Say What You Actually Believe

Most social impact leaders got into this work because they care deeply about the mission, not because they wanted to be public figures with opinions. But that instinct to stay quiet and let the work speak for itself may be doing more harm than good. 

Developing and sharing a strong point of view isn't a nice-to-have; it's a moral obligation for leaders in this space. And there's a concept at the center of this episode that puts a name to a problem most organizations feel but can't articulate: the "identity impact gap," the distance between who an organization truly is and how it's perceived by the people it needs to reach. The bigger that gap, the bigger every downstream problem becomes. 

• But is the gap always a bad thing? 
• Can it sometimes be a useful pull, especially during moments of transformation? 
• And does the real work start at the personal level, not the organizational one?

What emerges is a conversation about why the leaders who get remembered aren't necessarily the ones with the most compelling cause areas. They're the ones who've done the deep, sometimes uncomfortable work of figuring out what they actually believe and then said it out loud. 

Eric and Jonathan explore what separates a genuine point of view from a manufactured one, why time in the trenches matters, and why conflicting perspectives within the sector are a feature, not a bug.

The episode also doubles as a live demonstration: Eric road-tests his own evolving point of view in real time, with Jonathan playing both collaborator and devil's advocate. It's a rare look at the messy middle of idea development, and a challenge to every leader who's been sitting on observations they haven't yet turned into convictions.
 

Episode Highlights:

[00:01:00] The hesitancy Eric keeps seeing in leaders who won't go public with their thinking

[00:02:00] Jonathan's honest reaction: "Am I the right leader for my organization?"

[00:04:00] Defining "point of view" as a pattern of lived experience, not expertise

[00:08:00] Eric's origin story: from attention economy manifesto to a new framework

[00:10:30] Introducing the identity impact gap

[00:12:00] Jonathan pushes back: can the gap sometimes be useful?

[00:15:00] The fitness metaphor: faking it till you make it and identity shifts

[00:18:00] Why therapy made Jonathan a better leader (and what that has to do with point of view)

[00:20:30] The Skull World Forum test: who stuck and who didn't

[00:24:00] Devil's advocate: what about pure open-mindedness as a leadership philosophy?

[00:26:30] Shoutout to Kevin L. Brown and the "findable and fundable" framework

[00:28:00] Why conflicting points of view are healthy for the sector

Notable Quotes:

[00:01:35]: "It's a moral obligation to be transparent and communicative about not only the work that we're doing, but what we're learning about the work that we're doing and having a point of view about the work that we're doing." Eric Ressler 

[00:04:20]: "There may be a fear that if I put my point of view out there too strongly, maybe one of my collaborators isn't going to agree and that's going to threaten the relationship." Jonathan Hicken 

[00:11:05]: "The bigger the difference between who you actually are and how you are perceived by the people that you care about reaching, the bigger all of your problems are going to be." Eric Ressler 

[00:21:25]: "I've always loved just being with people who were passionate about something and it didn't matter what they were passionate about." Jonathan Hicken 

[00:29:35]: "People need to do research, they need to develop hypotheses, they need to publish those, not just think about them in their brains. I would like to see a lot more people doing that." Eric Ressler 

Resources & Links:

• Seymour Marine Discovery Center — Jonathan Hicken's organization at UC Santa Cruz
• Kevin L. Brown — Mighty Ally 
• Glen Galaich — Stupski Foundation
• Kevin Starr — Mulago Foundation 
• Skull World Forum 
• Strategy Tier ranking episode - "Most of Your Brand Strategy is a Waste of Time" 

P.S. — Struggling to align your message with your mission? We help social impact leaders like you build trust-building brands through authentic storytelling, thoughtful design, and digital strategy that works. Let's talk about your goals »

Full Transcript:

Eric Ressler [00:00:00]: It's a moral obligation to be transparent and communicative about not only the work that we're doing, but what we're learning about the work that we're doing and having a point of view about the work that we're doing.

Jonathan Hicken [00:00:15]: One of my core beliefs is that science centers, museums, aquarium zoos, these public spaces have an obligation to be more than passive places for learning and need to be proactive players in solving real problems in their community.

Eric Ressler [00:00:35]: Okay, Jonathan, I am so excited for our episode today, partly because I'm a little bit nervous and partly because I want to hear your thoughts about it. I've been spinning my brain around something that's been coming up for me and it's showing up in a few different ways. One is that in working with clients, something that I've noticed sometimes, and I've noticed this over the years and it's something that's coming up more and more and it's starting to irk me. And what it is is that sometimes we work with leaders and founders who have this hesitancy to feel like their voice should be heard in the work that they do. It's somewhat related to this, I just want to hunker down and do good work. I don't want to be public. I don't want to share what we're doing.

