The Alignment Gap: Why Leaders and Employees See a Different Workplace

[00:00:09] Welcome to Frequency, I'm Jenni Field And I'm Chuck Gose. Frequency is your go-to for real talk about comms, culture and employee experience beyond the buzzwords and straight to what matters. Jenni, as we kick off these stories this week, I was thinking about last year, Riverside, who we used to record our podcast, did this whole like, what's the word you said the most? And it was like, AI, AI, AI, AI, over and over again.

[00:00:29] We're gonna be kicking off with the AI paradox this week. Risks with quote unquote, vibe coding, a shocking gap between leaders and employees, I hope the sarcasm came through there. The importance of meetings and companies are banning phones at work. Oh, like they're banning them in school. Before we get into that, I wanted to kick off today with a bit of celebration.

[00:00:54] So, several million episodes ago, we talked about the importance of celebrating our friends and celebrating the work that they're doing. And there are three friends I want to celebrate on the podcast this week. The first is my best friend, Advita Patel, who has published her second book, which is called Decoding Confidence. It's a fantastic read about how to develop your confidence as a leader. And I'll put a link in the show notes so you can pick up a copy. She has also done a little podcast series about it if you want to listen to some of that.

[00:01:23] The next friend is Rachel Miller, who has published her second book recently, which is Successful Change Communication. And Rachel's book is out and available now, but it's got lots of expert views in it, focused very much on the internal comms practitioner and how to improve change comms in your organization.

[00:01:41] And the third friend I'm doing a shout out for is someone who is not in comms, but is my friend Steph, who has spent the last five years doing her degree part time while also being a teacher, full time mum, all of those things. And she's just finished her last assignment, which means after five years, she's getting her weekends back and she doesn't know what to do with herself with the amount of time she's going to have. And she's absolutely delighted. And we had a little celebration for her at the weekend with some cake.

[00:02:08] So I just wanted to give her a little shout out to celebrate it, because I think that's tremendous work doing all of that. And while we're on friends, to you, our friends listening, don't forget that if you want to join us at Unilease Unite 26 in London on 29th and 30th of September, where we'll be doing a live show of Frequency, you can use the discount code FREQUENCY20 to get 20% off your ticket. Well done on that friends to friends transition. Thank you. That was really good.

[00:02:38] That was really good. That was good. Yeah, that was good. Let's get into the stories this week. Microsoft's 2026 Work Trend Index surveyed 20,000 workers across 31 countries and landed on a finding that should make your company leadership uncomfortable. The biggest barrier to getting value from AI isn't the technology and it isn't the people. It's the organization itself. 66% of AI users say it lets them spend more time on high value work.

[00:03:06] 58% say they're producing work they couldn't have produced before, but employers aren't redesigning systems and incentives or metrics. That actually capture that value. Microsoft calls the top 19% of AI users, quote unquote, frontier firms. These are organizations where individual readiness and structural capability reinforce each other. The report found a 15x year-over-year increase in active AI agents on Microsoft 365, 18x in larger enterprises.

[00:03:34] 31% of workers are misaligned situations using AI, but the organization around them hasn't caught up. Only 13% of employees say their employer rewards reinventing work with AI when results fall short. Only one in four say leadership is clearly aligned on AI direction. The report's framing as AI takes on execution and human agency should expand is optimistic.

[00:03:59] Whether organizations are actually built to use that free capacity for anything useful is a different question entirely. Jenni Field, only 25% of workers say their leaders are clearly aligned on AI direction. Whose job is it to resolve that leadership ambiguity or does trying to do so just simply create another problem?

[00:04:19] So this feels like a layer upon layer upon layer of data that we've talked about now, I think, for the last quarter almost, about where we are with AI in organizations. If I think back to last week when we talked about the IC index and the confidence in the future of the workplace, and they were saying that internal comms are a position to help make sure that AI is being used to solve the right problems, right? This feels like that's sort of part of this data set of people saying people aren't really aligned.

