one’s lips is far easier said than done.  How many times have you been tempted lash out with a scathing retort to a colleague’s thoughtless comment? In these cases, you need to take the high road, as Sharlyn Lauby reminds us over at The HR Bartender. Taking the high road requires emotional control, and Sharlyn highlights some important reasons to do so. She also emphasizes that not speaking up when you observe something illegal, immoral or unethical amounts to tacit approval.

Beyond ethical and legal situations that compel you to speak, there are many other situations that may warrant silence. Maybe it’s not an emotional outburst that you’re stifling, but rather you’ve witnessed a breach in work etiquette or a show of poor judgment. When these dilemmas present themselves, you’re faced with an internal dialog of “should I say something or not?”  Here are some questions you can ask yourself to determine if (or perhaps when) you should speak up:

What’s my intention in speaking up?  Being clear on your intent can help you determine if it’s misguided or not.  Perhaps you intend to “help” but it’s possible that speaking up will only make matters worse. If you aren’t in a position to fix or change what you’re addressing, it may not be helpful to broach the subject.

Is the timing right? Timing is key—sometimes it’s best to strike while the iron is hot, so that the details are fresh.  However, you also need to consider the recipient’s frame of mind and your location.  If it’s an emotionally charged situation, it’s best to allow for a cool-down period and a private place for conversation.

Is this my issue to own? Sometimes we insert ourselves where we have no business being.  This is particularly true in the workplace. There’s a fine line between being a good friend and an intrusive (yet well-meaning) colleague. Leave performance discussions to the person’s supervisor.

What are the consequences? Think through the potential consequences, both positive and negative.  How might this hurt the person? How might it help them? Sometimes the consequences may be severe, but in your heart you think it’s best to speak up. If you’ve thought through the issues, at least you’ll be prepared no matter what the outcome.

Awareness of the Z Factor is a key relational skill for business success. Moreover, it’s been shown to increase your health— allowing you to avoid the dreaded Foot-in-Mouth disease.  So, next time you’re tempted to sound off, run through a mental checklist and be sure it’s in the best interest of all parties involved before you get involved.

Photo credit: istockphoto.com © Nikola Bilic

ENLIST YOUR AUDIENCE TO MAKE THE LOAD LIGHTER

Ever go to a conference break out session and experience 90 minutes of lecture, paired with the never-ending Power Point slide deck?  It’s not a very engaging experience, is it?  Now, imagine attending a four-hour conference break out session, with 70 other people in the room with you. This was my situation recently as I facilitated a communications break out session at a client’s internal leadership conference. Knowing that conference attendees want to be engaged in their learning, I decided to get creative with the management of the session’s discussions. Here’s what I did and it worked beautifully.  If you are ever in a situation that requires you to work with a large audience, give this “Sector Director” format a try.

Prior to the Session

Divide the room into “sectors”. For example, in my session, the hotel meeting room had nine round tables in it. So I created three “sectors” with 3 tables each: Red, Green Yellow. On each table, I placed a piece of colored card stock (red, green or yellow) in a place card holder on the middle of each table.

I then selected three chairs (one within each of the sectors) and taped an envelope to the underside of it.  Inside the envelope was a note that said, “Congratulations! You’ve been promoted to Sector Director. Please come to the front of the room for additional instructions.”

At the Session’s Start

Towards the start of the session, explain that you want to ensure that all participants have a chance to have their voices heard. In order to do that, you as the facilitator are going to seek assistance. Tell the group to reach under their chairs. Bring the three people who find the envelopes up to the front of the room. Introduce them and say, I’ve promoted (names) to Sector Director.  They will help me manage group discussions.  Brief the Sector Director on their duties. To keep the remainder of the group occupied during this 3-5 minute briefing, give them a question or issue to discuss that’s related to your presentation topic.

Here are the tasks that Sector Directors can help you with: 

• Distribute hand outs. 
• Lead discussions within their sectors.
• Facilitate debriefing of other activities. For example, one activity had my participants pairing up with two or three other people throughout the room to gather data. Then, I sent them back to their sectors to report their findings.
• Helping round up people and get them back from breaks.
• Ensuring that table groups selected a spokesperson for large-group report outs.

Encourage the Sector Directors to delegate if needed. For example, if the Director doesn’t care to write on large flip chart paper, she can ask someone from her Sector to take over that role.

Does It Work?

