Cymru. Cymru. So, rydw i'n rhywbeth, Carl Scotland. Rydw i'n gweithio'r Tachyrs Gwlad yn ymddiolol. Mae'n credu yn Ydyn nhw, rydym yn Bryton, yn y Gwlad Llywgrifennu. Ac yna wneud eu rhagel â'r Ydyn nhw, ac yn ymddiolol ymddiol. Fe wnaeth i'n gweithio'r cyfrannu i'r cyfrannu i'r Rhaglen i'r Ydyn nhw i'n mynd i'r Rhaglen ..y'n fawr o'rżydd. Ond gwelwch gyda'r cofniad a cyfnodol yn y Cymru sy'n gwreidio, ond byddai'n braf yn rai rydych. Ond maen nhw'n gwzinaudible ar Bangelor. Dw i'w rhan o gyflwyno gyda'r coleg yn Bangelor i chi, ar EcoWall. Rydym yn gwneud o btwith o'r me transfers. Am gyfnod a bwyl u'r gwirioneddau sydd o bwysig y clwrm adreconiaeth. Rwy'n meddyniolaeth hynny'n ddwylo gyda'r cyffreddau. a dyna'r gweithio ar y cyfnod. Mae'n gweithio'n gweithio. Mae'n rhaid i'r adegau i yw'r gweithio. Mae'n gweithio'r test cyfnodol. Felly ydych chi'n gweithio'r ddysgu? Felly y mynd i'r ddysgu? Felly yma'r ddysgu? Felly yma yma. Rhaid i'n gweithio'r ddysgu? Felly, y dyma'r ddysgu yma. Mae'r ddysgu yma'r ddysgu. Yma'r Ddysgu Peter. Y Ddysgu Peter yw'r Brithys. Y TV programme. Dyma'r mommy o'r ystyried. Mae'rgynch yn y Cymru. Mae'r Brithys TV. Mae'r brithys TV inni'n ddysgu. Pursiwll plastid gyda'r ysgrifoedd. Mae'r hyn ymgyrchonus yma. Mae'r Yn ymgyrchonus yma. Mae'r hyn ymgyrchonu am bobl. Mae'r hyn yn wneud cymryd. Mae'r hyn yn cyfryd. Mae'r hyn yn cyfryd. Mae'r hyn yn cyfryd. Mae'r hyn yn cyfryd. is now a big music and concert venue and is very successful so kind of interesting story that in itself in the kind of something design to one thing is ended up being successful in another in another thing. But while they were building the Millennium Dome they buried this time capsule in 1998. So time capsule got a lot of things put in it that represent kind of the world today or in the world in 1998. I can't remember exactly what was in it but one of the things I think was a Spice Girls album on CD. And the idea is that in year 2050 it gets dug up again and everybody opens it and goes wow look at how the world was 50 years ago. That's amazing. What can we learn from that? The thing was in 2017 they were doing some work around the Millennium Dome. They'd forgotten that they buried the time capsule there and they accidentally dug it up. And they got dug up and everybody went from there. That's not really very interesting is it? And I think they've kept it in a museum somewhere but basically a bit of a failure. There's a block, a podcast that was about time capsules that kind of reminded me of this story and I think is a useful thing. You know why time capsules, why am I talking about time capsules and I don't think about it is an attempt to communicate with the future to tell the future what you think the future needs to know about based on what you know today. So we're putting things in the time capsule we think is important for the future to know about this. But what typically happens is a few things. One is they get lost. People forget about them they never get dug up they just point this. Or you get what happened to the Millennium Dome, they get dug up early because people forget about them and then when they come up they usually damaged. Or usually the ones that do get dug up and opened when they're supposed to be opened are just really disappointing. Because people open them and go oh wonder what's going to be in this time capsule wonder what amazing things we'll learn and they kind of go hmm is that it? What was the point of that? So rather than trying to communicate with the future and effectively what we're trying to do is influence and improve the future with the knowledge we know today the quote that came up in this podcast that really struck me and what I think is relevant is if we want to benefit the future the future benefits from what we do now. Rather than trying to predict the future and rather than trying to tell people what they should be doing in the future let's just focus on what we're doing now and if we get the world make the world better today then hopefully the world will end up being better in the future. And I think that concept applies to our job transformations. So that idea of trying to predict the future and improve the future is what we can call the ideal future state. So we're trying to introduce some terminology here. Our current state is where we are now and we want to define, predict an ideal future state and what we do is we close the gap. We're here, we should be there. Let's just do that and get there. The other way of thinking about it is what we can call present thinking. Rather than that gap thinking and closing the gap let's just work in the present. So we have our current state. Let's understand our current state and instead of trying to predict an ideal future state let's work on the ideal current state. What's a better version of the world today that we can actually do something about today because usually these future states make big changes, big gaps, a lot of work. You can't do it in one step. So let's take one step from where we are today, the current state to that ideal current state, that current state the ideal current state becomes the new current state and then we can go from there to the next ideal current state and so on. Once we've done it step by step hopefully the ideal current state that we end up at is the right place to be because we're learning on the way. We don't necessarily know what those future ideal current states are going to be until we get to the new current state and then we're going to go ah, now we're here and now we can decide what we should do next. So that's what we call present thinking and Jay Bloom kind of calling this the present thinking. This is why I call this talk unwrapping the agile present. So a bit of a play on words agile is a present that's been gifted to us. Let's unwrap it and enjoy it and make the most of it. But to do that we need to think about working in the present. Let's not try and define the future. So basically the core message is do your agile transformations in an agile way. I go into so many organizations where we're going to plan our agile transformation and we're going to define that future state and all we need to do is implement our new blueprint, our new big framework that we've paid for. Now let's just work on what can we do today. So approach your agile transformations in an agile way and there are three areas that I'm going to talk about to do this. One is situational awareness. So how can we have a better understanding of where we are now. So understanding our current state, situational awareness gives it that. Strategy deployment so strategy deployment gives some ideas of thinking about how can we start taking those steps and go through our agile transformation in this step by step way and then similarly deliberate discoveries about how can we focus on learning and experimenting while we're doing that so we can discover what the next state should be as we go through the journey. So let's start off with situational awareness. Anybody recognize this code here? Anybody kind of has to guess what should be a step four? Anybody even kind of recognize what it might even represent? Nobody? Sorry? Chess? Yeah yeah. Okay these are chess moves. Okay great. We know it's chess now so we should be able to figure out what step four is. Nobody? Okay what if I show you this? If you don't know chess you'll probably not be able to figure it out but anybody that knows chess is this a little bit more meaningful? Anybody guess what the next move should be? Are you pointing at this one? Okay so it's white moves next. So actually it's this here. So if you move the white queen and take that pawn it's checkmate. So this is scholar's mate. It's like the quickest checkmate you can get in chess. You only make this mistake once. And I have done that. My daughter started learning chess so I thought I'll get back into chess and start playing online and she beat me with this quite quickly. Quite a sobering experience. The kind of message here is you look at this, this kind of written form. You have to understand what's going on. If you know a thing or two about chess you're going to look at that. That visual form is a lot more meaningful. So this kind of gives us a lot more situational awareness by visualising the current state and where the pieces are and understanding the rules of what things might go. So how do we take that idea of visualising our current state to create situational awareness? So Simon Wardley created the concept of Wardley mapping. Basically he uses this metaphor. A map to him is where you've got two dimensions. Where you are within the map has meaning and therefore movement within the space has meaning. So the two axes are, here you've got the value chain. So the value chain, the things at the top of the value chain are the things that are most visible to our customers. And as we move down the value chain and it's kind of a chain of needs, the things at the top need the things at the bottom. And as you move down the chain you get further away and things are more invisible to your customers. So you can start looking at what are the capabilities or components of the elements within our system and how do they chain together in a chain of needs in order to meet customer needs. And then along the bottom you've got this evolutionary axis where at this end, Genesis, things are kind of brand new emerging. We're kind of building things for the very first time through to custom built, well we know what we're building now, but we're kind of rebuilding it from scratch every time when we're doing ourselves, through to the product and rental space. So now these things are so mature that other people can build them for us or buying them from other people or we're renting them. And then through to commodity where these things are so well understood that they're just readily available from anywhere and everywhere. So we can start mapping our system onto this worldly map. So this is a really simple cup of tea. British example actually plays all quite well in India I think with Indian tea. But you know we've got our public, our public wants a drink so they want a cup of tea. In order to make that cup of tea we need a cup, we need some tea and we need some hot water. Well to get some hot water we need water and we need a kettle and for the kettle to work we need power. You can see how that kind of chain of tea to works down and we can start decomposing our system. But then we can also say well most of this is certainly kind of cups, tea hot water, water itself is kind of in that commodity space and power.  