The Un-automatable: Why Soft Skills Still Win in a Tech-Heavy World

Tasha Melchior, Mike Brown at UXDX EMEA. Video: https://youtu.be/phJsga428AI

Readable transcript: edited from the recording's captions for readability (fillers and false starts removed, punctuation and section headings added). Wording is the speaker's own. Timestamps are positions in the video. Names marked [?] could not be verified against the audio.

Introductions

[00:00:09] Mike: We got the fun challenge of keeping everybody on their toes before they go home.

[00:00:13] Tasha: Exactly. It's just us standing between you and drinks.

[00:00:17] Mike: And the previous session maybe made people hungry, so I hope you're not yet there.

[00:00:21] Tasha: Exactly. All right.

[00:00:23] Mike: I'll introduce myself first. I'm Mike Brown. You can probably hear from my accent that I'm from Australia originally, but I've been based over in the UK for quite a long time now. During that time I've really been building and leading design organizations, some larger than others. In almost all those cases it's been in really large, complex organizations like BT, EE [?], Discovery, and then lately Barclays. There's been a pretty consistent narrative in all the teams that I've built and all the situations I've been in, where we've really built up UX maturity during that time, increased the amount of user understanding and user research that we've done, and then driven real impact and changes in the business that way. That's something that I'm incredibly passionate about and bring to every role that I've done.

[00:01:14] My current role at Barclays is actually a bit of a change, because Barclays is a huge organization, so there are many design organizations. Myself and my organization actually sit within HR, and the principal focus of my team is learning design. We produce most of the digital learning that goes out globally throughout the whole bank. It is quite nice, because this is all colleague-facing, so there can be a real focus on user experience. We're not really selling very much in this current role, so I'm really enjoying it.

[00:01:45] Tasha: I'll also introduce myself. Thanks, Mike. I'm Tasha. I'm VP of Product at Everway. Everway is a company where we build assistive tech products for people with neurodivergent profiles, and our mission is to help them understand and be understood. I lead a team of eight product managers in a global team. I'm just really excited to be here and have this talk between a product lead and a design lead.

What stays human when AI speeds up design

[00:02:12] Tasha: The topic of today, as you can see on the screen, is the un-automatable. But really what we're asking is a simpler question. In a world where AI, which we've heard about so much in the last two days, can help us move faster, what still needs to stay deeply human? As a design lead, let's maybe start with what this means for you in your organization.

[00:02:37] Mike: Well, it's obviously something that we think about constantly and talk about constantly. I'm constantly being challenged, and there are suggestions about what we can automate and what we can't. It's a very common topic at work. For me, I obviously think about what we're doing right now, but also where things are going, in our particular area within learning and in design more generally. I think it's helpful for me to look back at how design has evolved in the time that I've been building and leading teams.

[00:03:06] Initially, when I first started building large design organizations, user experience design, UI design and user research were very separate disciplines. You had separate UX designers and separate UI designers, and what that meant is that it attracted quite different people as well. A lot of people entered the design professions who didn't come from a visual background. I used to hire lots of people who came from an academic background, psychology, those kinds of things, and they made fantastic UX designers.

[00:03:34] But then over time, as my teams and the ways that we worked adopted much more agile practices, which was great for efficiency, as the last talk would have emphasized, it got folded together, I think in most teams and certainly in the organizations that I was leading, into product design. You'd have one designer who could do all of that, and obviously it would vary with the team and the designer how successful that was. But with the advent of design systems becoming more prevalent, it was possible for a designer to do all of that.

[00:04:06] What I think it did, at least outwardly, at least in what I found, is that where wider stakeholders in the business saw design, they focused much more on the visuals. The work that we did in Figma, the visual work, became really the focus of design, and it just made it a bit harder to emphasize the things that we knew as designers were important, the user understanding, UX research, those kinds of things, because people got distracted by all the great visual work that we were doing.

[00:04:35] Now, coming into the advent of AI, I think it's very clear that in a pretty short period of time, the things that we can do with AI are going to swallow so much of that UI work and that visual work. All those things that designers spend a lot of time doing now, and that they're known for now, will be possible to do with AI, and be enabled and democratized for most people in the business to do. We're already seeing that. As I said, Barclays is a vast place, and the access to different models and adoption of AI is very different in different parts of the bank, but there are some parts that are really jumping ahead. We already have product managers, designers, everyone coding, everyone going straight to prototype, straight to code, in that kind of world.