I just want to do the good work. And it's like, that's good enough. I just don't buy that anymore, man. I just don't buy it anymore. I don't think it's right. And I think we in this space have, I'll even make a point that it's a moral obligation to be transparent and communicative about not only the work that we're doing, but what we're learning about the work that we're doing. And this is the focus of our episode today, having a point of view about the work that we're doing. What's that unlock for you when I say it that way? I just want to hear, what's your initial response?

Jonathan Hicken [00:01:55]: I mean, I'm like, am I the right leader for my organization? Because sometimes I feel that. I feel that is my voice really and my point of view really worth putting out into the world.

Eric Ressler [00:02:10]: So here's what I would say. I don't want this to come across as a judgmental thing. And the other thing I'll say is let's define point of view in a second, but I think that sounds a little bit scary. And even this is, I come into this episode saying, "I'm a little bit nervous." And the reason I'm nervous is because I'm going to put out a new point of view right now today. And that scariness, that fear, to me, that's a signal that you're onto something because if it's not a little scary to say something, it's probably kind of boring.

So here's what I would say. I'm going to make a case for this. I'm going to make a case that if you are a leader, especially at a social impact organization, if you're an executive director, but really if you're anywhere in the leadership team after a certain amount of time, if you've been doing this work and you're doing it in good faith and you're doing it fully, you should start to develop a point of view about how the work should be done and you should be willing to share that and you should be willing to be wrong and you should be willing to listen to the community about how you're wrong because that is going to make you better as a leader and it's going to make your organization more effective.

And I think sometimes what I hear from clients that I work with or people that we're talking to is like, "Well, why would anyone care what I have to say about this thing?" Or, "I'm not an expert at this thing." And here's an important distinction in my mind. You don't have to be an expert to have a point of view. Now, should we listen to experts? Yes, I believe strongly that we should. At the same time, if you do this work in any way for any amount of time, you do have a unique vantage point. You have a series of lived experiences that over time you can start to see some patterns.

You start to see things happen over and over again. Oh, when we do this, this happens. Oh, we noticed that these people have these problems in this space. So these are things that I'm sure you have some lived experiences doing this work, let's just even say at the Seymour Center over the last few years. What are some of the things that come to mind for you about what you've noticed in being an executive director?

Jonathan Hicken [00:04:10]: Some things are coming to mind. I'm going to put them on the table and then I want to understand if it fits within your definition of point of view.

Eric Ressler [00:04:15]: Yeah.

Jonathan Hicken [00:04:15]: I probably would've used the word core belief here. But for example, I would say one of my core beliefs is that science centers, museums, aquariums, zoos, these public spaces have an obligation to be more than passive places for learning and need to be proactive players in solving real problems in their community. That's one. The other is that I believe that spaces like ours, physical spaces, have power and that there's energy. And maybe this is woo-woo, but I even think of an extreme example, like the Roman Coliseum or a modern sports stadium. You go in and you feel something, right? You feel energy in there and I believe spaces have power. Two of my beliefs are, we have an obligation to be proactive players and we should use our spaces to solve those problems.

Eric Ressler [00:05:10]: Perfect. Both of those, in my opinion, are good examples of strong points of view. Now let's get into the definition a little bit. I'm not going to give you a textbook definition. I don't have one. But to me it's like if you have a point of view in the simplest version of this, and this is I think where our listeners should start, because I think at this point our listeners are probably like, "Wait, do I have one of these things?" And in prepping for this episode and as I've been thinking about this, I always think about, "Wait, am I doing this thing that I'm saying our leaders should be doing?"

And I'll share that in a second. But the way that I think about this is at the most basic version of this, your point of view is a pattern of lived experiences that you've observed. They could start at their base level as observations even. And your observations are going to be unique to your position in your social impact ecosystem that can build and build and build to beliefs and opinions. To me, I think the pinnacle keystone that you should be working towards is an overarching point of view that all your other beliefs and points of views can branch off from.

Jonathan Hicken [00:06:15]: The grand unifying theory.

Eric Ressler [00:06:20]: The unifying theory. Yes, exactly. And that's what I've been working towards and what I'm going to share with you. So let's not get hung up on specific semantics. It's just at some level it's the observations, the beliefs, the opinions and the theory of how this work should be done based on your lived experiences.