Cheap, easily available. Our cup of tea is kind of less commodity kind of a product we're making the tea so it's a product that we're selling. We're making our own kettles. That's interesting isn't it? Why are we making our own kettles? So once you start mapping these things out you start having conversations. So on the conversation of figuring out what's in the value chain where does it live on the evolutionary axis allows us to start creating some shared understanding, that's that situational awareness and now we can kind of go well based on that what should we do next. You know what we don't need to custom build our own kettles. We should be able to just go down to the local supermarket or electronic shore and buy kettles and commodities. So that becomes a kind of a potentially a strategic plate. This is something we can do to improve our business is let's just stop custom building kettles. We don't need to. Maybe our value is around the tea and actually we want to be known for the unique and innovative flavours and styles of tea. We're just using commodity tea. We're just going down to the supermarket and in Brighton we call it a build of tea. Kind of just really basic tea stuff but hey actually we could start innovating in the tea that we make. So actually we want to move tea over here. Again that's a kind of a strategic plate that we can discover based on this situational awareness. Or maybe kind of we think we make some pretty cool kettles. Yeah we're custom building kettles. We should be selling our kettles so we could move the kettles up the valley chain so we're just selling kettles to the customer. So this idea of having this landscape and what are the pieces on the landscape, where are they and how do we want to move based on that. It's what wardley mapping gives us. We can apply that basic concept maybe to our processes and our ways of working. So there's an idea called maturity mapping which takes that basic concept. We have a valley chain still of the practices we use and how those practices relate to each other and how visible or invisible they are to the customers. And we've got our evolutionary landscape but we've kind of changed the language slightly because we've kind of got novel practice emerging practice, good practice and great practice. Not best practice, just great practice. Better than good. But you can imagine how as we start kind of doing things for the very first time and innovating around the things we do through to just we know exactly what we're doing and everybody knows how to do it. We can think about what are our customer needs? Our customer needs us to be responsive. Our customer needs us to deliver value. Our customer needs us to be delivering things of quality. Well what do we need to be responsive or continue to deliver it? That's a good thing to do. But you know what? We're still figuring out how to do continuous delivery so it's over this end. Our customer, to deliver value we probably need some product management, maybe a backlog and some stories, quality we need to test TBD. So we can kind of take that same premise and start understanding with maturity mapping what's our maturity? It's called a maturity map because it's one it's kind of deliberately trying to play on the idea of a maturity model and a maturity scale. But rather than us measuring our maturity based on somebody else's view of what our maturity should be and how they define maturity, because this is just a free two dimensional space, we're defining our own maturity about what we do and what we think we should do based on our context. Again this gives a situational awareness of our practices. And again we can say well hey we're still figuring out continuous delivery, but we want to try and move that and get better at it. We think that's a good thing for us to be working on. And we can see how that fits into the overall landscape and why we're doing it because we want to be more responsive. Product management, yeah we want to get better at that but hey maybe we should be moving our product management a little bit more visible to our customers. Maybe that's a good thing to do. I had another example that I didn't put a slide on here. I can't remember what it was now. Backlogs. Is a backlog a good thing? We have a backlog. Do we need a backlog? You know maybe backlog we could just move a bit further away from the customer because they're not really interested in the backlog, they just want the value. So we can have a discussion about that and we can agree with it or disagree with it but it creates a shared understanding and a common situational awareness. So that starts helping us understand what sort of things we should be working on. I get into Cinevin. I meant to say earlier if anybody's playing buzzword bingo you've probably tick all the boxes in this talk. If you want to know more about Cinevin go to Jules's talk so she's got one straight after this and one tomorrow. She'll know much more about Cinevin than I do. But Cinevin, the way I think about Cinevin very simply is if we know what to do Cinevin starts giving us some idea about how do we go about doing it. So Cinevin has kind of a joke. Five quadrants. Five domains. Clear, complicated, complex and chaotic. And then this AC in the middle which is aporetic and confused. Don't worry about the aporetic there. It's just when you're confused and you don't know. So clear is the simple way I think about it. Everybody knows how to do something. So we can just do it. You don't need to experiment. You don't need to get consultants and everybody just needs to do it. And if you're not doing it then the question is why aren't you doing it usually? And typically it's we don't have time. Complicated is then when we know to go to experts. So both these things on this side are kind of ordered. They're knowable in advance. Clear, everybody knows it. Complicated, well not everybody knows it but we can either figure it out or we can go and get some expert otherwise. But then it's typical of just planning and implementation. Complex is when you're now unordered. And the way I think about it is when experts disagree because there's actually multiple ways you might do this and we don't really know which one, which way is the right way and which one is going to work. So this is where we have to start running some experiments and we're really kind of getting into that learning cycle. Chaos, you know, actually nobody knows what to do. We just need to do something.  Let's not kind of run some experiments about how to get out of the fire. You just need to get out of the building. Then they're kind of confused but usually we're just everybody's disagree. We have no idea what we should be doing, why we should be doing it. Again, you just need to kind of do something which is going to take you out of there. You usually into complex. So there's a whole, you know, this is kind of one slide. I spent a couple of minutes on it. There's a whole richness of stuff there. But it's a sense making framework. It gives you some situational awareness about the work you're doing, what the type of work is and therefore how you might approach. You know, do you just need to get some experts in to fix this? Or do you want to start running some experiments? Or maybe you just need to do something really quickly. So the way we use this, and this is kind of screenshot, I've had to blur out a lot of the content. There's a Cinevin exercise called four points contextualisation where you take a bunch of problems or challenges or opportunities and you just, you get the exemplars. So you start off down here. Let's just pick an example where there's an approach we all know and agree on. Put it in this corner. Let's pick an example where an expert or researcher will determine a good approach. Put it in this corner. There's no right approach. Experts are going to disagree. Put it in the top corner there. Nobody knows the approach or there's no immediate apparent approach. Put it down. So you get four exemplars. So those are the four points. And then you start positioning the other ones relative to each other. And then you draw these lines at the end to kind of figure out what's in which domain. So this is why we call it sensor making. The definition I like about sensor making is the data precedes the framework. It's not a four by four matrix where you're kind of going which corner does it go in, which quadrant does it go in. You just map things out and then you're going to well roughly these are the things come together. And anything in the middle is usually the ones that we want to, these things we want to talk about and try and understand why are we confused. And then depending on where these things fall in the other domains we can start understanding well what do we do about these. So I like Cenevin doing this exercise on warding mapping alongside each other because you get some really good insights about what should we work on and how should we work on that. Often these are the same things that are on the warding map. There's another nice kind of Cenevin related exercise and this is the exercise that Jules is running in the next session. I highly recommend if you want to know more about this. It's future backwards and it's another way of getting situational awareness. This is an example I did a few years ago where we ran the future backwards on the agile community. But you're looking at here I kind of call it extreme heather here. What would we allow the absolute utopia be about in the future? So we're not extreme heather in utopia because you're not defining a future state. It's like impossibly good. We're not going to achieve this but let's think about what that might be like and then down here extreme hell. Again not a future state that's likely to happen because it's extreme but having got that and having in the middle this is the current state you can then work back. So this isn't actually a completed version because we should have steps back here. But what this tells us, so this is current state how did we get to the current state and then what might lead us to that extreme heaven? What might lead us to extreme hell? Based on those conversations that you generally kind of get some insights around what opportunities are there, what things might we want to avoid. Another way of creating situational awareness and kind of creating a common context it's really interesting if you do this with multiple groups then you start comparing and contrasting with different groups. Again you start reinforcing and pulling out different perspectives, different experiences and then you can start talking about those things as well. So future backers is another nice exercise for creating situational awareness and the last idea around situational awareness is what I call true north. So we know our current state that's situational awareness. We still need to have some idea of what direction we're going to go in. So when we're kind of going from the current state to the ideal present, how do we know whether that ideal, how do we know what's ideal and what's not ideal? So I think of true north as it's orientation, it's direction. So it informs what we should do but it doesn't tell us what we should actually do. And then the three elements are it should be challenging. So that's the idea it's extreme. I think I've got an example later but I've worked in the organisation and that true north was around instantaneous delivery and deployment of customer needs. Now they're very