I facilitated the communications session three times over a two-day period, which presented me with nine Sector Directors. I gave all nine of them the chance to opt out, but none did.  Eight of the nine did a fantastic job and the ninth one needed just a bit of prompting to stay on task. In my opinion, the extra 10 minutes of session time needed to set up this format was time well-invested. The smaller sector groups were able to have more focused conversations, with people feeling more like they could contribute. Additionally, I had an extra three pairs of hands to help me get the 70 participants re-focused after the Sector Discussions.

Next time you’re asked to facilitate a large discussion—in either a learning or meeting context, consider delegating to your audience.  You’ll find that indeed, “a few extra hands” do make the work of managing discussions a bit lighter.

I’ll say it: men and women are different.  By many measures—physically, biologically, brain chemistry, shoe choice—we are different. 

We are the same, too.  We like to laugh. We are fierce protectors of those we love.  We seek meaningful work to occupy our time.

Can both men and women reconcile these two disparate notions and be effective leaders? If you read the business literature and believe what the media tells us, apparently not.

In my business reading, I see it time and time again—the pitting of men “against” women or vice versa as a model of leadership effectiveness.  For the longest time, the “male” or “masculine” archetype was the business model to aspire to.  This was certainly my experience when I entered the workforce in the mid-1980’s.

Over the past two decades, the tide has turned and now, it appears, it’s we woman who are “better” in the leadership arena. There is no shortage of articles touting research of the latest “proof” that women make better managers. For example, last year journalists Katty Kay and Claire Shipman wrote the book Womenics and declared in a Washington Post article—Fixing the Economy: It’s Woman’s Work.  Last month, the Atlantic Magazine published an article called The End of Men, chronicling the social and economic factors that are slowly shifting in favor of women.

Yes, I’m proud of the strides we women have made in our impact as leaders in the business world. In my opinion, it’s not necessary that the other (roughly) half of the population has to be marginalized in the process. Feminist Gloria Steinem makes the same observation.  In an interview with Katie Couric, Ms. Steinem and Women’s Media Center director Jehmu Greene discussed issues surrounding women’s equality.  During the interview, Couric asked what they were most disappointed in regarding the conversation about women’s issues. Steinem replied:

I think that we haven’t made a dent . . . in the idea that somebody has to win. We’re still living in an “either/or” culture, not in an “and” culture. We’re still ranking instead of linking. We still have a sort of hierarchical view of life instead of a circle. And actually for most of human history, we’ve lived the other way. It’s been about linking, not ranking. The circle was the paradigm of society.

Any list of effective leadership traits will contain elements of both the “feminine” and the “masculine”. When it comes to a leadership approach, it’s not “which approach—feminine or masculine?” but rather “which one when?” There is a time and place for both styles. My advice to leaders is to learn how to capitalize on your unique strengths, be they the “typical” domain of the masculine, the feminine, or perhaps some as-yet-undefined third domain that successfully combines the two. As a business community (and society) we benefit by integrating the best of what both genders have to offer.

photo credit: istockphoto.com © Vasiliy Yakobchuk

Given my love of words, I subscribe to Thinkmap’s Visual Thesaurus. Each day, I look forward to an email from Thinkmap’s Word of the Day. (Yes, I’m that geeky.) Today’s word is “erudite”.  It means “having or showing profound knowledge”. Don’t you just love how it trips off your tongue? Say it with me: erudite.

Beyond being fun to say, the roots of this word are cool too. The word erudite is related to the word “rude”.  My Word of the Day email informed, “erudite is from a Latin verb that means instruct, which is, in essence, to get the rudeness out”.

I love this! As a corporate trainer, my goal is to help facilitate learning rather than be a Sage on the Stage, offering up my volumes of wisdom.  In an adult learning environment, there’s nothing ruder than an arrogant person at the front of the room, pontificating. The same goes for leadership.  People learn a lot from their leaders, whether the leaders is conscious of doing the “teaching” or not. Every day, leaders have the opportunity to instruct their employees, whether in a coaching role, or as a role model demonstrating the company values. It’s up to the leader in how he or she wants to teach: with humility or with arrogance.

I’m going to turn the “word of the day” into a “thought for the day”— at work, would someone describe you as “erudite”? Are you seen as someone who is constantly striving to help others learn, while keeping the rudeness out?

Perfection Messing Up Your Corporate Mojo?

Have you ever noticed how pervasive “perfection” is in our language?

• The phrase “perfect storm” is used to describe a “rare combination of circumstances will aggravate a situation drastically”.
• Last month, ump Jim Joyce ruined a “perfect” game for Detroit Tiger pitcher Armando Galarraga.
• Recently, corporate success coach Ann Farrell ruminated on striving for the “perfect” life.

