For over a decade, Nathan Wood has been a leading thinker in the construction world, driving the conversation around data connectivity, lean processes and more. Join us for a look at the state of integration and how its being moved forward.
Hugh Seaton: [00:00:00] Welcome to constructed futures. I'm Hugh Seaton. I'm here with Nathan Wood, the executive director of the construction progress coalition. Nathan, welcome to the podcast.
Nathan Wood: [00:00:16] Great to be here, here.
Hugh Seaton: [00:00:17] Awesome. So I want to talk about something near and dear to your heart. What we decided we would call the integration dilemma.
Tell us what you mean by that. And let's get into to how it's being solved.
Nathan Wood: [00:00:28] Oh, man. The integration dilemma, I guess we got to back up and explain what a shared pains are. Cause I think that this is something that's evolved since Sasha Reed and I got together with about eight or 10 other contractors in 2013 around PDFs that architects were, or engineers were sending to contractors and challenges with the quality of the data being passed.
And everything's always kind of come down to. Well, actually, it's not that there's not a standard. We talk about standards so much in this industry. The challenge is that we're, we're just not, we don't have processes and mechanics to adhere to, or enforce those standards. And so really when I, when I talked about the dilemma is the fact that we're not actually motivated to enforce and to adhere to these standards that we keep saying we need.
And so we keep spinning ourselves in circles, be behind, you know, what, what we need to do versus why we should do it in the first place.
Hugh Seaton: [00:01:15] Interesting. And let's talk about why we should do it in the first place. Let's start there or not start there, but maybe go there. Next is why, why should we be integrating.
Nathan Wood: [00:01:24] Why data, right? I mean this whole concept of data is the new oil I think is where you're seeing that the, the FANG stocks, all of the, the tech stocks in general, the reason they are successful is because of more of the data that they hold than is the, the core technology itself. And so data ownership is so huge and, and the ability to harness the power of that data.
And so construction is just now kind of entering that stage. I'm sure. Plenty of your podcasts. You've talked about the McKinsey graphing and why construction's, you know, just one step above agriculture and hunting. But what that tells me is that, yeah, we're, we're really ready to launch. We're kind of, we've been holding back on, on that boomerang or that Slingshot for a while now and ready, ready to move forward and connect all that data together and really see what insights and what we can learn to improve upon past mistakes and not make the same mistakes over again.
But we can't do that until we have good, reliable, healthy data.
Hugh Seaton: [00:02:20] And I think it, you know, we make analogies of between manufacturing. It's like the McKinsey thing you referenced you know, makes an analogy between, or a comparison rather between construction and manufacturing and, and that's really.
You know, the big takeoff in manufacturing productivity. I mean, the reality is if you make the same thing over and over again, you're going to get better at it. So that, that was, there was always productivity growth, but it really took off when data started to become part of it with, with the kind of adoption of lean and other kind of Japanese derived that were very statistical in how they work.
Are you seeing folks take some of those ideas into construction.
Nathan Wood: [00:02:58] So, so yes and no, cause I think, I think that's, that's one aspect of lean. I think there, there is the, the other aspect, which is the craft. I mean, I think too, too often folks look at the very systematic way that Toyota and others do it and, and don't recognize some of the, the, or other efforts that they do.
Like, you know, each person goes through each of these stations and actually, you know, has a lot of variation in skill sets. Whereas in our industry, you know, you work for the company that is your specialty. But because our industry is so unique. Almost like a painter, you know, you may, you may use the same oil or the same water or the same sculpture.
We know whatever your medium is. But everything you create is going to be a little bit different. And of course the more you do it, the better you're going to get at it. So I think we have to treat this as, you know, treat construction as more of an art than it is a science. But at the end of the day, there's always some level of science to, to the art form.
Hugh Seaton: [00:03:45] That's interesting. I love that you bring up that there's more to what makes lean certainly in manufacturing work than just the stats and just the con the statistical control. There's another thing they do called quality circles, which I think is, is, you know, another way that data can be really valuable.