[00:04:46] We've then also talked about stuff in the past around it's how you message it that's a problem, about the fact that people that are using AI aren't freeing up time for more thinking and things like that. They're just doing more work, which isn't really helpful. So it feels like all of the data is pointing to just a big old mess in organizations about how we're using AI. And in terms of whose job is it to resolve that ambiguity, it is the leader's job to do that. Like they have to set the direction.

[00:05:14] They have to have that clarity around this is what we're doing. We talked about that report recently or that article that said to what end? You know what I mean? Like the measurement is no longer adoption. It's actually what are we actually trying to do? Somebody has to set that in stone almost like this is what we're going to try and do. If we're just playing, then just say you're playing. If that's the direction is we are just in a sandpit right now. We're just going to play around and see what happens. Then that's fine.

[00:05:42] But this lack of clarity is causing so much mess in organizations that is then going to fall on something like a comms function to fix. When actually it's the leader's job to do that, in my opinion. I think the data points that stand out to me are this one where two thirds are saying that AI lets them spend more time on high value work. That is exciting. And that 58% said they're producing more producing work they couldn't have produced before. That is intriguing.

[00:06:12] But I'm wondering, too, at times, especially from the comms and HR side, this 31% of workers are misaligned situations where they're using it, but the org hasn't caught up. I'm wondering if that's where some communicators and HR people are sitting, where they're using it in ways that the org is focusing on other areas right now, or they don't know yet quite what that benefit's going to be.

[00:06:34] And that's where I think that frustration is probably going to sit, whether you're forced to use tools you don't want to use, or you're benefiting in ways that the org doesn't really care about quite yet. I can see that being that frustration. If you're producing this high value work, but the org isn't caught up to that yet, I could see that being a big frustration for employees. Yeah, but I also question some of that data. So, you know, it's a bit like, again, we talked about last week, if you're going to say, you know, do people trust me? Yes, they absolutely do.

[00:07:04] Like, you know, are you doing high value work? Who's to say that's high value work? Like, who's determining that? And if you're producing work that you couldn't have produced before, yes, that's great. But is it something that you did need to produce before? Or have you just created something that you didn't need to do? I can't believe you're taking the side of management on this, Jenni Field. Like, where is the... What a suit. Where is the business impact? And that, for me, is still what's missing.

[00:07:30] If it had said 66% of AI users saying it's letting them spend more time on activities that are having a direct impact on the organization's goals, priorities, success. If it said 58% said they're producing work that is having a, you know, a profound change in innovation and what we're doing. But it's not saying that. It's just saying, oh, I think I'm doing more high value stuff and I'm producing stuff I couldn't do before.

[00:07:54] None of that is showing whether or not that is actually useful or helpful for the organization's success. I think, though, when it goes back to that data point, only one in four say leadership is aligned on AI direction. That's the problem. Yeah. That's the problem. That you clearly don't even know that your leaders aren't even aware of what's going on or what we should be using this for or how are we benefiting. So I'm not going to put that onus then on the employee to make that decision. No. I'm going to take the side of the employee, Jenni Field.

[00:08:23] You could take the side of management on this one. I'm going to believe them that they say they're doing high value work and the work they're producing because they know their job better than anybody else. Who's this? If a leader, if I think that's who decides value, is that the person doing the work or is it the person eight layers above looking down on them, deciding if that's valuable? That's a very big question, which we shall not answer today.

[00:08:48] Next up, an Israeli cybersecurity firm called Red Access Scan Apps built with Vibe coding tools, things like Lovable, Base44, Replit, Netify, which I have used, and found 380,000 publicly accessible assets. Around 5,000 of them contain sensitive corporate data. Every IT person who listened to this, the hair stood up. Privacy settings on many of these tools defaulted to public and the apps are being indexed by Google.

