by Robyn Bolton | May 30, 2025 | Leadership, Strategy
Conventional wisdom tells us that transformation flows from the C-suite down because real change requires executive mandates and company-wide rollouts. But what if our focus on building transformation momentum is exactly backward?
Ever since reading Multipliers, where Liz Wiseman revealed how the best leaders amplify their people rather than diminish them, I’ve wondered if, like innovation, organizational transformation and change also require us to do the opposite of our instincts.
I recently had the opportunity to dig deeper into this topic with her, and I couldn’t resist exploring how change really happens in large organizations.
What emerged wasn’t another framework—it was something more brilliant and subversive: how middle managers quietly become change agents, why sustainable transformation looks nothing like a launch event, and the liberating truth that leaders don’t need to be perfect.
Robyn Bolton: What’s the one piece of conventional wisdom about leading change that you believe organizations need to unlearn?
Lize Wiseman: I don’t believe that change needs to start, or even be sponsored, at the top of the organization. I’ve seen so much change led from the middle management ranks. When middle managers experiment with new mindsets and practices inside their organizations, they produce pockets of success—anomalies that catch the attention of senior executives and corporate staffers who are highly adept at detecting variances (both negative and positive). When senior executives notice positive outcomes, they are quick to elevate and endorse the new practices, in turn spreading the practices to other parts of the organization. In other words, most senior executives are adept at spotting a parade and getting in front of it! (Incidentally, this is one of several executive skills you won’t find documented on any official leadership competency model.) If you don’t yet have the political capital to lead a company-wide initiative, run a pilot with a few rising middle managers. Shine a spotlight on their success and let the practices spread to their peers. Expose their good work to the executive team and make yourself available to turn the parade into a movement.
RB: In your research and work, what’s the most surprising pattern you’ve observed about successful organizational transformation?”
LW: As mentioned above, I believe the starting point for transformation is less important than how you will sustain the momentum you’ve generated. Unfortunately, most new initiatives—be they corporate change initiatives or personal improvement plans—begin with a bang but fizzle out in what I call “the failure to launch” cycle. Transformation that is sustained over time usually starts small and builds a series of successive wins. Each win provides the energy needed to carry the work into the next phase. These series of wins generate the energy and collective will needed to complete the cycle of success. As that cycle spins, nascent beliefs become more deeply entrenched and old survival strategies get supplanted by new methods to not just survive but thrive inside the organization.
Each little success requires careful support and an evidence-backed PR campaign to build awareness and broad support for the new direction. Nascent behavior and beliefs are fragile and will be overpowered by older assumptions until they are strengthened by supporting evidence. The supporting evidence forms a buttress around the budding mindset or practices, much like a brace around a sapling provides stability until the tree is strong enough to stand on its own.
RB: How has your thinking about what makes an effective leader evolved over the course of your career?
LW: When I began researching good leadership, most diminishing leaders appeared to be tyrannical, narcissistic bullies. But as I further studied the problem, I’ve come to see that the vast majority of the diminishing happening inside our workplaces is done with the best of intentions, by what I call the Accidental Diminisher—good people trying to be good managers. I’ve become less interested in knowing who is a Diminisher and much more interested in understanding what provokes the Diminisher tendencies that lurk inside each of us.
RB: When you consider all the organizations you’ve studied, what’s the most powerful lesson about driving meaningful change that most leaders overlook?
LW: One of the dangers of trying to lead change from the top is that most leaders have a hard time being a constant role model for the changes they advocate for. Even the best leaders can’t always display the positive behaviors they espouse and ask their organizations to embody. It’s human to slip up. But when behavior change is led primarily from the top, these all-too-natural slip-ups can become major setbacks for the whole organization because they provide visible evidence that the new behavior isn’t required or feasible, and followers can easily give up. Wise leaders understand this dynamic and build a hypocrisy factor into their change plans–meaning, they acknowledge upfront that they aspire to the new behavior but don’t always fully embody it, yet. They set the expectation that there will be setbacks and invite people to help them be better leaders as well. They acknowledge that the route to new behavior typically looks like the acclimation process used by high-elevation climbers. These climbers spend some of their days in ascent, but once they reach new elevations, often have to descend to lower camps to acclimate. It’s the proverbial two-steps-forward, one-step-back process. When leaders acknowledge their shortcomings and the likelihood of their future missteps, they not only minimize the chance that others give up when they see hypocrisy above them, but they create space for others to make and recover from their own mistakes.