And that is that people get together and review what's going on and say, how could we do this better? That's hard to do anecdotally, but it's, it's, that's where data can really make a difference. Are you, are you seeing that as an opportunity that you use data to kind of look at processes and optimize them?
Nathan Wood: [00:04:19] Let's actually go back to those, those two pillars of lean and just clarify that real quick. Cause yeah, like w what, what we were talking about, I think what you're just talking about, there is one pillar of continuous improvement. So yeah, with data with measurement comes improvements, in, quality, all those other aspects.
But on the other side is. Respect for the individual and, and this, you know, profound level of empathy and understanding, and kind of this, this more holistic worldview that says, yeah, everybody at the end of the day, regardless of their role is equally important in the, in the system. And that paradigm shift towards respect for the individual, regardless of their level within the organizational hierarchy.
That's a huge thing that is very un-American for us to do and, and where a lot of this, again, that dilemma comes in.
Hugh Seaton: [00:05:02] Interesting. Let's tie that back then to the original point, the integration dilemma? You know, we, we see, we've just kind of talked a little bit about how data may or may not help with different, different parts of improvement, but how do we get back to the integration dilemma? Where are you seeing that? So we talked a little bit about the why what's slowing it down.
Nathan Wood: [00:05:22] Yeah. So at least when I talk about integration and I know at least Chris Lynn Giza will agree with me how to know about others in the industry, but we we've used the term horizontal integration versus vertical integration. And so a horizontal integration is going to be across a company. It's going to be from an architect to a contractor or from a subcontractor to a GC or an owner. And so we're, we're passing outside of company and contract and liability, which adds this whole other layer of integration challenges because where we've been successful so far with integrations are typically your internal integrations.
My field app to my project management or my project management to my ERP within my corporate domain, my corporate firewall or my enterprise firewall. And so that's really where I think that we're seeing that shift now of can we start to get to more of this ecosystem where we're sharing things outside of our company and recognizing what we should or should not share.
What's a secure or not secure. And we're, we're frankly not ready to make a lot of those decisions because technology and who knows if we'll get into the blockchain discussion but existing technology, even APIs can handle those requirements. The problem is we don't know what requirements to tell the technology.
Hugh Seaton: [00:06:34] That's a big statement. I'm going to have to, I have to ask you to get into that a little bit. What do you mean by, we don't know the requirements to give to the technology. I mean, I know you spend a lot of time trying to drill into that with, with RFIs, but you want to tell me more about what you mean?
Cause that's a, that's a cool one.
Nathan Wood: [00:06:51] Yeah. I mean, it's, it goes back to this idea of a, of a zero sum game and the reality that if you're working on your traditional, you know, hard bid build job , you're working on a contract whereyour incentive is at the expense of those that you're supposed to work with.
So we've already set ourselves up for failure because we're basically incentivizing ourselves to fight over the same piece of the pie, rather than look for opportunities to make that pie bigger. So, so much of this, you know, dilemma again, that, that we're stuck in, has to do with contracts.
And again, my, my background comes from integrated project delivery and this concept of 11, 12 different companies that can all sign the same contract that says we're not going to sue each other. And we are going to look for ways to share savings and share time. And we're going to clearly understand what the owner wants and actually push back on the owner when they're not doing what they need to do to be successful.
And it was a really cool experience, but it just ya know, that was over a decade ago and it should be commonplace today and, and it's not. And I think that's really, until we fix that that the technology will continue to get better, but it really won't fix the core of what our problems are.
Hugh Seaton: [00:07:58] So do you think that , the kind of core of that dilemma then is that, do you think it's only contracts? Do you think it's only how companies are doing business together? Or is that just one big piece?
Nathan Wood: [00:08:10] Well, it's, it's, it's half the battle, so, soone part contract, one part culture. And so I've, I've seen examples where teams have great culture and they actually go at risk and defy their contract to be more collaborative and be more transparent, which is great.