likely to get that instantaneous where a customer comes in and says can I have something in a bubble and goes I hang on, it's live. Very unlikely you're going to get that quickly but that was kind of gave them a sense of direction of what they were trying to get to. So it was challenging. It was concrete because we were talking about deploying code quickly and the continuous delivery pipeline and then it's compelling. It was something that they really wanted to work on. So that intersection there I think is what makes up a good true north. So if you've got your situation awareness and you've got your true north and you've kind of got a direction that you want to go in, now you can start on your journey. I like this phrase here and I can't remember where I picked it up on, I've not been on the final source but who you want to be not what you want to do. So who you want to be as an organisation, how you do that, what you do shouldn't really matter but if you know what you want to be that's going to give you a sense of direction. Okay strategy deployment, the next topic. So before we get into strategy deployment probably just you know strategy emerging strategy. So this is the way Henry Minceberg describes it and his book on strategy exploring and the way most people think about strategies we have an intended strategy all we want to do. We then deliberately implement that strategy and we realise our strategy nice and easy how many people see that strategy. It never works out like that so usually it's unrealised it just doesn't work out. Minceberg describes this idea of an emerging strategy. So all this other stuff that's going on if you can use situation awareness to start recognising all these things then that strategy can emerge and you can align around that and then you realise that strategy. So rather than most strategy is this intended strategy, most organisations it's the people at the top of the organisation making centralised decisions of the expert saying we should do this. Emergent strategy is about allowing it to emerge from the people. So I define strategy deployment where solutions emerge from the people closest to the problem because other people know what the problems are. So if you can learn from the people closest to the problem see what solutions they recommend and what solutions they're using and then as those things emerge that can lead us to an emerging strategy. So a couple of ideas around this one is David Marquay's leader-leader model from Turn the Ship around. What you're doing with strategy deployment is giving control rather than centralised decision making. Give control to people to allow them to decide what to do and get that feedback and get that learning in order to give control. He says you need two things one you need to give them clarity. It's the clarity of intent and that true nor is usually kind of a good clarity of intent what are we trying to achieve, what do we want to do and then you want people to be confident enough to do this. So he describes this in the context of the nuclear submarine. You want people confident in sailing a submarine if you're going to give them control to make those decisions. So within our organisations do people know the intent of what we're trying to do do the people who have the confidence if they do then we can start giving them control. This relates to this other model so Stephen Bungay writes about this in his book Art of Action. I've got book references at the end of the slides. This comes from Thomas Von Malt who was the Prussian army chief of the Prussian army back in the late 19th century I think. So alignment and autonomy. So the usual kind of mindset is these are two ends of an extreme. You can have alignment or you can have autonomy. You get alignment by taking away autonomy and just telling people what to do or you can give people autonomy in which case they're going to do whatever they like and you'll have no alignment. What Von Malt said was actually these are two different scales. You have alignment and autonomy so you'll give people alignment by being really clear on intent, clarity of intent so people are going to kind of align behind that intent and then you can give them autonomy in figuring out how they need that intent. So it's very similar. I think this model here, so this is basically the mission command model and that and David Marquet's leader leader model very similar and I think there's kind of a lot of overlap between them. Probably not surprising but it's very military based. So that's what we're trying to do with strategy deployment. Being really clear on what our intent is and get an alignment around that and give people autonomy in order to figure out how to do that. So related to that then is idealised design. Idealised design comes from Russell Ackoff and these two things at the top here is this really simple process. You imagine that current system has been destroyed so you want to improve the current system. You do that by actually, let's just imagine it's destroyed. We don't have it. He kind of famously used this and the story he uses was when he was working at Bell Laboratories and they kind of reinvented the telephone. So let's just imagine we don't have any telephones. So we're not constrained by the past anymore. We're not constrained by our perceived expertise in this. Anyone come up with any ideas. So then you redesign the system for the present time. So it's called idealised design because we're trying to create an idealised system but it's really important that you're not trying to create an ideal future. It's something that is possible now. So it talks about it has to be technologically feasible. So you have to be able to technically do it. It has to be operationally feasible. So in the context of our organisation it has to fit within our management structures and then capable of being improved. So again we're not trying to create a snapshot single solution. We're creating something that's technologically feasible, operationally feasible and capable of being improved at the same time. So product of our idealised design is neither perfect ideal nor utopian. So it's idealised, not ideal precisely because it can be improved. So it's the best ideal seeking system that designers can imagine now. So strategy deployment is about trying to come up with these idealised designs that we can improve and we're starting with a blank sheet of paper trying to get everybody's input, everybody's set of ideas not just saying, oh you're the experts, you designed the system for us. There's a nice canvas, so this is J. Bloom as well and it builds on that ack off with a little canvas here and I've used this really successfully with quite a few customers. Present mess, you usually have to explain present mess because people get a bit touchy if you start describing where their current context is a mess. But present mess is good, bad. I think I've not got the quote here but ack off has a very specific definition of what he means by a mess and it's just kind of the entanglement of the current system. It might be a mess but it might be a good mess, might be a bad mess it's just life is messy, our organisation is a mess. So there are good things, there are bad things and the idea is if we don't do anything our present mess will produce a future mess. So it's idea if we don't do anything things are probably going to get worse. So what is it about the future mess that's important for us to understand and then we can also talk about well what's this ideal or idealised future what would we like things to be in the future. So this is a bit similar to future backwards except maybe not quite so extreme that ideas that future backers uses the ideal present so this kind of gets into what can we do now today which is going to solve the present mess avoid the future mess and enable the ideal future. It's not going to implement the ideal future it's going to enable it so it's going to take just a few steps forward. Just mapping those things out on a families helps people understand what we're doing it why we're doing it, what we're trying to avoid and builds on that idea of situational awareness and start setting this up for strategy deployment. There's a technique I like to use this once we're getting into this which is back briefing. So back briefing is another military technique Stephen Bungay talked about it in Art of Action as well. I define a process by which people can check whether the intent of their work has been clearly described and understood and whether their plans to carry that work will move the intent. This is an A3 single piece of paper that we can articulate and condense our thinking down onto a single piece of paper collaboratively we've probably got a good understanding but context so that's what's our current state, what is it about the current state that's important that's leading to this piece of work, what's our intent, what's our goals and what are we hoping to achieve and also what's the higher intent. So if we're kind of our intent is to do some sort of agile transformation why is that important to the business and usually then the higher intent match back to the context so we're trying to fix something about the context. So you've got those three levels there context where we are now our intent about what we want to do and then the higher intent about why what we're going to do is important to the business who do we need to do that, what people, what skills who's going to be involved in this piece of work, what are our boundaries so freedoms and constraints, so what decisions can we make that might be budgetary, that might be technology, it might be organizationally and what can we do, what are the kind of rigid constraints and maybe they're also budgetary, technology, organization things that we can't do. Knowing what those boundaries are is important because then that's what gives people the freedom, what people know what their freedom are and know what they can't do, so that helps with that autonomy but without hopefully avoiding disaster. Quite often people are really good at knowing what their constraints are or we can't do that or we can't do that. Ask people what their freedoms are there's usually kind of silence but then once they start thinking about it you start coming up with ideas and then what's your plan and I think a plan in terms of hypotheses that we're going to test, what things are we going to try so the idea of back briefing is you've been given a mission as a team, you fill in this by yourself as a team and you brief it back to your management team, your leadership team. So there's two aspects here. It helps the management team, have they described the mission to you? So if you can describe it back to them it means that they've described it, not have they described it but have you understood it? So it's the idea of the curse of knowledge curse of knowledge is when we think because we know something that everybody else knows something or there's some great examples of where leaders have given a mission