Perfectionism isn’t limited to solely to our language, either. As a practice, The Quest for Perfect shows up on a regular basis in the workplace, most typically as a byproduct of a company’s culture.

When thinking of how workplace culture shapes employee behavior, a senior leadership work team that I consulted with comes to mind. The team was comprised of the top six leaders of a small manufacturing company and they were grappling with trust issues..  We were working offsite, trying to come up with some workable operating guidelines to ensure a more trusting, productive environment.  At one point, a Vice President bravely stepped out and said, “We are so demanding of each other, there’s absolutely no room for mistakes.” We explored this issue for a few minutes, with several people contributing their perspectives.

Finally, the leader of the team (who held the title General Manager) blurted out in frustration, “Jennifer, you simply don’t understand!  Quality is one of our company’s core values.  We’re at nearly zero defects per million on our products.  We live and breathe perfection. It’s who we are.”

Yes, indeed, Mr. General Manager. Your Culture of Perfection, while admirable for creating superior products, is eroding the relationships of the senior management team.  Our discussion then took a very interesting turn in which I was able to share an alternate perspective on perfection:

Strive for perfection in process and grace with people.

A process doesn’t have feelings, but people do.  When team members demand relentless perfection of one another in the workplace, they create unrealistic expectations for both work output and interpersonal effectiveness.  This is not a call for tolerating mediocrity.  On the contrary, in the workplace people should continually seek process improvement. All the while, they must be mindful: The creatures in charge of the process are human. Mistakes happen.  People misjudge situations.  Tempers flare. As humans, it’s what we do. Expecting perfection in the way humans relate to one another is like expecting every golf game to have a hole-in-one shot. It’s unrealistic.

Back to our struggling leadership team— we invested time defining areas in which “perfection” was an appropriate goal, and situations in which we should encourage a more forgiving stance. We also discussed that pesky gray area of “good enough”. As you might expect, there were varying opinions on when something should be deemed “good enough” to pass inspection— be it a process, a document or an interpersonal relationship.  All in all, it was a fruitful discussion.  Even though we didn’t create the definitive list (there’s no “perfect” list, after all!), we did bring this issue out into the open and develop some perspective around it.

Here’s the rub. . . this company was “successful” by nearly every measure: commitment to its core values, profitability, steady growth, quality products and employee satisfaction.  The company’s culture highly influenced achievement in these metrics. That’s a good thing. Even so, this company still wasn’t perfect. All workplaces, even the highly productive and positive ones, have their downsides because corporate cultures, like the humans that comprise them, are dynamic, influential and yes, sometimes flawed.

The General Manager in my example had his eyes opened that day. He realized that the culture he helped to create, while enviable, still had it drawbacks. His company’s culture of perfection wasn’t so much a problem to be “fixed” so much as it was a dynamic to acknowledge and direct. Leaders of organizations who recognize this and create interpersonal practices that allow some slack are the ones who create vibrant, sustainable corporate cultures.  Imperfections and all.

Photo credit istockphoto.com © Robert Hadfield

Always flocking to the same network?

Have you noticed that when people attend meetings, go to networking events or participate in training classes that they tend to sit with people they already know?  In academic circles this is known as homophily - the tendency to associate with people of “similarity” or familiarity. This is sometimes called the “birds of a feather” phenomenon.

When it comes to social media use, I will occasionally fall into this trap as well, tending to read the same authors and bloggers that I know well and whose work I’ve enjoyed in the past. Today, with the publishing of Dan McCarthy’s July Leadership Carnival at the Great Leadership blog, I decided to break out of that mold and seek out authors with whom I’m unfamiliar.  Happily, my foraging uncovered some excellent reading.

Meg Bear (@megbear) blogs for Talented Apps (@talentedapps). She’s a self-described Talent Management aficionado and has recently written a couple of great posts that explore gender in the workplace.  Check out When Understated Becomes a Liability and Are Your Leadership Competencies Biased?

Alice Snell (@Taleo_Corp) blogs for Taleo, a Talent Management solutions provider. As Taleo’s VP for Research, Alice is at the forefront of all things Talent Management.  I’m definitely going pay attention to her professional expertise and opinions.

Bob Lieberman (@bob_lieberman) who blogs at Cultivating Creativity, specializes in helping companies be more creative. (And what company couldn’t use a little more of that?!)

So, do yourself a favor and check out a different flock this week. There are 36 featured authors in Dan’s Leadership Carnival round up.  There will be plenty of great reading—both from familiar favorites and some new voices as well.