RB: Looking ahead, what do you believe is the most important capability leaders need to develop to help their organizations thrive?
LW: Leading in uncertainty, specifically the ability to lead people to destinations that they themselves have never been.
I love that Liz’s insights flip the script, calling on people outside the C-Suite to stop waiting for permission and start running quiet experiments, building proof points, and letting success do the selling.
The next time you want a change or have change thrust upon you, don’t look for a parade to lead. Look for one person willing to try something different and get to work.
by Robyn Bolton | May 10, 2025 | Innovation, Leadership
You need friction to create fire. It’s true whether you’re camping or leading change inside an organization. Yet most of us avoid conflict—we ignore it, smooth it over, or sideline the people who spark it.
I’ve been guilty of that too, which is why I was eager to sit down with Laura Weiss, founder of Design Diplomacy, former architect and IDEO partner, university educator, and professional mediator, to explore why conflict isn’t the enemy of innovation, but one of its essential ingredients.
Our conversation wasn’t about frameworks or facilitation tricks. It was about something deeper: how leaders can unlearn their fear of conflict, lean into discomfort, and use it to build trust, fuel learning, and drive meaningful change.
So if conflict feels like a threat to alignment and progress, this conversation will show you why embracing it is the real leadership move.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robyn Bolton: What’s the one piece of conventional wisdom about change that organizations need to unlearn?
Laura Weiss: The belief that change is event-driven. It’s not, except for seismic shifts like the Great Recession, the COVID-19 pandemic, 9/11, and October 7. It’s happening all the time! As a result, leading change should be seen as a continuous endeavor that prepares the organization to be agile when unforeseen events occur.
RB: Wow, that is capital-T True! What is driving this misperception?
LW: It’s been said that ‘managers deal with complexity, but leaders deal with change’. So, it all comes down to leadership. However, the prevailing belief is that a “leader” is the person who has risen to the top of the organization and has all the answers.
In many design professions, those who are promoted to leadership roles are exceptional at their craft. But evolving from an ‘individual contributor’ to leading others involves skills that can seem contrary to our beliefs about leadership. One is humility – the capability to say “I don’t know” without feeling exposed as a fraud, especially in professions where being a “subject matter expert” is expected. Being humble presents the leader as human, which leads to another skill: connecting with others as humans before attempting to ‘lead’ them. I particularly like Edgar Schein’s relationship-driven leadership philosophy as opposed to ‘transactional’ leadership, where your role relative to others dictates how you interact.
RB: From your experience, how can we unlearn this and lead differently?
LW: Leaders need to do three things:
- Be self-aware. After becoming a certified coach, it became clear to me that all leadership begins with understanding oneself. If you’re unaware of how you operate in the world, you certainly can’t lead others effectively.
- Be agile. Machiavelli famously asked: “Is it better to be loved or feared…?” Being a leader requires the ability to do both, operating along the ‘warmth-strength’ continuum, starting with warmth. There are six leadership styles a leader should be familiar with, in the same way that golfers know which golf club to use for a particular situation.
- Evolve. This means feedback – being willing to ask for it and receive it. Many senior leaders stop receiving feedback as they progress in their careers. But times change, and ‘what got you here won’t get you there.’ Holding up a mirror to very senior leaders who have rarely, if ever, received feedback, or have received it but didn’t really “get it,” is critical if they are to change with the times and the needs of their organization.
RB: Amen! I’m starting to sense a connection between leadership, innovation, and change, but before I make assumptions, what do you see?
LW: First, I want to acknowledge the thesis of your book that “innovation isn’t an idea problem, it’s a leadership problem” – 1000% agree with that!
One of the reasons I shifted from being an architect to focusing on the broader world of innovation was that I was curious about why some innovation initiatives were successful and some were not. Specifically, I was curious about the role of conflict in the creative problem-solving process because conflict is critical to bringing innovation and change to life. Yet, it’s not something most of us are naturally good at – in fact, our brain is designed to avoid it!
The biggest myth about conflict is that it erodes trust and undermines relationships. The opposite is true – when handled well, productive conflict strengthens relationships and leads to better outcomes for organizations navigating change.