[00:05:19] Once that gets ironed out and becomes replicable, and the things that are produced are actually credible, then what's left? Because if we don't need designers to create these artifacts, then what is left? I think it's that UX side. It's delivering that user understanding, evaluating things, problem solving, and, as we heard in one of the other talks today as well, that storytelling: being able to persuade and make people understand, make the right decisions. Those are the things that I think will remain.

[00:05:51] As I've been thinking about this, I read a really interesting article this week talking about the future of UX, and they made a really interesting point. I've been evangelizing UX for so long, trying to build up this understanding throughout all the businesses I've worked in. One of the things they were talking about is that perhaps in the future UX will be less something that specialists do and more something that everyone does, part of their work. I've certainly been seeing, if not the understanding, at least the acceptance that UX is important.

[00:06:29] The example in this article was that, I think it was the University of Michigan, one of the most popular minor subjects now is user experience. So there's a huge number of people who will never work as designers but are building up that basic UX understanding. And within Barclays, where we work now, we've literally just in the last week or two launched a user experience learning program for everyone in the bank. It's not aimed at someone who wants to practice UX, but a five-module series, so a fair bit of work for someone to go through, but the intention is to give people a baseline, an understanding of UX and of the importance of user understanding. So perhaps, as designers, we've been fighting so long for everyone to understand and appreciate UX, but the end result of that might be that everyone's just doing UX.

[00:07:20] Tasha: In a way it sounds like UX will become this connective tissue between product and customer experience.

[00:07:26] Mike: I think so. I think we can all see the direction of travel with AI, but as always, the timelines are very unclear.

Please be more human

[00:07:36] Mike: When you think about the future of product work, what skills become most valuable for you?

[00:07:51] Tasha: Before I get to the skills, it's really interesting. Something that I've heard a lot lately, and it also came up in a few of the presentations, is that when you prompt the AI, remember to add "don't make assumptions," or "ask me questions before you answer." I think Claude is really good at that. But what strikes me about that is that the most useful thing we've collectively figured out to tell the most powerful technology is: please be more human. Take a break, pause, ask me. That's active listening. That's a soft skill. So I think it's kind of ironic that we're coaching a trillion-dollar technology to use human skills.

[00:08:28] What this conversation is about, in my view, isn't really the fear of AI taking our jobs. There's no question that we all need to adopt AI, and we need to improve both our soft skills and our hard skills. Having soft skills alone will not maintain any of us in this industry. But I think it is about what it means that the machine still needs to be reminded to think like a human being, and asking whether we are holding ourselves to the same standard. We'll get back to that. I want to say a bit more about which skills we still need to develop in product. But before that, I wanted to ask: if AI is helping us be faster and improve our efficiency, how do you make sure that we're not just scaling really bad judgment?

[00:09:16] Mike: I think that's a clear and present risk, because every time I've been to the UXDX conference, Rory's emphasized that most features and products still fail. If you look at any company that analyzes this, what is it, 60%, 70% depending on the company, of their products fail. So the more that we can understand early on which ones are likely to succeed, the more that we can do our research and understand the problem we're trying to solve, the better things can be.

[00:09:43] I think it's pretty clear that if we're just accelerating the work that we can do, if we can move so much faster, if anyone can jump straight to code, if anyone can quickly build a prototype and then go to code, I don't think that means that products are going to be any more successful. If anything, I think it's going to be quite the opposite. With everyone being able to work so much faster, and to a certain extent in much more siloed ways, I think we're very likely to see more bad things being built, more things being shipped and put live which aren't going to work. So again, it comes back to being able to use those skills and properly evaluate and prioritize the right features and the right products. That's going to become even more important.

[00:10:27] Tasha: I think it's also important in that context to remember that we're still in this transition phase. We're all getting accustomed to this new way of working, and I do think that things will stabilize in a year or two. But in the meantime, judgment is definitely the word that I'm hearing a lot across all of these presentations.

Productive friction and the skills that are weakening

[00:10:43] Tasha: The next topic we wanted to talk about was friction. I saw that on the slides yesterday too; Tanya, I think, talked about it. There's this concept of productive friction, and I think that happens a lot when we're working with people. You mentioned collaboration: when we disagree, we might argue, we might disqualify each other's ideas. Friction also happens when we make mistakes, when products fail, when flows don't work well. That can be really uncomfortable, but of course it's crucial. So far is the cliche; I'm going to get to something a bit more interesting now.