[00:09:17] The people who built them often had no idea this was happening. Lovable, which doesn't sound very lovable right now, had a particularly rough run. In February 2026, a researcher found 16 vulnerabilities in a single Lovable hosted app, exposing nearly 18,000 user records.

[00:09:36] In April, another researcher revealed that any free Lovable account holder could access a different tenant's source code, database credentials, AI chat history, and customer data. In April, a Q1 2026 assessment, more than 200 Vibe coded apps found that 92% had at least one vulnerability traceable to AI hallucination, and more than 60% exposed API keys or database credentials in public repositories.

[00:10:03] If you're not an IT person, trust me, this is not good stuff. And this isn't a niche developer problem. Employees across organizations are using these tools right now to build things their IT departments do not know about. The Vibe coding pitch is simply like anyone can build with AI. I think I have probably also said that works exactly as intended. You have said that. The security implications are the other side of the same point. I have said that, but I also do not work for some massive company.

[00:10:32] Jenny, Vibe coding platforms are giving employees genuine capability to build tools without involving IT. Is this fundamentally a good thing with a security problem attached or is shadow IT just shadow IT no matter how AI powered it is? It's a good question. I need to come back to the term Vibe coding and just clarify what that means for people listening. Do you want me to clarify it or are you going to say it? I really do. In my head, I'm like, we're like, Vibe coding, man. That's kind of what it's like. I'm glad you're doing that.

[00:11:02] For those watching the video, you will see Jenny Vibe coding. It's basically people that you have an idea and you just start building it. You start planning out, you're building it. You don't know developer. You don't know all the code, but you're just actively building, testing, continuing, playing. All of those things that it gives. Basically, it's like coders who aren't coders can now Vibe code because you're coding on vibes. You're not coding on tech skills. So I think that this is fundamentally a good thing with a security problem.

[00:11:30] And if I link it into something that's got, I would say, less security risk, it's almost like when Canva came out and all of a sudden people could design, we were Vibe designing. Does that count? You can go with it. And I think that it's the same thing. It's like you can only go so far, you can do so much, but you're kind of playing, doing stuff, things that you couldn't do before because there's a tool that's now available to do it. This, for me, is not a bad thing.

[00:11:57] You know, you've had hours of fun Vibe coding and testing and doing stuff and, you know, making games, all sorts of things, right? There's something brilliant in that, that technology is making this more accessible. But the security problem attached with it is the risk. And so I think, yes, it is fundamentally a good thing with a security problem attached. I think, I love that you compared this to design. So we've got Vibe coding, we've got Vibe designing. And I think then you look at it from the professional side of things.

[00:12:26] Communicators are probably frustrated with other people Vibe communicating, just kind of doing it themselves. Not, not, not relying on the experts or the people to come to, to do it. You know, that this has got to be frustrating for IT teams, but I think it's also a good lesson to learn that what's your Jurassic Park thing you always come back to? Like nature finds a way. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Yeah, there you go. And also nature finds a way. People will find a way. If, if IT is saying, no, we're not going to do that. No, you can't do that.

[00:12:55] People will find a way. They'll, they'll do a workaround. So how, how do you make this happen? How do you, how do you teach and educate the risks and dangers of this, but still encourage? It's like, how do you give people the to do's and not the to don'ts on it? If you give enough people don't, they won't mess with it. But there's a lot of value in people understanding what goes into some of these things. But it also shows the risk that's out there. Yeah. And it's a big risk. And I think that does need to be addressed because that risk is significant, especially when you're dealing with data.

[00:13:24] So we've talked about, you know, people selling off data and all sorts of stuff. Like there's a, there's a lot in there that needs to be fixed, but the essence of it. And here they don't need to sell it. It's, it's, it's readily available. They can just go poach it. Next, Jenny, we're going to talk about the shocking gap between leaders and employees. The numbers from Axios's HQ's 2026 internal comms report are an uncomfortable reading for anyone who calls themselves a communications leader.