and given people some instructions on what they think they need to do and those people have gone off and done something completely different and it's because they didn't have a little bit of knowledge that the leaders had that the leaders thought oh well everybody knows that. So getting people to do that back briefing kind of is a safety check and a feedback cycle on do people have people understood what you're asking them to do. Okay last section of discovery, I need to speed up a little bit. How do we get learning? So people are going to start doing things, we've deployed our strategy, we're kind of giving people freedom on the autonomy to start trying things out, to implement that strategy, now we need to get some learning in place. This is really nice exercise, you can get this website down here and I'll share the slides and just do this online. I haven't got time to do it now but give people the sequence 2, 4, 8. So I've got a rule, there's a rule behind this sequence and what you want to do is ask people to guess what the sequence is and you do that by putting in some examples, other examples of things there for the sequence. So typically what happens is people go 2 times 2 is 4, 4 times 2 is 8 so I think it's a multiple of 2. So I'm going to go 3, 6, 12. I know of the rule I can look at that sequence 3, 6, 12 and kind of go that confirms the rule. We can do that multiple times and normally what happens is people think they know the rule and the sequences you give to test the rule are sequences which positively reinforce your rule. So you're always trying to pass the rule. Now actually the thing is, I'll let you in on the secret. The rule here is that numbers just are increasing orders of execution. So by saying 3, 6, 12 I'm not really getting any useful feedback. To figure out the rule I have to go 1, 1, 1. Oh 1, 1, 1 fails the rule and now I've got some information. So this idea of getting information we have to fail things otherwise we're just getting kind of positive reinforcement and we're kind of getting bias by it. So when we're trying things out or running experiments it's not just about being successful it's about failing as well because it's the failure is when we get the learning. So this is the idea of information theory. You have a probability of failure when you try something. If your probability of failure is 0 you're never going to learn anything. You're always right which means you know everything. Or if your probability of failure is 100% you're probably not learning anything because you're just constantly making the same mistakes so you're getting the information and not doing anything with it. The sweet spot in the middle is around failure 150% of the time. Now there's context to this as well because when I got in the plane to fly over here I didn't want only to have a 50% chance of that plane flight being successful and I wanted it to be 100%. So there's a point at which you don't want to be learning anymore and you want to kind of go, they know how to fly planes. It's not going to crash. But when we're doing product development and we're doing organisational development, usually we don't have that certainty. We're more in that complex domain. Therefore we actually want a probability of failure. Failure is not a bad thing. Failure is what we learn from. So another A3 canvas, you can then start defining your experiments in terms again what's our context, what problem we're trying to solve with this experiment, what is our hypothesis. I'll go into more of our hypothesis in my mini workshop tomorrow and why do we think this is true. There's some rationale and some basis. What are the actions we're going to take? How are we going to test for not just success, failure? So start thinking in advance what does success look like, what does failure look like, what things are we going to be looking for both sides of this and then similarly follow up what are we going to do if we are success if our hypothesis proof to be correct but also let's think about now what should we do if our hypothesis doesn't proof to be correct because we've just learned something. Now it might be as simple as just rolling something back or communication but thinking about acknowledging ahead of time that we might fail and thinking about how we're going to detect that. Again the A3 if you can condense this down, collaborate on it and you're going to get a good understanding about the experiments and being intentional about it and then running those experiments through a life cycle is the same way that we run our user stories, our features through a workflow on a Kanban board, visualize and have a life cycle around this. So this is a Jason, I've got this in there now, got it all Jason. Have a look at his blog. He kind of talked about agree urgency, negotiate, change of validator jobs and verify performance. So how urgent is your experiment? Negotiate that experiment with the people that are going to be impacted and run the experiment and validate that it works and it can be done and then verify the performance on it. I'm going to skip over this quite quickly. Just another framework that I found really useful in this in terms of running experiments is full disciplines of execution because they talk explicitly about a school board keeping a compelling school board. So when you're running your experiments and hopefully you've decided what are we things we're going to look for that tells us whether this is success or failure, keep a school board on that track. They use the word school board or dash board deliberately because they talk about the sports metaphor of if you know the score you know whether you're winning or losing and they kind of say if you go to a sports game and you don't know what the score is somehow it's not compelling. It's useful to know whether you're winning or losing. So have a compelling score board and then a condocadence of accountability that's getting together and reviewing your experiments and reviewing your can ban of experiments and looking at the results and deciding what have we learned and what should we do next. Okay so I think this relates I realise these kind of three things tie into this idea of good strategy bad strategy. So Richard Rommel talks about strategy in terms of diagnosis or good strategy of diagnosis. You know what the problem is you have some guiding policies that are going to create alignment for people to decide what they should and shouldn't be doing and then cohere in action are the things you're actually going to do and those should be experiments in terms of deliberate discovery. So that's kind of a really kind of lightning run through of a bunch of ideas hopefully you kind of get some of the something useful there. Move you from this idea of a treating on transformations of gap thinking moving towards about present thinking defining working on ideal current state and taking it step by step. There's one last thing I've got a few minutes left the X matrix is kind of a tool I really like using to try and some of this bring this all together. We have our true north aspirations results we hope to achieve strategies in this context become your guiding policies your tactics there for there are your cohere in actions the experiments you're going to run and then evidence the results of those experiments the leading metrics that you're going to track visualizing them on another A3 and showing how they relate to each other. So our true north informs our aspirations enabled by our strategies we implement our strategies with our tactics. Our tactics should generate that evidence and then hopefully the evidence is evidence that we are achieving our aspirations. So these things start fixing together and hopefully are coherent with each other so these little kind of matrices in the corner allow us to visualize the coherence the correlation and how these things contribute to each other because it's not kind of a mechanistic thing we can't just kind of break these things down easily. So this is an example so this is the true north in sustainability development deployment I described before the solid dots here indicate a kind of a really strong direct correlation so this is kind of saying if we can increase our productivity and this is kind of very abstract to realize but we can measure productivity as a leading metric we think that's going to enable us to our aspiration of having more releases. This one here if we increase our productivity the hollow dot means there's some sort of correlation there but it's not that strong it's maybe indirect. So I think productivity probably will help reduce defects not direct and then lastly productivity has no correlation with reducing waste waste was a very contextual terminology for this client so it just gives you a nice way of kind of one it's a form of situation awareness because we now have everything on a single page. We're getting into strategy deployment because we're talking about what our strategies are and deploying our tactics so allowing people to figure out what those tactics should be and trying this to emerge and then because we're running these tactics as experiments with our evidence we're getting into deliberate discovery and we can constantly review this and refine it. It's not a one-off thing it's just our best current understanding and typically our fund review in this on a quarterly basis gives us enough time to work on experiments and then we can kind of go okay are our strategies right maybe our strategies are wrong are our tactics working maybe we need to work on something different is our evidence telling us what we want to do we're getting information on that and ultimately do we think we're on track to meet our aspirations and this is kind of generally what we're trying to do with an agile transformation so I like to use these just to help bring everybody together on an agile transformation. Final quote I think a much time I'll give you just a minute second to read that. Anybody know who said this familiar anybody recognise? Okay this is Anna in Frozen 2 so this is a I don't think Dave Snowden came up with this but he kind of popularised it. If you watch Frozen 2 Anna is I don't know if she thinks her sister is dead. Olaf the Snowman she thinks she's dead as well she's stuck on her own in a cave she doesn't know what to do and the idea of what you do when you don't know what to do you just do the next right thing so when we're in an agile transformation we don't always know what to do so the next right thing take that step you make a step forward you learn from it and then you can figure out what's the next step up to that Okay those are the books I've referenced I'll make the slides available and we probably haven't got time for questions but I'll be around I'm around for the rest of the conference if you want to come and talk to me. I'd love to talk to you about some of these ideas in all detail Thank you very much. I feel free to leave. This is the book on the X matrix It's very X matrix is kind of very manufacturing so