Just as with innovation, the organizations that are most successful with change are the ones that consistently use productive conflict as an enabler of change.
To achieve this, organizations must shift from a reactive stance to a proactive one and become more “discovery-driven”. This means practicing iterative prototyping and learning their way forward. In my mind, innovation is a form of structured learning that yields something new with value.
RB: What role does communication play in leadership and conflict?
LW: Conflict is an inevitable part of the human experience because it reflects the tension between the status quo and something else that’s trying to emerge. It can appear even in the process of solving daily problems, so the ability to deal productively with conflict, from simple misunderstandings to seemingly intractable differences, is crucial.
The source code for effective conflict engagement is effective conversations.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
The real challenge in leadership isn’t preventing conflict—it’s recognizing that conflict is already happening and choosing to engage with it productively through conversation
This conversation with Laura reminded me that innovation and change don’t just thrive on new ideas. They require leaders who are self-aware enough to listen, humble enough to ask for feedback, and courageous enough to stay in the tension long enough for something better to emerge.
by Robyn Bolton | Apr 21, 2025 | Innovation, Leadership
Innovation efforts get stuck long before they scale because innovation isn’t an idea problem. It’s a leadership problem. And one of those problems is that leaders are expected to spark transformation, without rocking the boat.
I’ve spent my career in corporate innovation (and wrote a book about it), so I was thrilled to sit down with Tendayi Viki, author of Pirates in the Navy and one of the most thoughtful voices on corporate innovation.
Our conversation didn’t follow the usual playbook about frameworks and metrics. Instead, it surfaced something deeper: how small wins, earned trust, and emotional intelligence quietly power real change.
If you’re tasked with driving innovation inside a large organization—or supporting the people who are—this conversation will challenge what you think it takes to succeed.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robyn Bolton: You work with a lot of corporate leaders. What’s one piece of conventional wisdom they need to unlearn about innovation?
Tendayi Viki: That you need to start with a big bang. That transformation only works if it launches with maximum support and visibility from day one.
But we don’t think that way about launching new products. We talk about starting with early adopters. Steve Blank even outlines five traits of early evangelists: they know they have the problem, they care about solving it, they’re actively searching for a solution, they’ve tried to fix it themselves, and they have budget. That’s where momentum comes from.
But in corporate settings, I see leaders trying to roll out transformation as if it is a company-wide software update. I once worked with someone in South Africa who was introduced as the new head of innovation at a big all-hands event. He told me later, “I wish I hadn’t started with such a big bang. It created resentment—I hadn’t even built a track record yet.”
Instead of struggling and pushing change on people, I try to help leaders build momentum. Think of it like a flywheel. You start slow, with the right people, at the right points of leverage. You work with early adopter leaders, tell stories about their wins, invite others to join. Soon, you’re not persuading anyone—you’ve got movement.
RB: Have you seen that kind of momentum work in practice?
TV: A few great examples stand out.
Claudia Kotchka at P&G didn’t go around talking about design thinking when she started. She picked a struggling brand and applied the tools there. Once that project succeeded, people paid attention. More leaders asked for help. That success did the selling.
And there’s a story from Samsung that stuck with me. A transformation team was tasked with leading “big innovation,” but they didn’t start by preaching theory. They said, “Let’s help senior leaders solve the problems they’re dealing with right now.” Not future-state stuff—just practical challenges. They built credibility by delivering value, not running roadshows.
If you can’t find early adopters, then take one step back. Solve someone’s actual problem. People are always fans of solving their own problems.
RB: When you think about leaders who are good at building momentum, what qualities or mindsets do they tend to have?
TV: Patience is huge. This stuff takes time. And you have to set expectations with the people who gave you the mandate: “It’s not going to look like much at first—but it’s working.”
And I think you can measure momentum. Not just adoption metrics, but something simpler: how many people are coming to you without you pushing them? That’s real traction. You don’t have to chase them. They’re curious. They’ve seen the early wins.
Another big one is humility. You’ve got to respect the people who resist you. That doesn’t mean agreeing with them, but it means understanding. Maybe they need to see social proof. Maybe they’re waiting for cover from another leader. Maybe they’re not comfortable standing out.
None of that means they’re wrong. It just means they’re human. So work with the confident few first and bring in the rest when they’re ready.