Jonathan Hicken [00:06:35]: We did an episode recently called Strategy Tier Rankings and we broke down theory of change and tagline and mission and vision, all these things. I think what I'm hearing you say is that the difference between point of view and all of those things we went over in that episode is that point of view is a very individual thing. It is not necessarily a reflection of the organization. It is me, the individual and my life experience being at least part of the equation of what my organization is doing. Is that fair?

Eric Ressler [00:07:10]: I think that's fair. I do think the origin story of a point of view is from individuals and they're not even only leaders, but individuals within the organization. I think probably the closest thing to an organizational point of view would be a theory of change, although those are often a little bit too dry for it to truly be a point of view. However, what I would say is that the point of view from especially a leader at an organization or a series of leaders should have major influence in how you do your work.

Jonathan Hicken [00:07:40]: Okay. Got it. All right. Then let's move on and start hearing about, are you ready to peel back the curtain here?

Eric Ressler [00:07:50]: Sure. So I'll share in an effort to just be candid about where I'm at with this. This is something that I've believed in for a long time and I've been developing individual observations and lived experience doing this work over 16 years. So I have points of view about brand, points of view about how to build websites and what technology we should use, points of view about communication, points of view about how the social impact space at large should work. So I've had this collection of evolving points of view.

And I think it was 2022, I could be wrong, I sat down and I wrote a manifesto. And at that point my entire framing of this work was through a concept called the attention economy. And at the time, that was something that people didn't really talk about a lot. And I feel like it's become much more common and almost a household term that as there's more and more forces vying for our attention, you have to get better and better about playing within that attention economy. And my thesis at the time was basically social impact organizations need to A, understand this attention economy that we're playing in. It's a paradigm shift in how we communicate through digital channels and we need to get really good at playing in that ecosystem and probably think and act more like digital media companies than the traditional charity or nonprofit. That was the stake in the ground that I released in 2022-ish.

And for a long time, that was very central to how I thought about this work. I still think that the attention economy is real, but I think it's shifting and I think that everyone is playing in that attention economy and the sector at large has gotten better about realizing that. And I think we're in a moment right now where there's another major paradigm shift happening from not just a technology standpoint, but a saturation standpoint where pumping out more and more content and just becoming visible isn't enough.

And now we're in this moment where we hear words like authenticity and we hear words like vibe. And I started to think about that and as my brain was racking on this, I was like, what is upstream of all of that? What is upstream of authenticity? What does it even mean to be authentic? Is it about founder-led brands? Is it about influencers? Is it about being on TikTok?

And what I came to, and the aha moment that I'm about to reveal here is a little bit funny coming from a brand standpoint. To me, everything really at its core comes down to identity. And what I mean by identity is deeply truly knowing who you are as an individual and as an organization, deeply truly knowing who you are becoming as an organization and living in alignment with that.

And what that led to, and hey, I'm road testing this here, just to be candid, I have this concept that I'm developing that I'm calling the identity impact gap. And what that gap is is that the bigger the differences between who you actually are, whether you know it or not, and how you present yourself and more importantly, how you are perceived by the people that you care about reaching, the bigger that gap is, the bigger all of your problems are going to be. And the smaller that gap is, the better you're going to be at fundraising, the better you're going to be at retaining and attracting staff, the better that you're going to be at knowing what your strategy should be.

So to me, there's this identity impact gap that is this unnamed, unknown problem that maybe you feel but you haven't named. And my mission right now is to figure out how to help organizations get really clear about this actual true state of that gap and to close it as much as we can.

Jonathan Hicken [00:11:50]: That's awesome. Okay. So the identity impact gap, I love it. It's really easy to understand. And I wonder if that identity impact gap is sometimes necessary and helpful. And I think about moments of transformation for an organization, moments where you're pivoting, moments where you are becoming something else and part of becoming that thing is stepping into and living that identity before you're really actually there. And so I wonder if applying the identity impact gap thinking is largely contextual. Are you an established scaled organization? Are you small and scrappy? Are you undergoing a transformation? But I wonder if sometimes that gap is actually a helpful pull.

Eric Ressler [00:12:50]: I love this dialogue. Thank you. I think I hear what you're saying and I agree. And I think maybe to break this down a little bit further, there's actually different levels of identity, right? There's core, core, core identity. These are the things that will never change about you. To take me as an example, creativity is core to my identity. I don't think I could not be creative if I tried really hard in an identity level. I can certainly have days where I'm not creative or productive, but I couldn't stop being that even if I tried. It's in my DNA or something.