Photo credit istockphoto.com © Greg Nicholas

Both of my kids are really into the stretchy bracelet craze. On the way to the grocery store today, my nine year old son remarked that one of his bracelets looked liked Medusa.  Feigning ignorance, I said, “Medusa? Who’s that?”  He replied, “You know, Mom, the mythological character who had snakes on top of her head.”

Of course, I know who Medusa is, but I wanted to know if my kid knew. Later, I realized that this conversation represented a technique honed during my years as a corporate trainer. I think of it as the “low-key testing for understanding.”  This method isn’t a new concept, of course. Greek philosopher Socrates is credited with creating a method to help people form their own conclusions by asking questions.  As a more contemporary example, Dave Meier, founder of The Center for Accelerated Learning, says “never do for the learners what they can do for themselves”. His point is that people know a lot more than we give them credit for.  Given the right tools and encouragement, people can usually figure things out for themselves.

Leaders can use this approach too. The primary objective of leadership is to bring out the best in one’s contributors. When a contributor has a procedural question or is facing a dilemma the “test for knowledge” technique is an excellent way to demonstrate a collaborative leadership approach. Leaders don’t develop others by being the “sage on the stage”; they help their contributors figure it out for themselves.

Back in my supervisory days, whenever my direct reports had a question about how to do something, I’d draw on this “test for knowledge” approach.  Instead of immediately launching into an explanation, I’d start by “testing” for what they already know with a question like, “What have you already tried to solve this problem?” or “Tell me which parts you’re clear about and which parts need clarification.” Doing this accomplishes two things. It: a) Saves time by avoiding a rehash of something the contributor already knows and b) Models open-ended questioning, which the contributor can in turn use with their colleagues.

After discussing the answers to the low-key understanding test, I would then follow up to help the contributor think through their options and uncover answers.  Some of my favorites inquiries:

• Do you know where to find the answer on the company intranet? Let’s go take a look and find it together.
• What part of the process is unclear to you?
• What are the pros and cons of this situation?
• If you decide on taking this action, what’s the worst thing that can happen?
• What’s your gut telling you?
• How can I support you in this decision?

Some say a leader’s job is to remove the barriers to their contributors’ performance. While this is true, a leader must resist the temptation to jump in to “fix” problem so that people can quickly move on with their day. By taking a few extra minutes to fully explore a contributor’s knowledge base, a leader will actually save time in the long run.  Beyond time-saving benefits, employee engagement will get a boost too. Contributors who are involved in solving their own problems gain confidence, which leads to future positive contribution.

Whenever you’re tempted to take the short cut, remember this: it’s not what you know, it’s what they learn. Do Socrates proud and use the low-key test for understanding.

Photo credit: istockphoto.com © Hans Laubel

Are you a business coach or an internal training and development professional that uses a 360° feedback process for professional development of your clients?  In general, I like the 360 process and have had good luck implementing them for clients.  However, it’s not all peachy-keen. A few of the “beefs” I have with the process is:

• The written comments from some raters are not constructive, are poorly written or are just plain snarky.
• It takes too long to complete a response form—sometimes up to 2 hours!
• Some of the 360 reports are too hard to interpret, or are an endless list of numerical ratings with little interpretive narrative.

I just finished up an informational webinar offered by Inscape Publishing to its authorized distributors (of which I’m one) on an exciting new product they are launching July 13, 2010. It’s a 360° feedback tool for leaders called Everything DiSC® 363™ for Leaders.

“363” = 360 process + 3 personalized strategies to improve leadership effectiveness.

Granted, I have a reason promote this tool*, but here are a few ways this new tool addresse the issues listed above.

• Even though the research is based on the DiSC model, readers don’t need to have a knowledge base of the DiSC model. The report feedback has a unique, stand-alone leadership model that stands apart from the DiSC model. So, if your company uses another “styles” program, you can still use this tool for professional development.
• It takes the “sting” out of traditional 360 feedback, by offering a proprietary “CommentSmart™” tool—a library of constructively worded comments in a pull-down menu that raters can choose from.
• It doesn’t take a lifetime to respond to the online form: It only takes 20- 30 minutes for the leaders and 15-20 minutes for raters to respond.
• It’s been heavily field-tested with 500 leaders and 3000+ raters.

This is hot-off-the-press information; I just finished the webinar 15 minutes ago.  If you are interested in learning more, check out the following resources and or/email me: jmiller@people-equation.com:

 Everything DiSC 363 Preview Brochure

Everything DiSC 363 for Leaders Sample Report

Take a peek.  Let me know what you think.  How does it compare to other 360’s you’ve used?