Unless you're a lawyer or something going like, wait, wait, wait a minute. Like don't, don't put us at more risk just because it was easier for you to collaborate. But then, you know, the, the real answer is no, we should be creating contracts that support that level of collaboration. But on the flip side, you can have very integrated, very shared risk contracts with folks that come into it with more of a traditional mentality of, you know, me versus you.
And that's actually the worst combination because not only are you at risk you're not behaving in the way that you should. And it's it's frankly, what some of the reasons why IPD got a bad name early on, and it's still kind of been, the brand has been recovering since
Hugh Seaton: [00:09:03] What are some examples of, of what you mean by that, that where, where IPD got kind of tarnished in the beginning? What sorts of things happened?
Nathan Wood: [00:09:11] So, I mean, I chalk it up to those in the business sales world probably read "the Challenger Sale" and kind of the different definition of those different sales folks. Are you more of the relationship builder or are you more of the, the challenger sale? And the relationship builder is, you know, the project manager that just wants to appease the owner.
That's going to tell them whatever they, you know, need to hear until it's too late. And then we kind of have to drop that news and it's a fire, but then we put out the fire and then we feel like we're a hero. And it's back to that whole cycle again, versus a challenger sale would say, you know, no, Mr. Owner, we've, we've been down that road before. This is where we see this happening. You know, I think we should go this route knowing very well that they may be offended or pissed off or may fire you for that. But if they do, that's probably not an owner that you want to work with anyway. And that more of especially the tech owners are increasingly accepting and welcoming of that type of strategy because frankly, why else are we, you know, being hired as a professional service provider, if not for our expertise. So, you know, we should be able to speak up when we think that we're right.
Hugh Seaton: [00:10:11] Do you think some of this is, and do you remember when you were doing IPD?
Were there kind of change management processes going on too? Cause I mean, what I'm some of what I'm hearing you say, or at least implied is when it was easy, people played nice, but when it got hard people kind of reverted back to old instincts because no matter what you're dealing with, people that probably have spent a good portion of their career in some of the more adversarial relationships.
So you're going to have to keep reminding people, you know what I mean? That's change management. I mean, it happens in every industry. Did you run into any of that or is, or is it just. It, it, it kind of worked because it worked.
Nathan Wood: [00:10:45] No, absolutely. I think that's the biggest thing. You know, I, I, I got to spend my time on two different IPD projects.
One that was, you know, had a lot of accolades and awards and was very successful. The other that was not so successful and ended up six months delayed and $24 million over budget. And I, and I think. Too often we think that the project that they did well did not have any failures and did not struggle at all.
And that's what I continue to remind people. It's like, no, they struggled as well. There were a lot of struggles early on, but what did they do when faced with that adversity? You know, they, they bore down and they were more transparent and they, they handled it much differently than than the second project that once something negative was happening, it was more "all right, how do we brush this under the rug? How do we get around this so that we can just kick that can further down the road." And it just, you know, led to creating a larger bomb at the end of the project.
Hugh Seaton: [00:11:35] Well, I'm assuming once trust is, is broken and you're not doing anything to address it. It just winds up poisoning everything.
And if you're, if your interactions are, are kind of based on trust that that's got to slow everything down and, and just kind of gum up the works, is that what wound up happening?
Nathan Wood: [00:11:51] Well, yeah, and I mean, one of the single best kind of tools that was used, it was literally a spreadsheet that both projects use, but they were almost a telling kind of litmus test for where the project was at.
It's called a risk and opportunity log. And it's literally a log of, you know, risks that come up. You know, it's a potential things that might or might not happen. Yeah, opportunities, things that we might be able to save. And here's how much we might be able to save if we do these other things. And it was kind of opportunities for certain IPD stakeholders to bring up these ideas or bring up these challenges and have everybody else hear them and put in their 2 cents to be able to solve them.