And I think that's true also at some level for organizations too and for leaders at organizations. So there's these durable elements of identity and then there are these more transferable, fluid elements of identity and probably even more so how your identity is expressed or explored.

And so yes, I do think there are moments where you have to stretch, where you have to not abandon your true identity but become something new as an organization and step into a new identity. And I think that happens at the personal level too in major moments of life, like becoming a parent. Both of us in becoming parents stepped into a major identity shift and yet there are parts of your identity that you've never lost in that transition that are core to you and your being. So I think that's a good metaphor to think about when we use the word identity, what are we talking about?

Jonathan Hicken [00:14:25]: And actually the point I brought up a moment ago about that gap being helpful sometimes, it's interesting. My mind went immediately to organizational identity and not individual identity and you brought it back to individual again. And so I think we're teasing out something important about your point of view here.

This really is an individual exercise and yet my point still applies because I'm thinking about my fitness journey and I convinced myself that I was a CrossFitter before I was a CrossFitter and I lived it and I did it. And now today I actually do identify that way. Health and fitness is core now. There was a moment where I had to fake it till I made it. So there is this moment of stretch.

Eric Ressler [00:16:15]: Yeah, I love that and I think it's true and I don't think that the gap is necessarily a problem as long as you acknowledge that it's a transition. Where the gap becomes a problem is really largely a perception gap and I think that's an important point to make in my point of view here is if you have an identity about who you are or who you are becoming, it's one thing for the gap in terms of growth. There's a growth gap there of who we are and who we want to be that is part of identity. But the one that I'm pointing to is actually more a perception gap. Either an internal knowing if you are something and you think you're something else, that's a big problem, or you're not clear about who you are, that's a big problem. So those are versions of that perception gap.

But even more so I'm talking about a gap between who you do know you are once you get clear on that and who people think you are or just don't understand who you are. This shows up in a couple different ways. "Oh, there's this org. They're in this space that I don't really know what they do." Or, "I thought that org did that thing, but it turns out they do something else." Or, "I just don't really understand how they make an impact." Or a common one that we'll hear is, "I thought you only did work in this area." So some of it might even just be lack of awareness, but I think that almost always stems from an identity problem or a perception problem and that could be because messaging is weak, it can be because of visibility or awareness is weak, but upstream of all of that, in my opinion, is identity.

Jonathan Hicken [00:78:45]: Okay. And I actually think that last bit when you brought it to organizational identity and external perception at the organizational level, that was actually less compelling to me than this very individual focus that to me I think is super powerful because it brings me actually to, I see a therapist and I'm doing a lot of this foundational work and not even realizing it, that work I'm doing in that environment is strengthening who I am as a leader. I didn't go to therapy for work, but it is playing out because in large part I am becoming more in touch with who I am and my identity and what matters to me and that is helping me show up better. And so I almost feel like the call to action here is, leaders need to do that work.

Eric Ressler [00:18:40]: Yes. They need to do the deep identity work individually and that could be personal and/or professional and organizationally.

Jonathan Hicken [00:18:50]: You need to be conscious about applying that to work. But for me, the thing that's resonating most from your point of view is there is actually deep personal work that you need to do to uncover and unearth that point of view that you have.

Eric Ressler [00:19:05]: Yes. And like therapy, it can be really hard to do on your own. And I think that's honestly one of the major unexpected values that people get when they work with us, that they think they're getting a visual aesthetic brand or a website overhaul or a campaign, but because of this belief that I've had trouble articulating, and if you actually look back at the last eight Designing Tomorrow Jonathan and Eric episodes, I've been building this subconsciously towards this point, poking, exploring.

And I want to bring it back to the point of view. I've been teasing out these points of views and again, publishing them, articulating them, not just spinning on them in my brain, being exposed to pushback. And I've had some. Being exposed, especially on some of our strategy episodes. "What do you mean, strategy is conviction?" Hey, fair point. I still believe it. And so to bring it back to our listeners, I've shared my point of view.

I'm happy to keep going on it and thank you for the feedback on it. Point of view is an active thing that you develop that you should be working towards. And there is a point in time where it gets a little long in the tooth.

I want to share one more thing. So I just got back this week from Skull World Forum. I had an amazing time, amazing opportunity to meet some of the most awesome human beings in the world doing incredible impact work. But you know what stood out to me out of everyone that I met? The ones who had a strong point of view are the ones that stuck into my brain. And it almost didn't matter how much personal interest I had in their ecosystem or impact area or their issue. And there were some people that I met who I cared a lot about their issue, but I don't really remember how they did their work because their point of view was a little bit weaker. And there's some people who I met with who had really strong points of view on things that I didn't have a lot of exposure or interest in that nonetheless still stuck with me.