it's kind of quite a tough read very dry but there's nuggets of gold in there and it kind of just extras the X matrix Art of Action is that kind of the military and that briefing and that model Good strategy, bad strategies, strategy in general I think Richard Rommel's kind of take on strategy is my favourite one Turn the ship around is that kind of idea about leadership and leading with intent Getting the right things done I didn't talk about this explicitly because there's lots of A3s and it introduces the idea of using A3s for strategy deployment Idealised design has that model and you only need to read the first few chapters of that really to get full for it and then four disciplines of execution is probably one of my favourite books just on It doesn't talk about strategy deployment explicitly but just those four disciplines are really useful for any transformation I think Hi, great presentation The true north exercise that you showed Typically with whom do you do this? Do you do this with all the coaches or the senior leadership who's sponsoring the gel transformation or at what level do you do to get the most results? In the organisation I'm working so if you're just working with a team sometimes just a team having it's own true north What I'll tend to do though is whatever level of the organisation you're working with when you get that true north kind of go up a level or outer level and kind of go hey this is our true north Does this make sense to you so try and get some feedback on that If they kind of go yeah that sounds like a great true north to be working on then then you've now got a validation They might kind of go no actually I'm not quite sure that's right I thought your true north should be something else so that's the idea of back briefing just kind of trying to use that collaboration and communicate hey this is what we're doing this is what we think our intent is Is that right? Have we understood our mission correctly? Understood, thank you Thanks everyone


All right, how are you guys doing? All right, I heard a lot of these rooms are packed. So if you've got a seat by you, raise your hand. Maybe you could fit one more person by you. I think there's one right there. That's about it. All right, so my name's James Lobaki. I'm the product owner for Red Hat Cloud Infrastructure at Red Hat. This is actually my first presentation using Prezi. There's a big screen in a small room. So hopefully, if you have motion sickness problems, you might want to close your eyes during the transition. So what I want to do is take you guys through just a quick overview of what Red Hat's been doing in the cloud infrastructure space, then get into kind of a technical overview of the pieces. So I'm just curious, how many of you are like system administrators, operator-focused? Developers, partners. OK, cool. All right, so just to dive in real quick, I'd like to start out just by saying that Red Hat, these are just contributions. You could click the Stackletics link there if you want. I'll post these slides afterwards. We contribute a lot. We are committed to the OpenStack community. These are our contribution numbers here, just to give you an idea. And it's not only about contributing to OpenStack, but it's about contributing to every project. So I like to preface every presentation with this, that we are 100% upstream-first policy, right? So what's our vision? So at Red Hat, kind of our vision and our goal is to provide workload portability from an infrastructure standpoint across the four footprints that you usually see, physical, virtual, private, and public cloud. So we do this with both Red Hat Enterprise Linux running across there as a stable infrastructure. Private Cloud, obviously, provided by Red Hat Enterprise Linux OpenStack platform. But then we also do this by providing consistent storage footprint with Red Hat Storage, so whether that's Ceph or Gluster. And we also provide kind of seamless management with cloud forms as part of that. And then, of course, with JBossMiddle, where we're giving you application portability. So that's our main goal, kind of, as far as where we're going from an open hybrid cloud standpoint. You might have heard this morning, or if you saw the press release. So what we announced this morning was something called Red Hat Cloud Suite for Applications. Basically what this is, is this is an offering that we have an early access program now available. So if you want to run from virtual machines to cloud-enabled virtual machines on infrastructure as a service based on OpenStack, all the way up to containers running in a platform as a service with OpenShift Enterprise, along with hybrid management we're now providing us, just to give you an idea. So everything from fully open source from bare metal to apps. And what we're going to focus on today, so if you look at it really, what we built is kind of on top of a huge certified hardware ecosystem that we've inherited from building everything on top of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. We've built kind of the virtualization and infrastructure as a service. So in the virtualization space we leverage Red Hat Enterprise virtualization, which is, I'll get into the upstream communities that we work in here. And on infrastructure as a service, obviously we leverage OpenStack. But we also include hybrid management. And so what Red Hat Cloud Suite for Applications does is it builds on what Red Hat Cloud Infrastructure is an offering, and it adds platform as a service to it. So really what we're starting to do is build not only kind of a mode one, if you're familiar with kind of the Gardner terminology, mode one of traditional applications running as virtual machines, but we're also allowing people to run cloud-enabled virtual machines all the way up to container-based workloads in a platform as a service. And of course we provide kind of the middleware and mobility services on top of there through the middleware, the Jboss portfolio. So we do all this in communities. So we're here at OpenStack Summit, so everybody's interested in the OpenStack community. And you guys are all familiar with RDO. Who doesn't know what RDO is? Anybody? OK, it's Red Hat's OpenStack distribution. But there's a number of other projects that we bring together in our cloud infrastructure ranging from Forman, which becomes Red Hat Satellite, to Manage IQ, which becomes Red Hat Cloud Forms, and then a number of other projects like Kubernetes that we're leveraging inside of OpenShift, Project Tomic and Overt, which become Relatomic Coast and Rev. So everything is kind of this community enterprise model. What I'm going to dive into is really kind of this technical architecture. Don't worry, I'll zoom in on it. So basically the building blocks, again, of Red Hat Cloud infrastructure are really designed to allow you to run both mode one applications, so state full scale-up workloads, alongside stateless scale-out workloads with OpenStack. So the building blocks are basically Rev for Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization, our OpenStack platform, and then we leverage CloudForms for hybrid cloud management and Satellite for configuration and life cycle management. So I'll dive into these a little bit more. So on the OpenStack side, we build out Red Hat Enterprise Linux OpenStack platform on a huge hardware certification program, lots of partners. This is really built for your scale-out workloads. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this because you guys are all here. You know what OpenStack is, presumably. But I think the key is that we also provide, for state scale-up workloads, we're providing Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization. And so this is for workloads that aren't going to fit onto your OpenStack environment. You can leverage Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization to provide kind of that stateful infrastructure. And then from a management standpoint, to provide kind of seamless management between these two platforms, and a number of other ones, which I'll get into, is Red Hat CloudForms. So CloudForms is based on an acquisition we did in 2012 of a company called ManageIQ. We've since open sourced all that code. So it's about $100 million acquisition we did in 2012. We've open sourced all that code in ManageIQ.org. What this is, it's a Ruby on Rails-based application that you can deploy as a virtual appliance, either into OpenStack, into Rev, into vSphere, so on and so forth, to basically start to begin providing a cloud management platform for that infrastructure. So you often hear with OpenStack, people kind of expect it to be an on-premise Amazon-like infrastructure. But the reality is that OpenStack provides an infrastructure platform. It's not providing necessarily the management platform.  So it's built on a modern framework. It does basically passing utilization event collection, state relationship config, across a number of infrastructure platforms. And then it basically provides those up into a virtual machine database. And then from there you have a management interface and a northbound web services API that you can use. So it's leveraging Ruby here. So if you guys are interested, learning more about ManageIQ and I'll get through some of the use cases that we deliver through here. There's actually a ManageIQ day here that we have. So you can go there. There's a couple of labs. You can actually sit down, hands on the keyboard. These are running up in something called Revello, which runs on top of Amazon web services. So we have a full OpenStack environment with cloud forms that you can leverage for basically a lab and walk through all these different use cases of tenant workflows and service catalogs and all those pieces. All right. So on the satellite. So the satellite really is based on the Forman project. And really what it provides is consistent content and configuration management. So what we leverage satellite for in the context of our cloud infrastructure is mirroring content down and then providing a lifecycle around it. So whether it's dev, QE, prod, making sure that those are there. And the configuration management is all based on puppet. So actually you can leverage a puppet master inside of satellite and basically provide from dev to QE to production the ability to life cycle this, all your content. And that works across a number of areas. So dive into it a little bit more here. If you look at cloud forms, it provides not only consistent operations management on Reve and OpenStack, but it actually works across Hyper-V, vSphere, and AWS. So the key here is that you can drop this in. It doesn't need a green field environment. You don't need to deploy new infrastructure for this. You can literally drop the supply into your existing VMware environment, discover it, begin to discover the workloads there. And then you can optimize your VMware environment at the same time you start to plan out your OpenStack deployments. We have a number of customers that are using cloud forms actually to analyze their VMware environment and determine what workloads are best to move on to OpenStack. And so we have customers who are actually doing this migration today. All right. By the way, we can keep this interactive. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. There's a microphone in the middle, so there's a price to pay if you want to ask. You have to get up and make your way through everybody. All right, so on to satellite. So one of the things about satellite that is really crucial for this is basically providing that consistent content management. So whether it's syncing your configs from Git or pulling down certified content from our content delivery network or the ones you set up, it provides consistent life cycle management for not only the hosts, but also the guests. So whether it's your control nodes on OpenStack or it's your compute nodes or it's the instances running on there, satellite can provide consistency on how you mirror that content down, get it out there, and deploy it. And it can also update cloud forms as well. So the cloud forms, all this gets pulled together. So you don't need to have multiple tools, one for your hosts, one for your tenants, one for your management system. You can kind of unify that life cycle management between everything. And so what it also allows you to do is basically the combination of cloud forms and satellite with OpenStack or Rev or any of the other providers that Cloud Form supports can start to provide this kind of what we call standard operating environment and kind of consistent workflow. So it's great when you get OpenStack up and running, but then the question is how do you actually automate your tenant workloads on top of there? So just providing a QCOW image with cloud in it might be good enough for some workloads, but there's a lot of users that want to actually build out very complex applications on top of there. And so what cloud forms can do is it can actually help people basically with the automation engine can actually reach down into whether it's a control node on OpenStack or the manager on Rev or a V center on VMware or AWS. It can build up that entire instance using the native OpenStack APIs. Again, we're upstream only. This is nothing special we're doing here. And once it does that, it can actually do all the workflow and approval. So once your instance is built, then the instance can actually reach back out over to satellite. And that's kind of that step two there, where that satellite can handle all the provisioning. So whether it's what network cards you want on there, what IP addresses, what users, what RBAC control, role-based access controls, everything built onto that system the way you want it with controlled content. And then it could be handed back over to the automation engine. And this way your users are basically able to start to build out way more complex applications on top of OpenStack, Rev or the like. And just from CloudForms 3.2, which is based on, again, based on the managed IQ community, is actually going to support heat templates as well. So you can actually start to leverage all your heat templates inside of OpenStack for deployment there. So that's kind of the workflow automation here. Let me just also say that right now, the way up until version 3.2, which is the release is kind of imminent, CloudForms looked at OpenStack the same way it looked at AWS. So you'd come in as a tenant. All you would see is your tenant workloads. But we've done a lot of work in the Kilo release. Actually, Hugh, right there, so Hugh's team did a lot of work at Red Hat to basically instrument a lot of the projects inside of the Kilo release, Ironic, Tuscar and the like, to basically expose more information about the actual OpenStack infrastructure. So one of the big requests we got from enterprise customers was that they wanted to be able to see into that infrastructure layer of OpenStack and not just view it as a tenant, so that they could actually start to do capacity utilization planning, control policies, those sorts of things. And so in the Kilo release of OpenStack, we've instrumented all that into the kind of control plane, right, of the overcloud. And so CloudForms can actually add an infrastructure provider now and look at OpenStack as an infrastructure provider. So we're able to start pulling out a lot more metrics around CPU memory utilization, all those sorts of things. I think you're going to see, over the coming weeks, you're going to see some pretty cool demonstrations we do where we actually hook CloudForms, actually manage IQ, because we'll probably use the upstream code to demonstrate this. Where manage IQ is actually looking at our RDO, our OpenStack distribution, and being able to automatically scale this based on capacity utilization data. So pretty cool stuff. Oh, is he? OK, who's that, John? Yeah, so we've got a whole bunch of sessions that I'll plug at the end, and that's probably going to be demonstrated here. All right, so just from a conceptual standpoint, because I know everybody here, we all love OpenStack, right? I love OpenStack, but the reality is that there's probably some, strategically, there's a reason people want to separate their cloud management platform from their infrastructure platform. And part of it is that you don't want to push too much business logic into your infrastructure platform. So by leveraging a cloud management platform, what it allows you to do is you can gain a service catalog that works across providers. And things like governance quotas, approvals, and placement logic can be separated from the actual infrastructure platform.  And then on the other end of that, you can also decouple yourself from the infrastructure by leveraging systems management. So in this case with Forman, you could leverage things like content views and host groups, so you can build automation that works across all your infrastructure platform, and it's not just tied to a single silo of OpenStack. All right. So three things I want to touch on. So between Rev and OpenStack, we've been doing a lot of work in bringing together networking, identity management, and storage. So you can have a common fabric between both of these. So this is pretty interesting work because what it allows you to do is simplify your architecture so that you can be leveraging neutron across mode one and mode two, as well as identity management. So on the identity management side, I told you I'd give you guys motion sickness. All right. So on the identity management side, what we've been doing is leveraging Red Hat's identity management, which is based on something called IPA. And so what IPA allows you to do is actually allows you to do cross domain trusts, even with Active Directory. And so you can start to build a unified single sign-on between all these. So for example, with OpenStack, we've done a lot of work so that Kerberos and SSO works seamlessly. So when users log into OpenStack, they can also log into Satellite, CloudForms, and Rev with that same identity. And it flows all across. And again, this is kind of simplifying the architecture, making it more usable so you don't have to log in multiple times, have multiple users, and multiple places. On the neutron side, this is actually new in Rev 3.5. What we've actually done is there's something called the Rev Manager in Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization. You can think of it like vCenter or Microsoft System Center, Virtual Machine Manager. And it can actually look and discover neutron networks in your OpenStack environment. So if I have neutron networks in OpenStack, my OpenStack distribution, I can actually discover them with Rev Manager, and I can make them available to my virtual machines running on Rev. So now I can start to build a common tenant network between mode one and mode two. This is kind of simplifying all those pieces between here. So I don't have to learn one networking technology and how to provision a network for my virtualization and one for OpenStack. And then finally, on the storage side, we support glance between the two. So basically, you could dump all your images and templates in one spot. And then you could leverage these images and templates across both Rev and OpenStack. So we're kind of combining these two areas. In the 3.6 release of Rev, we're also adding Cinder support for this as well in Rev. So basically, you'll be able to use Cinder in Rev to back all your stateful virtual machines as well. All right, no questions. I should have brought some hats. Hats always get questions. All right, so just to give you guys an overview of where these kind of capabilities lie, a lot of people say they want to deliver AWS in their data center. The reality is that between OpenStack and Rev, what you're getting is mostly solving the problem of compute, persistent storage, object storage. Don't get me wrong, these are important problems. The same problems Rev solves as well just in a different paradigm. But then when you move into areas of analytics, monitoring, IT service catalogs, charge back, those pieces are really solved by cloud forms and the cloud infrastructure play. And then satellites adding onto that kind of tenant provisioning, configuration management, software distribution as well. All right, so two things I want to kind of, one other thing I want to kind of impart on you guys is this idea of how to deploy. So we kind of view, at the infrastructure layer, you have two options, right? You can kind of nest your virtual infrastructure, your existing virtual infrastructure underneath OpenStack, right? And you probably see people talking about this even here. But from our standpoint, we feel that on the left-hand side, you kind of lose the ability to do centralized operations management when you do that. And second, you kind of pin yourself to a scale up architecture underneath OpenStack, which is kind of fundamentally flawed, right? OpenStack is meant to scale out. And so the way we actually work on our deployments is we leverage cloud forms as kind of a broker between vSphere, OpenStack, Rev, Hyper-V, AWS so that users can get a consistent experience with that. But really, we leverage KVM underneath OpenStack as opposed to trying to kind of shoehorn a vertically scaling architecture underneath a scale out architecture. All right. So a couple of options you have here. So you can actually coexist your VM work footprint with either Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization or OpenStack. I'm going to actually skip this one and just go right to OpenStack. So basically, we've had a number of people that are actually interested in migrating from VM or vSphere over to OpenStack. And so we are doing this today. So there's kind of two ways of doing this. The first is leveraging something like cloud forms and actually doing a vert v2v copy. So actually, you see number one there. Basically, you're taking the virtual machine. You're using the vert v2v tooling that exists in Red Hat Enterprise Linux.  