[00:11:26] To me, what's interesting in this discussion isn't in what way humans can supplement AI, or whether we need the human in the loop or the AI in the loop. There's no question that there's going to be a balance and a collaboration. But my take on it is that we shouldn't just be focusing on sharpening our soft skills, or even our hard skills for that matter. Of course we will work on all of them, but there are certain skills that are weakening due to our collaboration with AI and all this automation, and I think we need to find the antidote for those skills that are weakening.

[00:12:03] I'll give some examples. It reminds me a bit of how today a lot of people go to the gym, because we have these office jobs where we sit all day, and then we need to train our bodies and move around. In a parallel way, I think our brains are getting a bit lazy, and we need to find a way to stimulate them and move out of the laziness that the digital world causes.

[00:12:26] I was reading about a really interesting effect called the Flynn effect, where a researcher called Flynn was following IQ scores over the 20th century, and you could see that IQ scores were rising consistently. Then suddenly in the '90s something changed, and IQ scores started declining. You should look it up; it's really, really interesting, and there are quite a lot of papers on this. There are various hypotheses about the causes of this decline in IQ, and one of the hypotheses is that we have shifted from print to digital media. We're consuming information in a different way. I used to be a teacher, and I can tell you that learning is definitely changing. Engaging with cognitively demanding tasks is shifting: the way we work, the way we read. Just think about how our abstract thinking and deep reading are declining, because we're so used to fragments and visuals.

[00:13:37] So I think some of the skills we need to sharpen are, first, critical thinking, which is an obvious one. The AI will feed us a lot of stuff and will tell us how great our ideas are. As my 13-year-old would say, "Stop the glazing." I don't know if any of you know the brain rot term, but: stop making me feel so good about myself. Don't let ourselves get blinded by that.

[00:13:59] And staying focused. I don't know how many of you have experienced that when you get on a roll with Claude, or whatever AI it is, you just get into a bit of a spin, because your ideas lead to more ideas, and you just lose focus. So I think maintaining focus is a skill that we're going to have to work on. And diligence: the willingness to work hard and combat that laziness, and try to ask "what would I say" before I ask it, not just rush to ask the AI everything.

[00:14:35] This morning I actually wrote to the friend who was telling me about the Flynn effect, and I asked him if he could send me the articles, and he wrote me, "Well, ask ChatGPT [?]." But before he replied, I'd already asked; I happened to have Claude on my phone. And then I realized I almost missed the opportunity to reach out to him. I think that's also just a small symptom: we end up asking Claude instead of talking to people. Sometimes the answers might be better, but we might be losing that human connection. So I think social skills and teamwork are also something that we need to sharpen.

[00:15:09] Mike: Definitely. Just returning to you talking about friction as well, I think that collaboration is so important. I know the designers in my team have great ideas, great ways of doing things, but they do need that feedback from different disciplines. They get real value from the pushback from developers, from the pushback from product managers. Equally, we're often fighting against great ideas from product managers that maybe need a bit more light shone on them beforehand. As you said, we can get so much of that from AI now. It can fill those gaps. It can bring a lot of that information in, but is it always the right one? It can be very complimentary. It can reinforce biases, reinforce assumptions.

[00:15:54] I think that's one of the things that we'll have to solve. I know we're going to be talking a bit more about leadership: bringing in that cross-functional collaboration. Because I think inherently, as we move into this AI-assisted work in the future, things are going to be more siloed. People can do so much by themselves. So how do we get people to communicate and work more closely together, and get the benefit of that cross-functional stuff?

Leadership and the diamond-shaped organization

[00:16:17] Tasha: We're touching upon leadership and teamwork, and we're both leaders. Tell me a bit about how you see it already impacting your role as a leader. Is your role changing due to this new reality?

[00:16:31] Mike: I think it's starting to. I know a lot of people are going through this. We're already starting to go through some larger organizational changes, and I think a lot of companies are starting to deal with that. But if you look at the direction of travel, what's interesting is that most industries and disciplines, and design is certainly the case, are very much shaped like a pyramid. You have a lot of entry-level jobs at the bottom, doing less complex tasks, more manual tasks, building up that experience. As you go further up the pyramid, and the jobs become more complex and more senior, there are fewer jobs, and obviously very few at the very top.