In kind of the most innovative and accelerated way. And so the more that was used in, and shared as a transparent tool and the more it was really kind of respected by the owner the more valuable it was, but the less respect in the last kind of valued it was by the owner on the second project, the less it was used and the less folks cared and the less likely they were to really be transparent about risks, or even be that incentivized to, to bring up opportunities.
Hugh Seaton: [00:12:52] So do you think that, that you bring up owner a lot in that last illustration? And I think obviously common sense says that the person who's writing the ultimate check has the power to make a lot of these things different. So are you seeing that IPD and design build for that matter are, are happening, are being driven by... I mean, I'm almost embarrassed to ask the question, but I want to make sure we answer it. That owners are driving this. Or do you think that that at least some of it is general contractors were, or the group saying, this is how we should do this job.
Nathan Wood: [00:13:25] Yeah. You know, it's interesting. I, you would think it would, it'd be owners that are driving it. Cause obviously they're the ones who have to make that decision. I, I would say more often than not that you're seeing general contractors pushing it, certainly more thanwe're seeing architects or engineers necessarily. But you know, I think everybody's coming into it with a different intention.
And I think from a, from a contractor standpoint You know, there are a lot of contractors that don't, don't like IPD because frankly they think they can make a higher profit margin in a more traditional Design Build or, or at other processes. And that they, it kind of IPD mucks things up too much.
And, and, and I would agree if they're more simplistic projects that don't have a lot of designintricacies and complexities then yeah, maybe that makes sense. But yeah, I don't know. I think it's, it's, it's interesting. .
Hugh Seaton: [00:14:11] Do you think it's well, I, I would, this was the other question I'd ask, is that... and you kind of hinted at this, that, that some projects lend themselves to IPD more than, or at least certainly the, the complexity of it makes it feel a little bit more necessary. I mean, it seems like healthcare, for example , like hospitals has been one of the places where it's used pretty extensively.
Has that been your experience?
Nathan Wood: [00:14:33] Yeah, I, I draw is basically a spectrum that on one end, you've got your IPD integrated project delivery for healthcare being really that, that prime example of all the complexities of, you know, a major utility plant or, you know, any sort of heavy MEP coordination, but then you've got to fit it behind, you know, five star hotel walls.
And so it's it's and you've got inputs from doctors, from patients from facilities. There are so many different stakeholders in the ultimate decision making process of that use of space. So then on the complete, other end of the side, end of the spectrum would be your EPC, your engineer procure construct.
That's truly driven by the engineering itself. It is a, the building is built for purpose of a process and an engineering. So the aesthetics and the, kind of user experience and things other than basically your facilities guys, you in the maintenance user experience is the only thing that you care about.
So you're gonna have a lot less factors, a lot less drivers. And so you don't necessarily need this crazy IPD. The EPC or the CM at risk model is basically that. The contractor does take over the design. They do, they do hire everyone and they control from soup to nuts because it makes sense to. And so I think it really comes down to how many different perspectives or personas within that owner have influence on the decision. And the more that there are, the more likely it is that you should be doing IPD.
Hugh Seaton: [00:15:56] That's interesting. I wonder sometimes if you know, in an industry this big, if you you're naturally going to see some segmentation like you do in a lot... I mean, you already are, but, but where some of these, these more innovative or, and sometimes more efficient ways of doing things, migrate to some subset of jobs and companies and other ones less so.
Hey, I want to shift gears to, to the Construction Progress Coalition and talk about some of the stuff that you guys do.
I mean, you've got a, an amazing monthly group of of panels. How is the integration dilemma kind of fed into how you choose who, you know, who you invite and some of it's, you know, awesome people and you invite them. But, but how does, how does that, you know what I mean, there's, there is a unifying thread in a lot of what you do, and I'd love to hear a little bit about how, how that guides some of the decisions you make.