RB: Have you always approached resistance that way?
TV: Oh no—I learned that one the hard way.
Early in my career, I was running a workshop at Pearson. I was beating up on this publishing group about how they’re going to get killed by digital, and they were arguing. It was a really difficult conversation, and I was convinced I was right and they were wrong.
Afterward, one of the leaders pulled me aside and said, “I don’t disagree with what you said. I think you’re right. But I didn’t like how you made us feel.”
And that was the moment. They weren’t resisting because of the content. They were reacting to how I delivered it. I made them feel stupid, even if I didn’t mean to. And their only move was to push back.
It took me years to absorb that lesson. But now I never forget: if people are resisting, check the emotional tone before you check the content.
RB: Last question. What is one thing you’d like to say to corporate leaders trying to drive innovation?
TV: Just chill!
Seriously. There’s so much *efforting* in corporate transformation. All the chasing, tracking, nudging, following up. “Have they responded to the email? Did you call them?” All that pressure to push, to prove.
But it reminds me of this Malcolm Gladwell podcast, Relax and Win, about San Jose State sprinters. Their coach taught them that to run their fastest, they had to stay relaxed. When you tense up, you actually slow down.
Innovation works the same way. Don’t force it. Build momentum. Let it grow. And trust it once it’s moving.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
The real challenge in corporate innovation isn’t convincing people that change is needed—it’s helping them feel safe enough to join you.
This conversation with Tendayi reminded me that the most effective innovation leaders don’t lead with pressure or pitch decks. They lead with patience, empathy, and small wins that build momentum.
by Robyn Bolton | Jul 23, 2020 | Innovation, Tips, Tricks, & Tools
“We need more data.”
How many times have you heard this? How many times have you rolled your eyes (physically or mentally) and then patiently tried to explain that, when you’re doing something NEW, there is NO DATA.
There are analogous innovations, things that are similar in some ways that can be used as benchmarks, but nothing exactly like what you’re creating because nothing like it has existed before within your company.
As Innovators, we constantly balance our need for and comfort with gut decisions so we can move forward at speed with the broader organization’s need for data and certainty as a way to minimize risk.
But what role should intuition and data play in the early days of innovation?
This is exactly the question that my friend and former colleague, Nick Pineda, sought to answer in his thesis, “Are relevant experience and intuition drivers of success for innovation decision-makers? An interview-based approach”
Robyn: Hi Nick! Thanks for taking the time to speak with me today. The topic you explore in your thesis is fascinating and something every innovator struggles with. I’m curious, what led you to decide to explore it?
Nick: Interestingly, the process of deciding what to write my thesis on actually inspired the topic itself.
For the capstone of my Masters program, we were told to do a consulting project but I had spent so many years in consulting that I wasn’t terribly excited about that prospect. One day, as I was walking to work, I felt this feeling in my gut that said, “Nick, this is not why you’re in the Masters program.” I shared this feeling with my professor and faculty advisor, and they were open to a different approach.
As we discussed what I could do, the same topic kept coming up – a lot of what is published about innovation, especially with Agile, is about measurement and that we need to have evidence before we take action. I don’t disagree with that but viewing things only through that lens kills the wisp of an idea that has the potential of becoming something amazing. Ultimately, we decided to focus my thesis on what happens on the front-end of the innovation process and whether intuition or evidence and data lead to success.
Robyn: And, what did you learn?
Nick: Two things, one that wasn’t surprising and one that was.
First, what wasn’t surprising is that innovation decision-makers have a really clear awareness about the role that gut feel or intuition, knowing without knowing how you know, play in their process.
Second, what was surprising, is that anyone who leans much more heavily in one direction versus another (data vs intuition), had many more failures, and struggled to process what they learned from those experiences and incorporate those learnings into future actions and decisions. Successful innovators know how to create a dance between their rational processes and their intuitive processes.
Robyn: It seems so, well, intuitive that using both intuition and data to make decisions will lead to better outcomes. However, so many innovators rely on intuition and so many companies require data, how can you encourage that “dance” that’s required for success?
Nick: You need to start small.
First with the person who’s innovating, to help them enter that inner space and recognize all the different ways that intuition can show up. It can manifest as a sensory experience, a change in temperature, even a color. It varies by person and by moment and the key is to recognize when it’s happening.