[00:13:52] 27% of leaders believe their employees are fully aligned with the organization's goals. Only 9% of employees agree. The perception gap runs deeper. 80% of leaders think their communications are helpful and relevant. 53% of employees feel the same. The same pattern holds for clarity engagement. Leaders rate themselves at 80%. Employees check in at 50%. It's also expensive.

[00:14:18] Employees say they spend two thirds of their working day during their actual job. The rest disappears into bad communication, avoidable meetings, and noise that leaders apparently don't notice because they're not the ones sitting in it. The cost of poor communication runs anywhere from $3,600 to $37,000 per employee per year. Jenny, when the leaders-employee alignment gap is this wide, 27% versus 9%, neither of those

[00:14:48] numbers are ideal. At what point does, quote unquote, improving communication stop being the answer and some bigger change become the only true honest response to this? Now. Now is the time where it's stopped. Now. We're right here. We're in it. We've been in it for probably about six months to a year, if not two, if not 10. Like, we're in it. And I think that there has to be an uncomfortable conversation. Like, something is really drastically not working.

[00:15:15] If we're saying 27% of leaders believe their employees are fully aligned, that is abysmal in itself. And then only 9% of employees agree. I mean, what are people doing in organisations? Like, from a leadership perspective, they're probably thinking, what are people doing? Like, are we doing the right things? Employees, only less than 10% agree. That they are aligned to what the organisation is doing. Something is wrong.

[00:15:41] And the only thing I can come back to on this is based on the conversations I have with clients, which is a range of people from comms, HR, boards, executive committees, directors. There is a real lack of clarity of strategic direction. And you can blame that on the fact that the world is changing at a rapid pace. We've got to make decisions quickly. All of that I get. But all of that I don't care about when it comes to you having a strategic direction in your organisation. It's not an acceptable excuse.

[00:16:10] And I think that it's being used as an excuse. And it doesn't wash anymore. This is the world we live in. You have to adapt to that pace. You've got to think strategically. You've got to put a stake in the ground. Get people to move forward. Change as you need to. Communicate that well. And go. But this 27%. I mean, I am shocked. And I know we did the shocking in the quote marks. But I am shocked. Yeah.

[00:16:37] Well, I think there it was the gap that leaders are 3x employees. But even the leaders are really far down the list. Yeah. To do the reverse math, 73% are saying we are not aligned. Yeah. Which is just showcases such a problem. I also want to point to everybody likes to run to these dollar figures, which now I'm going to do with a cautionary tale on this, that this we'll do. It says 3,600 to 37,000. That is a pretty.

[00:17:06] That's a 10x gap right there. That's a pretty big gap between the two. Let's take the conservative number on this. You're a company of a thousand people. I'm going to do the math for you. That's saying at least that poor communication is costing your company $3.6 million. That's conservatively per this data, $3.6 million. You're a 10,000 person company. That's 36 million. You have the numbers. You're adding a zero as you add a zero. And then take the extreme figure on that.

[00:17:34] All of a sudden, you're in the tens of millions of dollars that poor communication comes. If you believe these data figures, and I'm not saying you should or shouldn't. If you believe these data figures, this becomes something to go arm for investment. If you know that, hey, how can we improve communication? Well, we need to get our employees aligned with goals. Do they even know what these goals are? I think that is one of the bigger challenges that is so simply solved that employees truly don't know the purpose. They don't know what the goals even are

[00:18:03] because they're not even understandable or easily recitable. It's infuriating. And I kind of feel like, to your point on the numbers, I don't know what it's going to take to get people to actually do the work. And this isn't about comms people or HR people. This is about leaders. This is about leaders recognizing, actually, do you know what? We need to just go and sit in a room for two days and just figure out what we're doing. And then we can come out and talk about it. Make the time.

[00:18:32] Make the time to have that conversation. I think that's actually one of the worst things I could do, is going to a room and talk about it. I want them to go out and talk to all the other people. They spend enough time talking to each other. I don't think they do. I want them to go out and talk to everybody else. No, I disagree. I do not think they do spend anywhere near enough time talking to each other. I think they spend like a quick hour here and a quick hour there. And they don't spend the time to talk about what is it we're really doing? How are we going to talk about that? What's the impact across the organization?