Nathan Wood: [00:16:44] Yeah. I mean, I I'd say the organization as a whole it feels like we're constantly going three steps forward and two steps back as, as we're really listening and responding to the audience, which, which is the AEC professional. I mean, if you, if you look at our members we're about a 60 /40 split between technology on the 60 and industry on the forty, so we're always trying to bump up more of our industry members, but it should be a balance between those that are able to control the changes in technology and, and stand up for the, the needs of technology. That's a whole layer in the dilemma that we haven't even talked about of a technology solution providers.
And like, why would a, Procore ever want to talk to an Autodesk? Or why would any of these guys, you know, it's true. They probably don't want to, right. You know, if the customer wants them to, they're going to figure out a way to, if they're going to stay relevant. And that's what you're seeing, you know, with Newforma making huge investments in Procore and BIM 360 and other integrations and all these players recognizing that, "Hey, if I'm going to be around. I need to be integrating with these other platforms and create that sort of hub and spoke model." So, you know, CPC is a whole, I, what, what we're trying to tackle is that intersection of people, process and technology, knowing that, that each of the three, you know, play a role and that, you know, our, our people as, as a group can, can have certain amount of influence.
But that process is influenced by owners. It's influenced by government and local authorities having jurisdiction and sureties and other players. And so that's why we have our collaboration partners CSI of which is one and, and excited to have have you on an end, joining in these discussions, as we're all trying to figure out, you know, what is the role of standards?
What is the role of member organizations? What is the role of those AHJs. And, and these different folks that are gonna have to come together to find shared gains in order for all these interoperability solutions to, to occur. But until we can find that win-win, or, or even like a win-win win scenario it's, it's, it's not likely to happen because again, if there's not that return on investment, it's going to be hard to justify.
So the more we can host those conversations that are really getting at the heart of why we should do anything, which is why, why should we have diversity and inclusion? You know, it's, it's not just to meet a number it's because there's actually better innovation has been proven through Netflix and all these other organizations that having diversity inclusion within your leadership and throughout your organization actually leads to a better bottom line and like helping people realize why we do anything and, and helping to lead through that process of how we do it.
And that's the whole common data exchange framework and trying to build that language.
Hugh Seaton: [00:19:16] Yeah. Actually want to stick to that really quick. I mean, I want to talk about the common data exchange in a sec, cause I think that's really cool too, but you said something really interesting a minute ago about ... I'm going to paraphrase it, but kind of getting, getting technology people to speak and be spoken to in ways that each other can understand. Like, like, I mean, I think that's a really big benefit of, of, of panels, like, or, you know events like you do every month where you're getting people to learn how to speak to each other in ways that, that, you know, is specific to there, there are different groups, like someone who's thinking like a, like a software product manager, isn't thinking about certain things the same way as someone who's in the field might certainly when it comes to risk. And certainly when it comes to, you know, just the words you use, like you're not running around, talking about personas very much when you're worried about getting jobs done.
Do you find that, that, that you get a lot of the people get a lot of kind of benefit and traction from just learning to translate?
Nathan Wood: [00:20:15] Totally, as a former BIM guy, the BIM guys are the worst.
Hugh Seaton: [00:20:20] That's so funny.
Nathan Wood: [00:20:20] We think we know what we're talking about, which is just... Throw words out there, like integration, right?
I mean, integration is such a vague... word. But actually on one of our recent round tables Kelly Doyle interviewed Anto with PADI. And he basically comes from the digital twin and from the facility space. But just again, he, he does not come from architecture, engineering, construction at all, but the way he was able to articulate this idea of a project fabric of all these different nodes that have integration connectors between them and that each of these connectors need a connection profile. And essentially the connection profile that he's describing that he has all this, you know, again, that's what they do as part of their their SAS is something that is what, in our early definition of what Common Data Exchange is, you know, it's, it's it's I get excited when I see parallels of other industries that come from technology that are explaining this, because I know that our kind of litmus test is, does the industry understand it?