A simple way to create this awareness is to reflect on how you decide whether to trust someone. Every time you meet someone new, you have to quickly decide whether or not to trust the person. How do you do that? What is the feeling or sense that you get that leads to your decision? How often are you right?
Next, you need to create a language or process within the team to externalize the intuitive sense. In my research, I found examples of visionary leaders who were constantly able to use their intuitive sense, but their teams were constantly felt left out and wondering why they did all the work when the leader was just going to decide on gut. More successful teams were much more open about why, when, and how they were using their intuition, even specifically asking other team members to share their intuition in meetings.
Then, as leaders, we need to normalize the fact that we’re not always going to have precise evidence to know what the right call is and that we’re trusting what we’ve learned as leaders in this space to make a decision.
Robyn: That last point is really critical, leaders must role model the behavior they want to see and that includes using and communicating their intuition. Anything else pop up with respect to leaders and decision-making?
Nick: Ideally, leaders will go beyond normalizing the use of intuition to actively working to dismantle the organization’s bias against it.
Most organizations consciously or subconsciously, defer to the highest paid person or the most credentialed person in the room when making decisions. This is a highly rational behavior, but it doesn’t lead to the best decision. The reason is that it overlooks the fact that diversity of experience surfaces other data points and intuitive experiences that need to be part of the conversation to get to a better decision.
Innovation is a group experience and when intuition is allowed to show up in groups a group intelligence starts to manifest and the group makes better decisions.
Robyn: That’s quite a To-Do list for leaders and decision-makers:
- Manage your personal dance between intuition and data
- Normalize intuition by creating a language around it
- Create ways to tap into diverse experiences and intuition
Thanks so much for sharing these great insights, Nick!
Nick: My pleasure.
****
To learn more about intuition and innovation, Nick recommends that you:
READ:
WATCH or LISTEN TO:
TAKE ACTION and Conduct an idea retrospective
-
- Anchor on an idea
- Think back to a memorable innovation success or failure?
- What was the idea?
- Where did the initial idea come from?
- If you had to pick 1-2 of the most important decisions you had to make in the process of bringing this idea to life, what were those decisions?
- Did you use intuition?
- Intuition defined: Intuition is a process of rapidly recognizing things without knowing how we do the recognizing, which results in affectively charged (somatic, sensory, or emotional experience) judgements.
- To what degree was your process intuitive?
- To what degree were you aware of what your brain was doing to seek an answer / path forward?
- How did your intuition show up?
- Signals / Cues: What signals or cues did you have about which course of action to take or not to take?
- Knowing: How did the answer for which path forward to take “show-up” for you? Where were you? What did it feel like?
- Feeling: What did you feel during this process?
- Apply More Broadly
- In what ways is the way you explored your intuition in this case similar (or not) to other decisions you make in your life?
- How might you be more intentional about how to bring your personal brand of intuition into your innovation process?
by Robyn Bolton | Jun 18, 2020 | Innovation
Last week, I wrote about Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS), a process of using art to teach visual literacy, thinking, and communication skills.
Typically, used in primary school classrooms, VTS has made its way into the corporate setting, helping individuals and teams to build and strengthen their problem solving and critical thinking skills, ability to communicate and collaborate, and effectiveness in delivering and receiving feedback.
While I did my best to capture the Why, What, and How of VTS in that post, there’s no substitute for learning from an expert. That’s why I asked Suzi Hamill , former Head of Design Thinking at Fidelity and the woman who introduced me to VTS, to share her experience using the tool.
Hi Suzi. Thanks for sharing your VTS wisdom and experience today. I understand you’ve been doing a fair bit of VTS-ing lately.
Suzi: Yes! Just a few months ago I was at Oxford University coaching 30 Chief Marketing Officers from large global corporations on how to apply Visual Thinking Strategies to their work and their teams. And just last week, I led a session with a group of women on the West Coast of the US.
That’s one of the things I find so fascinating about VTS. It was created to help people learn about art and was designed to be used in schools, but it can have such a powerful impact in a wide variety of businesses.