*Disclosure: SkillSource, the consulting company owned by me, is an authorized Independent Distributor of Inscape Publishing products.

The other day I was at a client’s office listening to a presentation.  The topic was how to effectively complete the company’s online timecard system. As the group was discussing the details of how to complete the online timecard, the talk turned to how to notify ones supervisor of impending PTO (Personal Time Off). One of the audience members piped up and said, “Well that’s easy— the XYZ system (not its real name) has a section in the upper right hand that says “Notifiy your supervisor via email.  All you have to do is click on the box.”  At which point someone else said, “Oh, that box?  It doesn’t do anything.”

“For real?”

“Yeah, for real. I learned the hard way.”

“Oh, man, I’ve been checking that box every time I file for PTO. You mean that my supervisor never gets an email?”

“Yep, pretty much.”

 The training participants looked to their instructor to verify that this was so.  Sheepishly, the instructor (who was a senior manager with the company) said Yes, it’s true. Actually, he did a marvelous job massaging the information so that the company didn’t look like it was hosting a total goat rodeo.

All the while, I’m quietly sitting in the back of the room thinking: Seriously?!  A section in an online employee timekeeping system that says “Check this box to notify your supervisor” and it’s not functional?  I felt like we were in a Dilbert comic strip. Back in the day, when I was in Human Resources, this kind of organizational idiocy made me crazy. (Although it is great fodder for comic strips and blog posts.)  I’m not in HR any more, but if I were counseling someone who is, this is what I’d recommend. . . 

Assess the Impact of the Situation

First of all, maybe nobody else thinks this is a big deal.  It seemed like a big deal during the training session, but it needs to be verified.  So, check in with your sources on the frontline throughout the organization (because, being the savvy HR person you are, of course you’re well networked). Send a few emails/phone calls to find out: how often does this happen? What’s the impact? Then, check in with a couple of folks in IT- what does it take to get this fixed? 

Let’s say that your frontline supervisors say, No Big Deal. Or, when you check with IT, it’s a battle that they’re not willing to help you with. It’s probably best to move on. You’ve got plenty of other fires to put out, right?

On the other hand, let’s say that your investigative work uncovers that it’s a problem and several miscommunications have occurred. Further, IT says it would not be a huge deal to fix (even if “fixing” means removing the check box altogether).

Build the Case

One of the great things about being in HR is you have great data at your fingertips.  So, you can quickly build a financial case about this issue:  estimate how many miscommunications occur as a result of employees mistakenly thinking they’ve communicated their absence to the supervisor.  Estimate the financial cost in monthly terms (hours productivity lost X average hourly wage= monthly productivity drain.) Then, contrast that with the estimated cost to fix it (average hourly IT wage X # of project hours to fix = investment). Numbers are the language of business. If the numbers are persuasive, move ahead. 

Gain Supporters

This is where it gets strategic. Think about who in the company might support this “fix it” project and (this is the important part) who also has the organizational influence to help you get it done. Pick one or two people who fit this bill. Sit down with them and explain the situation.  Show them how the company will benefit and share your financials. Enlist their support for when the project stalls.  Let them know you’ll give the periodic updates.

Execute the Plan

Once you get the go-ahead, circle back to the people you polled before. Ask: “I’ve been authorized to help get this fixed.  What else do I need to know before moving ahead?”  If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years, even seemingly simple projects like removing a check box from an online form have hidden pitfalls.  Another benefit of checking in with the people you tapped: it lets them know that you actually listened to their input and are taking action

Then, go make it happen.  Let’s say it takes 2 weeks months to get it done. (It always takes longer than planned, and let’s face it, this won’t be a high-priority project.) After the project is finished, you’re still not truly finished, because there’s one more thing and that’s . . .

Talk about the Success

I would advise my HR colleague in this situation to “talk it up” a bit when mentioning this project. Yes, toot your own horn, or a least toot the success of the project.  If you are going to be seen as a player who adds value to the company, then you have to be seen. Toiling away in some hidden back room is not the way to go. So be sure that you (again) circle back to those who helped you out: your colleagues in IT, supervisors on the frontline and your supporters in upper management.  A quick email will suffice.

Now, maybe these suggestions seem like a lot of work, all for the sake of fixing a broken button. Perhaps. But I ask you this: as a professional in HR, isn’t your role to make the workplace function more effectively and with less cost?  If that’s how you view your role, then this would be an ideal project to take on.