Cause I'll, I'll make sure that technology understands it. Cause they're, they're kind of that'swhat product managers are used to doing is hearing different people explain kind of their problems. But if we can provide a language. To industry to say, you know, if these were words are intuitive to you, if these icons and things like let's use this basic structure of establishing your stakeholder companies on the project and your personas that work for that stakeholder company and the activities that they do and the data that needs to be stored in your system of record versus someone else's system of record.
And ultimately those documents of record, like the RFIs and the submittals and the change orders that create and exchange that data, if we're not using that consistent language . And we start saying containers or integrations or whatever, it confuses people. So I think if we can get to that, that common level, we can start to have more productive conversations faster.
And that's really what we're learning through these virtual round tables is that we do actually need to establish some level of kind of baseline. I don't want to say rules, but, you know, guard rails around having a productive conversation and, some kind of minimal level of almost like language certification that, you know, you can speak CDX. So you can now come into this conversation. We may have to start, start enforcing that down the road.
Hugh Seaton: [00:22:31] That's interesting. And it reminds me of, of the kind of reality that, if you say there are two groups, there's the folks that are, are putting work in place and are, are of the industry.
And there's the group that is the sort of technological, whether it's consultants or, or software companies that are asking them to change. So, kind of what I'm hearing you say is if you're a sloppy in how you ask them to change, they're not going to want, they're not going to know what to change to, and you're going to wind up having people say I don't have time for this today. So if you don't make it a little easier and say, look, you guys have learned this. Now you can build on that. Like you've learned what an API means, and now you've learned what a common data exchange I'll make. I'm kind of making up some words here. At least, you know, people don't feel like it changes every time I talk to you because to your point, you can get, you can get engineers and software folks wound up enough that every time you talk to them, they're, they're using a slightly different bit of words because there's so many, so many ways of describing some of these ideas.
Nathan Wood: [00:23:32] And part of it too, is, you know it, yes. In certain cases, yeah. We need to be, be speaking the same language, but part, part of the analogy I was just thinking of as, as you're explaining that is, I don't know if you've ever if you hire a cleaning person to come, come clean your home, but I have come to find that when you hire cleaning folks, like how clean you are as a huge impact on how much they clean.
Because if you don't have beds made and have a bunch of dishes in the. Sink. And it's a huge mess, you know, they're, they're only going to do a minimal amount to get to that kind of next level or whatever they think is, is noticeable. And I think there's so often, yeah, there's so often that we, we don't as, as industry or house in order, we're like, Hey, I want you to clean everything up. Perfect. To make it all spic and span. And Oh, by the way, I'm not going to tell you where the dishes go. I'm not going to tell you how to make my bed. I'm not going to tell you how to do all my clothes, because really those are the things you should have done so that they can come in and do the finishing touches.
But yeah, it's, it's really setting expectations. I think on both sides is what it comes down to.
Hugh Seaton: [00:24:30] That's interesting. Yeah and to your point, demonstrating the expectation by saying we believe in this and we're.. The old expression in software, eating your own dog food.
Nathan Wood: [00:24:38] Yeah. Oh, we say that all the time.
Yeah, because we were, the worst at is as a bare bone skeleton, nonprofit organization, trying to use Zapier and HubSpot and all these things, but, but not, you know, be overly spammy or sending too many things out or getting things stuck. So it's, it's it's really is a fine balance. And I don't think anybody's really got it figured out, but, you know, we're, we're just out there trying to be a sandbox and, and tell people what we're learning.
Hugh Seaton: [00:25:03] And bring folks together . I think that's great. Well, I want to make sure we cover the CDX. Let's talk a little bit about what you've been working on for a while with that.
Nathan Wood: [00:25:10] Yeah, and, and I think we've, we've hit around it a little bit, but at the end of the day, you know, the it's, it's born out of this whole concept of a CDE accommodated environment which is, as you know, can, can be a very polarizing topic.