[00:19:00] Yes, by all means, go out and talk to people and bring that back in. But at the moment, you need to put some sort of stake in the ground to get people moving and then test, adapt, iterate, agile. All of these things are there. But my worry of if you go out and spend the time and go out and talk to everybody and come back, you're kicking this down the curb. You're giving people permission to go, yeah, go out and spend three months and six months and do this and then come back. There is not the time. You have to make that decision,

[00:19:30] then be agile enough to evolve it and shift it and change it. But you have to do the work to pull this together. Otherwise, you're going to be spending millions, as you've pointed out each year, on stuff that you can absolutely save. Next up, Priya Parker, author of The Art of Gathering and truly one of the brightest minds on how and why humans come together, has been building out a body of work specifically on workplace meetings, everyone's favorite thing to do.

[00:19:58] Her core provocation, when teams are remote, hybrid, or distributed, meetings aren't just one tool among many. They're the primary way people experience the organization. Parker's central argument is that most meetings fail before they even start because the people who call them mistake a category for a purpose. Quote unquote, where meeting about the product launch is a category. A purpose is specific enough to make decisions against.

[00:20:26] It tells you who should be in the room, what success looks like, and when you're done. Most gatherings skip this step entirely. Her more recent work on hybrid meeting adds even another layer. The format itself now disadvantages certain participants by design, and most organizations aren't doing anything about it. Connection in a distributed workplace doesn't happen on its own. It has to be designed. This sits right next to the Microsoft data we talked about earlier on how poorly most organizations

[00:20:53] are capturing the value of the people they employ. We've talked about meetings in the past, Jenny. If meetings are the primary way distributed employees experience the organization, does that change who owns the meeting design, or does it just mean the current owner, which is sometimes usually no one, needs to actually do the job? So this is interesting. This is about the third time I've heard this Art of the Gathering book mentioned in the last sort of three weeks. Have you not read it?

[00:21:22] No, I haven't. Oh, that's a great read. It's a great read. So it's going on my list. So I love the premise of this, that meetings are the primary way we experience each other at work, and in an online world as well. And I think that's so true. And I don't think that's really been called out in this way before, in terms of how we interact with each other as that primary thing. So I think it's huge. And I've talked about, we've talked about digital body language.

[00:21:50] You introduced me to Erica, who wrote that book. And this is really important. But I think this comes down to culturally how the organization is doing this. So the meeting design has to be set up by the person that owns it. But sometimes having parameters in place around that are helpful. So I've talked before about Chris Dyer and Kim Shepard, who wrote the book Remote Work. They talk about different meeting types and how you show up for those. I think there's just more work in general to be done to make meetings work better,

[00:22:18] which I talked about a few episodes ago, where I got really cross about people saying meetings and not work. They just need to be better. And I think that has to be, I think you have agency to do that as an employee. I think you have the ability to make your meetings better rather than waiting for the organization to do it. But I think the organization should be doing that as well. Yeah, I think I misspoke for almost. I meant provocation, not provocation. I know, I really liked your provocation. Why I invented that word.

[00:22:47] But in her book, The Art of Gathering, one of her things to talk about is that sometimes having a meeting or a gathering is about actually excluding people. It's about who is it for and who is it not for, which can be a very challenging thing to happen in the workplace. But if people are so bothered by like, oh, I've got so many meetings, but they never want to be excluded from one. So it's, which is it?

[00:23:17] Do you want to be involved? Do you not want to be involved? Do you want to complain? Do you want your calendar full? Because sometimes it is about with her art of gathering, it's about deciding who should be there and who shouldn't be there. And I think taking that same argument and bringing it into the workplace is very important. And even giving people ideas around, hey, if it's this type of meeting, this is how it should be structured. If it's a one-on-one, maybe this is how it should be structured. If it's a team meeting, this is how you structure it. Giving people those templates, I think is really valuable.