[00:17:16] But you can look at how things are trending in design and product, and I think in most industries, and they're probably going to be turning into more of a diamond shape. The top stays the same. In the middle there are still lots of jobs, where people will be using their experience, using the understanding they've built up, to really be reviewing a lot of the work that AI is producing. But at the bottom there just won't be as many jobs, because AI will be able to do so much of that.

[00:17:45] In the short term, it's not the most exciting place to be, going through that transition. But as leaders, I think it brings a really big upcoming problem. If the diamond shape sits like that now, in ten years' time what does it look like? If we need to refill the people in the middle layer, where are those people coming from, because we haven't been training people, we haven't been building up that experience at the bottom.

[00:18:12] Tasha: Right. And the juniors will need to learn somewhere. How do they acquire the judgment and the pattern recognition, the experience?

[00:18:21] Mike: Exactly. And as leaders as well, there are so many skills that we bring in, but I think empathy is going to be so huge. It's not the nicest thing to think about as leaders, but obviously there'll be a lot of change in roles, a lot of change in organizations, and that's going to be hard for people that leave, but also hard for the people that remain in these organizations. Working in any kind of large organization, which I have been for a long time, leading people through change is constant. There are huge advantages to working in big organizations, but one of the things that can be harder is that you're constantly reorganizing. There are constant changes in priority. You are moving things around, and you have to lead your teams through those and help them be resilient. I think the whole world, the design world as well as every part, is going to go through some big changes.

[00:19:12] Tasha: What advice would you give to juniors who are in this situation now and are worried?

[00:19:19] Mike: I think it's probably the same as for everyone right now. Embrace AI, experiment as much as you can. That is the future. If you have a view of what design work looks like now, what careers look like now, and expect that to be the same, it won't be. So I think it's incumbent upon people to be experimenting, driving their understanding of what can be done, because we are building what the discipline will look like in the future. It's the people that are driving this forward that will have the right jobs and the best jobs in the future.

[00:20:00] Tasha: I don't think I have a solution for what you're talking about, but I do see the issue of how we train people to really get that experience, and I think we will have to find a solution for that. That diamond shape sounds problematic to me; the triangle has its own issues in itself. But also, thinking as a leader who wants to upskill my team, some of them are much quicker to embrace the new methods, and others are really, really nervous. I think it's important to acknowledge that there are people out there that are really finding it hard. As a leader, I'm constantly moving between wanting to say, "Come on, there's no time. You have to start embracing this, just jump over that hurdle and put the fear aside." And at the same time I want to protect them from it and say, "You've got a lot of other skills: your experience, all these soft skills that are there."

[00:21:06] Mike: I think it's good, because it does sound like I'm quite negative about this, which isn't the case. I think the opportunities are vast for people that embrace it. What you will be able to do as a designer with AI is so much more than you could do before. For almost anyone, if you can remove so many of the rote tasks from what you do, you can amplify the work that you can do, and that is really exciting. But the most important thing is to embrace it, because we're exactly the same in our organizations. There are some people racing ahead, embracing this, really amplifying what they can do, and some people that don't want to change, and they are the ones who may struggle in the near future.

[00:21:48] Tasha: It reminds me very much of Des Traynor's talk yesterday, where he was saying we gave our team X amount of time, and whoever hopped on the train, or the wagon, stayed, and whoever didn't, didn't. I think that's something we have to be aware of that is happening. It's not happening right now in all companies, but it seems to be the way the world is going right now in our tech world.

What leaders should choose not to automate

[00:22:11] Tasha: We're coming to an end, and we're going to get to your questions in a bit. We've spent this conversation talking about where human skills matter. What would you put on a list of things that leaders should make a deliberate choice not to automate?

[00:22:29] Mike: Not to automate. To be honest, I have this conversation on what feels like a daily or weekly basis at work. Not because I don't believe that's where we're heading; it's just that in our area, working in a very regulated environment in banking, and also within the specific area of learning, there's almost nothing that we've found in our workflows that can be fully automated. There's a lot of nuance in what we create, and we do need accuracy when we're responding to regulation. It can't be different every time. We have to be giving people the same training, because we are tested against these things, and there'll be enormous consequences if we can't prove that people have been trained properly.