Especially if you say the word single source of truth, because it's never a single it's always redundant. And I think that the recognition of that fact, that the future of AEC technology is not one platform, but it's, it's sort of a, a system of platforms that all need to connect together. So if you, if you go on the website and look at some of the gears and how we use CDX, we literally put a gear as almost like a shield around that database that is... it could be a company's Common Data Environment or their, their system of record. It could be the project's system of record. It could be, you know, all different types of systems of record that we need to connect together. But providing that sort of visual language or iconography is another term that I learned recently.
That's essentially what we're doing is coming up with intuitive icons or visual ways to represent the workflows so that we can very clearly articulate as industry: "what are today's workflows?" "What do we want tomorrow's workflows to be" and "how do we need to change as industry to make it happen?"
And then what are those capabilities for technology to do what that future state workflow is?
Hugh Seaton: [00:26:25] Do you find that when you're talking like that, that that's some of what is needed or some of the process is getting people used to thinking of their workflows in a slightly more abstract way. And that's not a construction problem, everybody's bad at that. But do you find that you guys spend time on that?
Nathan Wood: [00:26:43] Absolutely. And, and really what a lot of this is, is it's a derivative of design thinking and, and what yeah. A lot of Silicon Valley and IDEO and all those folks are doing out there. Of really trying to structure innovation, structure change management in, in a much more agile way.
And so yeah, in a way where we're trying to replicate, what's already been done, but again, within that kind of framework and language of how AEC speaks.
Hugh Seaton: [00:27:11] Nathan. It is always amazing to talk to you. So I'd like to, I'd like to kind of end with , what should people be doing differently and where should they go learn more from about what you're up to.
Nathan Wood: [00:27:21] Well, yeah, definitely sign up for the monthly or almost monthly virtual round tables that we're doing. We have a LinkedIn group that's pretty active, so you can find us Construction Progress Coalition on LinkedIn, constructionprogress.org or Twitter, I think it's @ CPCoalition. But yeah, we're always trying to get the word out about center's initiatives.
What's working, what's not working having those kind of tougher conversations. So and I know Hugh you're, you're on quite a few of them, so good to get a chance to come on and talk to Hugh. So if nothing else
Hugh Seaton: [00:27:49] listening to you talk is amazing. I honestly they're really, really good. Do you guys post some of those.
Nathan Wood: [00:27:55] We do. Yeah. So we, as, as long as our moderators are good about recording and we get them out, we do have a YouTube channel. So this, the Construction Progress Coalition, YouTube channel, you can subscribe to that. So that as those new round tables do get posted you'll get those notifications. But yeah, I would definitely encourage you to check out the, the digital twin round tables with Kelly Doyle has been amazing. Brianna Williams has been running our reality capture round tables. And we've had a slew of different folks that have been running our technology stack ones, but all really interesting conversations on, on the tech side and, and some great kind of industry social and cultural issues that we're tackling as well.
Hugh Seaton: [00:28:28] Yeah, I think that last one, I just want to call attention to. I mean, honestly, they're all pretty, they're all amazing. But you guys are really starting to have some great conversations about the social side of the industry and, you know, diversity and inclusion and, and a number of there was even one of, I believe on mental health.
So I think you guys are there some conversations in there that are, I think a lot of people could do with listening to. So listen, thanks for doing so much.
Nathan Wood: [00:28:50] Yeah, I do have, I do have to give a shout out because you said mental health, that has been a huge track and we would not be doing that one without Chad with Plexus.
Who's been running that as well as Cal buyer with CSDZ and he's, he's really, I mean, he is the champion for mental health and construction. And if you're not familiar with the CIASP, they're also one of our members, the Construction Industry Alliance for Suicide Prevention. So I know I May is mental health awareness month.
And so yeah, we definitely want to get the word out about that and make sure that everybody is focused on that as well.
Awesome stuff, Nathan. Thanks for being on the podcast.
Thank you. .