[00:23:45] Yeah, for people that haven't read The Art of Gathering, it is a really good read where it's that, where you read things and you're like, yeah, obviously, but you hadn't processed it in time, that it's really made me rethink from an ecology standpoint, why and how we bring people together, that recognizing that what you're doing isn't always for everyone. Yes. Yeah. And it doesn't need to be. And I think that's really important. But I would just reiterate the point that you can do this. Like, I think sometimes people are waiting to be told,

[00:24:14] you can make meetings better. If you're in them, running them, you know, you are in charge of your behavior and your actions. So you can be part of that change as well. And lastly, phone pouches have left the concert venue and entered your workplace. Companies including ID.me have been locking employee devices in Yonder-style sealed pouches during shifts, the same technology used at comedy shows, school classrooms, and concerts.

[00:24:44] JPMorgan Chase's Jamie Dimon, who I love referencing from time to time, has called phones and meetings, quote unquote, disrespectful. The trend is spreading, but the research behind it is shakier than the headlines suggest. University of Southampton researcher Adrian Chatty's work shows phone bans can help with routine, repetitive work by cutting distractions. But the evidence gets murkier for complex roles that require creativity or judgment. You can lock a phone in a pouch, but you can't lock out a distracted mind.

[00:25:14] There's also the trust dimension people weren't talking about. Pouch locking an employee's personal device says something specific about the employer-employee relationship. Whether it sits on, we care about your focus, or we don't trust you to manage yourself, probably depends on whether anyone has asked employees what they thought about it before rolling it out. Jenny, would you let your company lock up your phone? No, and this is utterly ridiculous.

[00:25:43] This is the most ridiculous thing I think we might have talked about, because it serves no purpose, right? And also, just no, right? So we now live in a world where if I'm at work, I'm sat at a hot desk, probably. So I don't have any other phone. I might not even have a work phone, okay? So if somebody, if I had children, or I cared for a parent, or somebody else in my family,

[00:26:09] or I don't know, I'm just a bloody grown-up, and I might want to just have some conversations, taking my phone away doesn't do that. It makes sense in a comedy show, right? Because you don't want people to film that. You don't want people to take photos. You don't want that to be shared. It makes sense in a classroom, because you are learning, and you're a child. And you are more easily distracted, and you are there to learn for an hour, and then go and do something else. At work, I am in charge of my time.

[00:26:38] I am there for seven hours, and I am a grown-up. And this is just absolutely just mind-boggling to me, that this even thinks like it's... I've just got no words. It is a bit mind-boggling, but it does happen. And I think you're right. It's the context. It's the why is it being done. Because there are company environments where, because of security concerns, kind of along the lines of the comedy concert,

[00:27:07] they don't want data coming out, like that you can't take your phone into certain environments. And also, this is someone's typically, with very few companies are not even providing company devices. Like, this is your personal item. This is yours. And companies have policies around when and when you cannot use your phone sometimes, especially if you're in retail environments, hospitality, healthcare. They don't want you using your phone out in front of the public.

[00:27:36] But also, it's worth looking at those company policies. Because I know there was a certain casino that I worked with one time that launched an employee app, and wanted employees to use this as a resource with their customers. Because there were maps in there. There was instructions, restaurant times, all those things in there. But the employee policy said, do not use your phone in front of customers. Yeah. So which is it? Yeah. I'm not allowed to use my phone,

[00:28:05] except I am allowed to use my phone. So that then puts the employee in an impossible situation. But it's also linked to having an employee app on a phone. Do you know what I mean? It's all the work we've done in our respective careers of introducing technology to frontline workspaces, manufacturing, retail. Nearly all the policies are, you can't have your phone in that environment. And if there's a reason it makes sense, that I've been into places that are secure, and you have to put all of your personal belongings into a locker before you're allowed to go through. Right?