Suzi: Absolutely. In a business context, there are massive systems and massive problems, and everyone has their own interpretation of what’s going on. (imagine doctors deliberating over a diagnosis, investment analysts debating a company’s intrinsic value, retailers predicting the next fashion trend…) This creates conflict. How do you pull together a range of people and ideas to forge the best path forward? VTS is a great, simple but rigorous method to help business groups look at big problems. VTS is a way to have open exploratory conversations with a diverse set of people
This is especially true in organizations that are very execution oriented. Often organizations haven’t developed the time, space or habit to work through ambiguity. VTS opens space for there to be ambiguity and dialogue. It gives people permission to explore ideas, be wrong, and hear different points of view.
All of those behaviors are essential to making good business decisions. I wonder, have you found that some people need “permission” more than others?
Suzi: I think everyone can benefit from the VTS experience and there are some circumstances where it can be transformational.
We are often taught not to question authority. But there is a delicate balance between challenging authority and understanding perspectives At Fidelity, our first experiment focused on using it as a way to prompt open conversation when there was a power imbalance in a room. We rolled VTS out to our Design Team of about 100 people as a way to help junior designers to talk to the CEO or senior executives about their work and not get defensive. We trained them to ask the VTS questions, especially “What do you see that makes you say that?” We found that it was a great way for designers to learn how to get feedback on their designs.
Once we started having success with VTS, it was integrated into Fidelity’s 6-month long training program for the top 100 potential leaders.
That’s where we found the next circumstance – using VTS with leadership teams. We found that VTS acts as a practical way to introduce the idea that you’re not just a do-er now, you’re a thinker and, as a result, you’re going to be faced with ambiguity. Instead of shying away from it, you need to see that ambiguity is not only ok, but it is also fertile ground for us to grow our business.
That’s great but, as we both know, just because you learn something in training doesn’t mean you actually do it in real life. Have you seen VTS make that jump? Get people to move from knowing to doing?
Suzi: I have.
At Fidelity, we would VTS customer research. We would use the principle of VTS more than follow the strict methodology. We’d post our research on walls – sticky notes, photos of customers, flowcharts, everything, and we would bring in stakeholders and use the VTS process to tease out insights. We give people time to LOOK and internalize what they were seeing before we told them what to think. By asking questions, we would discover what they were interpreting, identify unconscious biases, and learn what they already know or want to know about the customer.
At the event in Oxford, we VTS-ed the Business Model Canvas because most of the CMOs weren’t familiar with it. Just by looking at it, they teased out its purpose, what was important and what wasn’t, what was confusing, and what wouldn’t work. They walked away with a deeper internalization of its meaning
How is VTS able to do that? To help people quickly internalize new insights or behaviors?
Suzi: The best way I can explain it is that VTS is like yoga. When you teach someone yoga, with consistent practice they develop better posture and they walk and move fluidly and with strength. So, when they’re going through their day, they become more aware of their posture and adjust but they don’t go into a whole vinyasa flow.
VTS is similar because when you use it with people, you’re teaching the mechanics of dialogue, of using evidence to progress, of managing ambiguity and conflict.
It takes time to tease out the power of the process but in the end, I’ve seen it help people realize that you don’t have to agree or disagree right away. Instead, it gives them space to express an opinion and teaches them to ask questions and to ask for evidence in a way that is psychologically safe.
OK, but is it as simple as asking the 3 VTS questions?
Suzi: I wish. You need somebody who is a skilled facilitator, who can keep the group moving forward and exploring ideas.
Leaders know they should stimulate conversation… solicit other people’s opinions, but they don’t know how. In meetings leaders will voice their own opinions, rely on the loudest voices, and steer the conversation. People will pick up on these signals. They will stop exploring and focus on giving the right answer.
Often, when people are running meetings they try to participate. But that’s like trying to breathe underwater. You can’t facilitate and participate.
What have you learned & applied?
Suzi: If you want to get people to engage in a great dialog, try giving them something to look at first. It can be a metaphor or real reflection. But give them something specific to point to anchor their thoughts.
Give people time to look and think before they speak or act. Silence is Golden. Silence is not the enemy. Give people time to silently observe something. Even 1 min can make a huge difference in how people respond.
You don’t need to compliment people on their thoughts to keep them engaged. Ask them for more… What do you see that makes you say that? What more can we find? People are not often asked for their opinions. That act alone is incredibly engaging.
As a leader it is just as important to get the obvious out on the table so that you can get to true insight.
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT VTS OR TO EXPERIENCE IT FOR YOURSELF…