[00:23:16] So the motto I've been saying for a long time, and I think I will for at least a significant part of time, is augmentation, not automation, in almost everything we're doing. We can bring it in where we can demonstrate the efficiencies and the rises in quality that bringing AI into our processes is delivering. We've got so many use cases we've already proven, but we're not quite at the point where we can automate everything yet. So that's one of the main things I would say.

[00:23:42] But returning to what we were saying at the start, those really clear UX skills, user understanding, evaluation, problem solving: AI can augment those and assist those, but I don't believe those can be fully automated. I think that is the real future for the design discipline, and where designers can continue to drive change and impact will be on the UX sides of the discipline, rather than the UI ones.

[00:24:13] Tasha: I do think there's something that I'm grieving a bit over, that loss of the craft, because so many people really enjoy the craft of shaping things and working with the UI. So I'm wondering if there will be a way to do that too, imagining these UIs all folding into just command-line kinds of searches. Who knows? The future is still a bit vague. We don't know if there will be some other supplement for that, but it might be that the craft part will have to be found elsewhere, or in hobbies outside of work. Let's see.

[00:24:47] Mike: It's a great point, because I do hear lots of other people talking about this. You hear other design leaders saying that what will remain now, what's really important, is craft and taste, and those are the things that we have to really drive. Now, I'm not sure that I agree. Not that those things aren't important, but I don't think that businesses will value those as a discipline from designers. Everyone I work with in every part of the business has taste. Everyone that I work with understands the craft of things. But if they can produce it themselves, make decisions themselves, apply their taste to something that they could build with AI, they're probably more likely to prefer to do that than employ someone purely on that basis. However, if we can show how we can drive impact and drive really big business outcomes, I think that's going to be more important.

[00:25:37] Tasha: I'll just say, to sum up from my perspective, that I think there are skills that we need to sharpen, then there are skills that AI can't supplement, and skills that we shouldn't automate. I wrote down the skills that I think we should sharpen: like I said, critical thinking and diligence. And also, I didn't mention self-awareness and self-reflection: the ability to maybe work with AI to do coaching. I do that quite often, where I get the AI to coach me, but then I take the time to reflect on what it's telling me.

[00:26:04] Skills that AI can't supplement, I would say, are influence, reaching alignment, active listening, talking with a bunch of people. That collaboration piece is still ours to work on.

[00:26:18] Mike: Persuasion.

[00:26:19] Tasha: Persuasion, definitely. And the skills that I don't think we should automate are, first, taking ownership of the outcome of what we build. We definitely aren't yet giving that ownership to the AI. Another one is conflict resolution. I heard some story about giving AI models a task to solve the problems in the Middle East, and it led to a solution that we should use some nuclear bombing or something like that. So I think conflict resolution I would leave in the hands of human beings at this point. Let's have a look at the questions we got from the audience.

Q&A

[00:27:00] Mike: The first one, from Martha: "I see a lot of junior roles from different generations coming into our organization who are low on soft skills. How might we encourage younger people to learn soft skills that might be out of their comfort zone?" I think it's a great point. In many ways that's situational. A lot of people started their career coming out of COVID, in the new environment where most people are working in a hybrid environment or perhaps still remotely. It's harder to learn these things that you just used to learn naturally on the job.

[00:27:32] For us as leaders, it comes back to the point I was making before: it's really incumbent on us to push people into these opportunities for collaboration, to work with other people. In many ways it can be uncomfortable to push people out of these silos and into those places. I think leaders have to provide those opportunities, because they're not as natural as they used to be.

[00:28:03] I found, well before AI, just in the way that we've all worked: I'm very big on empowering my teams and empowering my designers, so that they can own their work, they're the ones owning the solution, delivering the solution. But what that means is that when you're empowering teams, giving them the direction and letting them do the solution, you're almost inherently building up more silos and encouraging teams to work by themselves. So for a long time it's been on myself and other leaders to ensure that there are times and spaces for people to work together, and I think this will be the same. What are your thoughts on that?

[00:28:38] Tasha: I think soft skills are skills that we develop all the time, in all situations. If we were hermits, just staying at home and never interacting with people, it would be really hard to develop those skills. But I really think all of the skills that I mentioned can be acquired in many ways, at work and outside of work. I think I mentioned to you when we were prepping that I took this course when I was working at a bank that was all about soft skills: identifying my triggers, basically just being a better person. It was kind of ironic that I got that at the bank, but that course ended up helping me with my children, with my husband, with relationships, with friends. So I think soft skills can be learned in many, many places. It's definitely something that we can develop everywhere.