[00:28:34] That's quite normal in places that are, you know, government-related and security-related. And I'm totally fine with that in those environments. And that's what's expected. It's part of the contract. You know that. But if I'm just going to work, and someone at, you know, JP Morgan is now going to say, oh, we're just going to take everyone's phones away. Have the, oh, I'm going to, maybe said bloody, have the bloody conversation about the fact that you need to put your phone away when you're in a meeting. Like, that's, you're just not having the difficult conversation

[00:29:03] because it's easier to say, oh, actually just everyone put it in a locker. Have the conversation. Hey, Jamie, put your phone away. I'm in a meeting. It's not that hard. Right. Well, and to be fair, I'm not aware that, that JP Morgan Chase is doing this. It's their CEO who I love referencing, Jamie Dimon. He is saying that phones and means are disrespectful, but let's say they are. Yes. And I work at JP Morgan Chase. I would lock my phone up if Jamie Dimon locked his phone up. Do you think he's locking his phone up? No. Not a chance.

[00:29:33] Not a chance. So the fact that that's fine, if you want to say, hey, when we're in meetings, put the phones away, fine. But locking it up, because that to me, going back to the thing, we care about your focus versus we don't trust you to manage yourself. Come on. Let's be real here. Yeah. Ridiculous. Let's be real. Ridiculous. Well, that wraps up our stories for this week. Let's move on to our freak outs. Jenny, what are you freaking out about? So I am freaking out about the fact that I, I'm just not really at home very much.

[00:30:03] And I suppose I'm freaking out. You've, we've talked in the past about when you sort of pack loads of traveling and you're out and about and doing stuff. And I suppose I just feel a little bit like, well, gosh, I'm, I'm just not in the office. Like I'm either speaking at events or I'm running client workshops or I'm traveling. And a friend was saying to me the other day, or, you know, when are you next free for dinner? And I was like, 25th of June, which is mad. Right. But that's just kind of where I am. And there's some non-work stuff in there. I've got some,

[00:30:32] some nice things going on with sort of bachelorette hen party things and, and family birthdays. But I just, I'm living out of a suitcase. And I know sometimes when we're not on air and we're both going, I just need a day. I just need a day. Just need a day. So you can hear my freak out a little bit in that. I just need, I just need a day. So that's what I'm freaking out about. Literally freaking out about. Yeah.

[00:30:58] My freak out is I've now lived in Indianapolis for, including college, a little more than 30 years now. And there's something really special about the month of May in Indianapolis. And it all centers around the Indy 500. It, the, the buzzing of the track. We're fortunate. We just live probably a, without track activities going on, probably about a 10, 15 minute drive from the Indianapolis motor speedway.

[00:31:27] During track activities, that 10 or 15 minutes could turn into hours. If anybody's been to IMS, it is all city streets. So it's not, it's easy to get to and from, but there's a volume problem, but it's really cool to just be in a city where the entire culture revolves around this racing moment. And it happens every single year and it's family traditions for people. It's work traditions. There's so many cool, like people go to for not everyone. Some people go to the track every single day because there's qualifications or there's practice.

[00:31:57] So there's a race going on, or they get to go to the garages and the pits and it be very much becomes a culture of this city during the month of May to celebrate that. And yeah, it's been, it's really fun. We've gone out to the track a couple of times this May. We're not going to the race or didn't go to the race, but we did go to the U S Grand Prix, which is the road course that's happens here. But yeah, just a really cool time to be in Indianapolis. Yeah. It's nice. We like a little bit of local community culture. I think it's nice. Of course. And that's what we're freaking out about this week.

[00:32:26] The show notes have all the articles and links from today's conversation. If frequency is a part of your week, a quick review goes a long way. Subscribe wherever you're listening and share this with, just one person who's interested in what we talked about. Thanks to my friend, poet Ali for the music. We're back every Monday. See you next week.