And that works. It's a binary operation. It's very expensive. But we have users who are doing this today at scale. The second option that we see probably more people doing is that they are using the cloud management platform and then brokering new workloads onto OpenStack and some workloads onto vSphere based on tagging, capacity utilization, what the application is. So this is probably a far more common request that we have. And so that's really where cloud forms shine. So it basically builds workflow and decision making into the cloud management platform. And then based on the person's user ID or tagging or however you want to build your taxonomy inside there, it can decide where it's going to place a workload. So it might be that a developer logs in and you determine that developer can go onto OpenStack. And then when a production person logs in to deploy an application, that's going to get dropped onto OpenStack. So we see a lot more interest in that kind of approach. All right. So just to give you an idea of some of the common management integration. So we integrate in two different places. One is on the management side. And here we integrate with almost every popular configuration management system. No CF engine on there. Sorry. But CMDBs, catalogs, workloads, infrastructure. So whether it's Puppet, Chef, Ansible, we have numerous customers doing all of these kinds of integrations today. Or whether it's integrating with your IP address management systems like Infoblox. And then satellite actually integrates with Git and Jenkins so you could do continuous delivery of your kind of configuration data as well. And then on the infrastructure side, this is just a sampling of them. This is probably one of the biggest, I think, one of the largest IHV independent hardware vendor certification programs in the industry through Red Hat. And we extend this across both Red Hat Enterprise virtualization and our OpenStack platform. And the reason we could do this is because it's all based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. And so we deliver this huge ecosystem around there. So whether it's storage, network, or compute, you have kind of a huge choice there. So any questions? You don't have to use the microphone. Sorry. All right. So what I'll do is I'll let you know about a couple of sessions here. We have a bunch of sessions going on. I will definitely tell you the managed IQ sessions going to be great on Wednesday. Definitely attend that. There's a whole bunch of live labs there. We have the other one I was going to mention is Mark McLaughlin's keynote tomorrow morning. But with that, I'll take any questions. Hi, James. Thank you. Last year, we looked at managed IQ, and we found basically two areas where we found it wanting. One was single tenant. It was very much single tenant oriented. So I think we're going to have a look at 3.2 now. The other one was the integration with the solometer, which we found extremely expensive. Solometer itself was not without its problems. Can you say something about solometer and managed IQ integration today? Yes, I absolutely can. But even better would be Zav. And you can talk more about it. All right. So there's a lot of multi-tenancy work happening right now upstream in managed IQ. The target, so right now where we're at, is CloudForms 3.2 is going to be the next release. Beyond that, the six-month release cadence we're on, the plan is to get true multi-tenancy done in that six-month window. Around solometer, there's been a number of improvements around solometer data gathering in the 3.2 release as well, not only on the managed IQ side, but on solometer itself. And so those I think you'll see in the 3.2 release. OK, thank you. One last question. CloudForms also talks to Microsoft VMM, doesn't it? Yeah, so in the 3.2 time frame, that is the goal. So that release is kind of imminent. So that could be another way to get out of Microsoft VMM, actually, the same way you can get out of VMware. Thank you for saying that. I didn't say it. You're welcome. Can I get a hat now? Yes, I don't have any hats. But if you stop by the booth later, no. All right. There was not a plant, by the way. I promise. Anybody else? All right. Well, thanks, guys. I'll give you back some time, I guess. All right.


I found 15 easy remote jobs that you can do at night. And nighttime-related jobs tend to be easier to land than jobs that you do during the day because less people want to do them. But if you're a night owl and you like working at night, these could be perfect for you. And I can almost guarantee you that most of these you have never heard of. So if you appreciate me doing all this hard work to get this content out for you, go ahead and gently tap that like button and let's jump into it right now with number one on the list, which is going to be Movie Recap Script Writer.  Well, meet the Movie Recap Script Writer. They distill movies and TV shows into bite-sized summaries, providing a short chronological summary of a two-hour movie in a matter of minutes. And one way you can make money doing this is being a script writer for a YouTube channel that does these summaries. So for example, here is a post online. They're hiring a Movie Recap Script Writer for a YouTube channel, and they pay $35 to $65 an hour. And they even mentioned that they're willing to pay higher rates for the most experienced freelancers. So yeah, this as well as other types of script writing opportunities can be great for you. I'm gonna go ahead and give this an eight out of 10 opportunity score. And honestly, YouTube is my favorite way of making money. I honestly think it's the easiest way to make money online. And if you're interested in how to start a YouTube channel or if you already have a YouTube channel and you wanna grow it faster or monetize it better, I actually do coach people on how to do this. I've gotten lots of different people to over six figures a month. And I make over six figures a month myself on YouTube. So if you're interested in doing that and you're serious about YouTube because we only work with people who are serious about it, go ahead and check that out by clicking the link down in the description as well as the pinned comment below. Next is going to be a helpline coordinator. And this is basically a position where you intervene through calls whenever someone's feeling like they want to hurt themselves. And there are many companies that hire for these types of positions. And this company, for instance, starts at about $24 per hour. And as you can imagine, this is of course a position where there's gonna be a lot of opportunities in the middle of the night. Now, this is an incredibly important position because unfortunately, this is one of the top nine leading causes for death among the ages of 10 to 64. And it's the second leading cause for death in between the ages of 10 to 14 and 20 to 34, which is really sad if you think about it. So like I said, there's a lot of different companies that hire for this. Here's another one where they pay about $58,000 a year.  However, if you're passionate about helping people, then it can be a great opportunity for you. And of course, there's gonna be a lot of opportunities at night. And it typically does not require a college degree or previous experience to land these types of jobs. So overall, I'm gonna give this one an opportunity score of eight out of 10. Next on the list is going to be tutors. Now, you're probably thinking, Shane, the only people who make money with tutoring are people who are good at math, or maybe people who are good at hard sciences. Well, I decided to choose one specifically, which is private poetry tutor, just to show you that that's not necessarily true. But of course, you can get opportunities in all different types of tutoring. And your job in this situation is to get students how to understand, appreciate, read, and write poetry. And a specific company that hires for this type of tutor is going to be Lesson Pal. And Lesson Pal tutors typically make $39 to $62,000 a year. So the big point here is being a tutor can be incredibly lucrative and you get to teach people things that you're either passionate about, good at, or both. I personally made a bunch of money tutoring when I was going to school, and it was a great experience. I had a good time and I made a ton of money. So I'm gonna go ahead and give this one a nine out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a remote front desk associate. Now, you might be thinking, Shane, how in the world can you work at a front desk and also be remote at the same time? Well, a lot of the time front desk may get too many calls, and so what they'll do is they'll actually just forward it to someone working remote, and then they'll screen the call, see if it needs to actually go to the front desk, and in many cases, they can just take care of it themselves. And this is especially true for jobs in the middle of the night. Now, front desk associates typically make about 34 to $49,000 a year. Now, the truth is this is not a job that you probably wanna do for the rest of your life, but it can be a good way to get your foot in the door with a remote job. So for that reason, I'll go ahead and give it a seven out of 10 opportunity score. By the way, comment on this video about any of these jobs that you like or any other jobs that you want me to cover, and there's a good chance in the future that I'll cover them even more. Next is going to be a card customer service advisor. And these are the unsung heroes of credit card or banking assistance. So you're basically going to be answering customer inquiries, providing banking solutions, and ensuring that people have a smooth experience with their credit or debit cards. So what sets this job apart is you have to have a combination of financial knowledge as well as customer service skills. And that's why these types of positions tend to make a little bit better money than just customer service alone. In fact, you can expect to make between 51 and $82,000 a year. And there are many opportunities for remote jobs and many opportunities for remote jobs at night. So this is another really good one. I'll give it an 8.5 out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be an SEO associate. Now SEO stands for search engine optimization. And this is basically the secret sauce behind all of those top ranking websites. You know those websites that almost always show up at the top of Google whenever you search something. And they do this by optimizing content, enhancing keywords, and strategizing digital success in various different industries. And a lot of the time SEO associates are gonna get hired in industries such as e-commerce, business, startups, corporations, content publishers, web development agencies, and small businesses. And an interesting fact is 68% of all online experiences begin with a search engine. So as you can see, SEO is incredibly important. And SEO associates make 45 to $74,000 a year. Now SEO is a type of digital marketing. And digital