[00:29:24] Mike: There are quite a few questions coming in about how juniors can be developing soft skills, how people can be developing soft skills. As I said, I think it's incumbent upon the leaders in these new environments to push people, to give them these opportunities. But I think nothing's as important as pushing yourself and trying to do these things as well, because I've always seen these skills as so important: presenting, talking to people. There's no point doing great designs if you can't sell people on those designs and explain why they're important. So it's always been something I've worked on with everyone in my teams, from top to bottom: providing opportunities for them to practice speaking, practice working with other people, practice persuading people. Some people hate it, some people take to it, but they all get better, and it always improves their work.

[00:30:12] Tasha: Yeah.

[00:30:13] Mike: But so much of that should be self-driven, I think.

[00:30:15] Tasha: All right. I was about to read the question that was skipped: "In what ways do you create an environment for your team to improve their soft skills?" Similar question.

[00:30:28] Mike: And "how will we train the juniors?" Okay, so we definitely hit a spot there.

[00:30:36] Tasha: I think there are two questions here, in my view. There's what will happen if juniors do not find a job, and then how do we train the juniors? Because once the juniors are within the organization, there's no question we still need juniors and we still build up our teams, and it's about upskilling. In many ways, if you think about it, it's like 20 years ago, or was it 30 years ago, when the internet became a big thing. Tech companies also went through a really big change, and suddenly roles changed, skills changed, and it was this transition period that had a lot of opportunity in it, and then it stabilized. I have a feeling that we're going through a similar wave.

[00:31:23] So I'm not that pessimistic. I don't think that juniors aren't going to find jobs. Right now there's definitely this question of, okay, if AI can write code so quickly, maybe we need fewer people. But to be honest, I'm not seeing lower employment rates at the moment, at least in Denmark, where I come from. So I do think juniors will find jobs. The nature of that job is in flux at the moment.

[00:31:49] Mike: Exactly, it's a really good point, because obviously now that I work in HR and learning, I'm constantly reading and listening about that particular area. If you listen to a lot of views, particularly in the tech area, everything is doom and gloom: there's going to be a jobs apocalypse, no one will have jobs. But all the data that we're seeing, the same as you, is that there's no downturn in the number of jobs. Jobs are changing. Industries are changing. The roles that were being offered before aren't being offered, but new roles are being created. It's not clear what those all are now, but it is happening.

[00:32:32] It's a bit of a frivolous example, but people talk about how terrible it is that there are so few journalists now. People who used to go into a journalism career: there aren't as many jobs. However, even just a few years ago, were there thousands and thousands of podcasters, people working full-time in these kinds of roles? That job didn't exist as a profession even just a few years ago, and now it's quite dominant. There are a lot of people doing that professionally. That's just a small example, but these new things that we don't even realize are becoming whole new ways of working, and I think that will continue to happen.

[00:33:04] Tasha: I'll just add a quick note on that. If any of you follow Lenny's Podcast, it was quite interesting: there was one episode about how the PM job is disappearing, and then a week later there was another podcast with somebody saying, "I'm hiring more PMs than ever, because design and engineering are moving so fast, and we need a PM to align and get people on board with all of these ideas." So I think there are a lot of conflicting prognoses, and time will tell. Neither of us are prophets, but I would like to stay optimistic and believe that things will balance out.

[00:33:39] I think we're over time, but there's one question with more votes: "Can you share more about the five modules of UX you prepped for the company? Sounds like a great idea in the age of developers owning whole products and projects."

[00:33:50] Mike: I think that's right. It's essentially just giving people a grounding in not just UX, but particularly user research, user understanding, the different types of research, why they're important. A lot of people who've had no exposure to UX almost think about things the opposite way: "I'm an expert in a subject, therefore my view must be great." And it's trying to flip that around to say your expertise might actually be the wrong thing, because you need to design for a user who might not have that expertise, might think about things differently. It's really just trying to give people that baseline and change that viewpoint. But they're voluntary courses at the moment, so these developers would have to willingly do it. They're not mandatory yet.

[00:34:39] Tasha: Okay, great. I think it's time to wrap up. Thank you for having a great conversation, and we hope you enjoyed it.

[00:34:45] Mike: Thank you very much.