marketing is the most popular and best type of marketing in the modern day because you can actually track it. Think about it, it's very hard to track how many sales you get from a banner ad, or a TV ad, or a radio ad. However, with digital marketing, you can track exactly how much money you make from these different types of ads. And I've actually interviewed a bunch of people on this channel that have been able to get into digital marketing. For instance, Orlando was an actor in Los Angeles and he was able to quickly land a high-paying digital marketing job that was remote, flexible, and allowed him to pursue his passion of acting. And if you're curious how he was able to quickly land this job, he was actually able to do it through my friend Seth, who's helped thousands of people get into digital marketing. And Seth does have a free masterclass which explains everything you would possibly wanna know about digital marketing and whether it's right for you. And I'll put that down in the description as well as the pinned comment below. So go ahead and click that if you're interested. But yeah, SEO associate is amazing. Lots of different digital marketing careers are awesome. I'm gonna give this a 9.5 out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a customer care specialist. And this is a person who's responsible for addressing customer inquiries. And they're also going to resolve issues and provide assistance, all to ensure a positive customer experience with a company's products or services. And customer care specialists make 37 to $53,000 a year. Now I get it, this is not going to be the sexiest job out there. You're gonna have to deal with Karens. But with that being said, this is still one of the easiest remote jobs to land. There's still literally millions of different customer service jobs available. And there's a ton of them available at night. So is this something you're gonna do for the rest of your life? Of course not. But is it something that you can quickly land a remote job at night with? Yes. So I'm gonna go ahead and give this one a 7.5 out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be tier one tech support. Now this may also be referred to as first line support. And you're basically responsible for providing initial customer assistance and resolving basic technical issues. And you serve as the first point of contact to customers that are experiencing technical difficulties. So there's lots of different companies that hire for this type of position, just to mention a few internet service providers, telecommunications companies and customer support outsourcing agencies. And first line support makes 42 to $72,000 a year. And you might notice that that's much higher than a customer service representative. And the reason for that is because you do have to have a little bit of technical skill. You have to be relatively good with technology. But does this career require a college degree? Absolutely not. Does this career require previous experience? Usually not. And by the way, sometimes I get comments down below about certain careers where they'll look up technical support for instance and they'll say, oh, the company does want previous experience. I can tell you for these types of roles after helping hundreds of people get into them, even if it says it requires experience, just apply anyways. Usually it is a preference, it's not something that they need. I see, I get it now. And at the end of the day, all they really care about is that you have the skills necessary to do the job. And on top of that, this is a great job to get into if you wanna get into higher level jobs in the technology industry later on down the line. Now by the way, if you think of somebody else who could get value from a video like this, maybe it's a friend, a family member or just someone who needs to get a job, go ahead and send this video to them, share it with them. I actually get messages all the time from people saying that they shared this with their cousin or their nephew and then they were able to get a job later on. So yeah, tier one tech support is great. I'm gonna give this a nine out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be an intake specialist. Now this is a position where you could work in a bunch of different types of industries. The most common ones are going to be medical, legal, social service agencies and educational institutions. And you're basically responsible for intaking calls from customers and you're usually the first person that that customer talks to in your company. And your job is to make the patient feel welcome, comfortable and initiate a positive first experience with the company. And you're basically gonna be taking down their information, seeing if your products or services fit with them. And if so, you're gonna be directing them to the right person. An intake specialist make about 41 to $57,000 a year. This is another one of those careers that does not require a college degree or previous experience in most cases. It's relatively easy to get into and it's even easier to get into if you try to get into a nighttime role. So it's another pretty good one. I'll give this a 7.5 out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be an appointment setter. Now, appointment setters play a vital role in the sales process of a company. And they're basically responsible for scheduling and arranging meetings. And these meetings would be between potential clients and sales representatives. And there's many different industries that use appointment setters. Just to mention a few, real estate, insurance, financial services and marketing firms. Now there's also many different types of appointment setters. Some of them are going to be outbound appointment setters. If you do that by phone, that would be known as a cold caller. Many of them are going to be inbound appointment setters where you basically wait for someone to call or message you. Some of them only message with people. So for instance, there's appointment setters on Instagram that literally just message with people. They never talked to anybody on the phone. And then some of them are gonna be more integrated into the sales process. And appointment setters typically make between 45 and $70,000 a year. And there are certain types of appointment setters that can make much more than that. So this is another really good one. It's also a great way to kind of dip your toe in the sales industry without jumping in head first. And then there are higher level sales jobs that you can eventually move into that can pay much, much higher than this. So I'm gonna give this one a 9.5 out of 10 opportunity score because there's a lot more opportunities down the line. By the way, if you haven't done it already, what are you thinking? Hit that subscribe button and ring the notification bell. I think only about 20% of people who watch the channel regularly are subscribed. So stop lurking, hit that subscribe button and notification bell and you'll never miss out on the content that I'm about to drop because it's gonna be awesome. Next is going to be a social media community manager. And this is basically a position where you represent a brand. And you do that by engaging with the brand's online audience, responding to concerns, and in some ways being the voice of the brand. And social media community managers make 54 to $85,000 a year. And the great thing about this job is it's relatively easy to get into, doesn't require a college degree or previous experience. And it's actually easier to get into it if you're young. And the reason for that is pretty obvious. If you're young, you're gonna be more familiar with social media. So this is another really good one. I'm gonna go ahead and give it a nine out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a legal assistant. And this is someone who provides administrative support to legal professionals. And this might include drafting documents, conducting research, and managing client communications. And there are many different organizations that hire for these types of positions. Some of them include law firms, corporate legal departments, government agencies, and legal outsourcing firms. And legal assistants make 43 to $63,000 a year. Now, some law firms are gonna require you to get an associates in paralegal studies. Many of them don't though, and you can just get into it without a college degree. Some of them also require you to have experience, and some of them will train you. So overall, this one's a little bit harder to get into, so I'm gonna give it a seven out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a remote hotel reservationist. And this is someone who's responsible for booking hotel accommodations over the phone with guests. They may also help people online through chats, assist with inquiries, and overall just do whatever they can to ensure a smooth booking process. And there's various different types of companies that hire for these types of roles, and these include hotels, resorts, travel agencies, and online booking platforms. So this is basically a combination of customer service skills, with some knowledge when it comes to the travel and hotel industry. In this position, you'd make about 35 to $53,000 a year. So this is another pretty decent one. I'm gonna go ahead and give it a seven out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a telephone interviewer. And this is somebody who conducts online interviews or online surveys in order to get people's opinions and gather data. And you could be hired by various different types of companies like market research firms, polling organizations, customer feedback agencies, and even government agencies. And telephone interviewers make $33,000 to $47,000 a year. Now, this is not the highest paying job ever. It's probably not something you wanna do for the rest of your life, but it can be relatively easy to land this job. Doesn't require a college degree or previous experience usually. So yeah, pretty decent one. I'll give it a seven out of 10 opportunity score. Next is going to be a donor coordinator. This is someone who's responsible for managing and coordinating organ and tissue donation. And this involves communicating with the organ donor, the organ recipient, the hospital, and the transplant center. And in this position, you make about $43,000 to $62,000 a year. Now with this role, a bachelor's degree is often required, but it sometimes doesn't matter what type of bachelor degree it is. And in addition, they also prefer people who have previous experience. You're also gonna need some training, but typically the company or hospital is going to be able to train you. So yeah, this one is pretty good. It's also harder to get into though. So for that reason, I'll give it a 7.5 out of 10 opportunity score. By the way, if you haven't seen it already, I did have a video that went viral because people loved it so much. And that was the seven remote jobs that are always hiring. And you can check that out by clicking right here.