So developing a strong point of view is a really durable asset and it has really big downstream impacts on how sticky your work is going to be.

Jonathan Hicken [00:21:20]: Two things. One, what you just described to me is almost like an idea of magnetism and I've always, even in my personal life, I've always loved just being with people who were passionate about something and it didn't matter what they were passionate about. I have a friend who's really into knives and he'll sit there and tell me about sharpening knives for two hours and I love it because the dude is just so into it and it's magnetic and I want to be around him and I want to be a part of it. And every time I look at my knife rack now, I think of my friend.

And I think part of what you're describing, even your experience at the Skull World Forum, is the people who are sticking with you, there's a magnetism there. And part of that comes from that point of view, this passion and this clear sense of self and this clear position and purpose in the world.

Eric Ressler [00:22:15]: I think I agree. And I think what it comes from is in order to have a strong differentiated point of view, it's almost required that you do deep work for a long time. Otherwise, you could try and do a shortcut and just speed run a point of view. It's probably almost never going to work.

Jonathan Hicken [00:22:40]: Something that's been rolling in the back of my head that I wasn't sure I was going to bring up was this: I wonder if part of what we're saying is unintentionally saying younger leaders are less positioned to have a strong point of view simply by their lifespan.

Eric Ressler [00:23:00]: I think that's true. You think about the 10,000 hour rule to become a true master of any craft, you have to put in 10,000 practiced hours to get there. I think there's some corollary with point of view. In order to develop a strong and differentiated one that is actually rooted in truth, you have to do deep work for a long time. You have to test and tease and see what works and experiment and tinker and to develop something truly unique that no one else has that exact same point of view, it's really hard.

Jonathan Hicken [00:23:30]: Time is a factor in this, in the development of this.

Eric Ressler [00:23:35]: Yeah. Time and hours in the trenches at some level and deep thinking and reflection too.

Jonathan Hicken [00:23:40]: Okay, just to help tease out this concept some more, I want to put on the full devil's advocate for a second.

Eric Ressler [00:23:50]: Yeah, do it, please.

Jonathan Hicken [00:23:50]: Where I'm like, okay, what is the antithesis of a strong point of view and what would be the benefit of having that? So the opposite that comes to mind for me would be one of pure open-mindedness, pure receptiveness to the world, to the community, to your constituents and channeling what it is that you're hearing rather than having that singular flag in the sand. So for someone, and I know leaders like this, and I think that there's virtue in that and I think that there's power in that. What would you say to somebody who's like, "Wait a second, Eric, my core belief is it's not my voice. It's everybody else's voice."

Eric Ressler [00:24:40]: That's a point of view, right? You can't escape it. And how did you get to that point? You've done the deep work. I'd say that slightly in jest, but I actually really struggle with this. I have the kind of brain that is a little bit unsure of my ideas and constantly rethinking, overthinking, what's the other side think? Honestly, sometimes I think to a fault where it's just like, "Dude, form an opinion and stick with it."

And I've actually been working on this, not just because I think it's smart to do that, but because I think it comes from a place of lack of self-confidence. There's always a balance there. If you take it too far, you're just the confident person that has no self-reflection or thought or can't possibly entertain other ideas. The pinnacle of this is literal narcissism, not what I'm suggesting.

So I don't think those two things are actually as in tension as you're presenting them. And what I mean by that is you can have a really strong point of view and be open to other people's points of view. It's not about a zero sum game where you either win or lose, but I do think that it's good to develop it or to have that be a goal that you're working towards even if you're not there.

And I'm feeling pretty good about where I'm landing trying to create this overarching point of view and my test for it is: is this in resonance with what I truly believe in the work that I do and what I've learned doing this work? And I can check that box, no problem. Is it differentiated? I think so. Are there other people that probably believe that too? Yes, who are in my space and maybe even direct competitors to me. Are they articulating it in that way? Not quite. And they've developed their own point of view in how they do that.

So straight up inspiration for me on this that is in my space who I'll shout out is Kevin L. Brown, who is the founder of Mighty Ally. We're not exactly the same. I actually saw Kevin and met him in person at Skull World, which is awesome. And he knew who I was. And he has a really strong and well-articulated point of view, which is that in order to be a successful organization in the social impact space, you need to be findable and you need to be fundable. That's his rallying cry. And he has a whole system built around that. And I also agree with that. I'm in complete agreement with him, but I didn't articulate it that way. So some of this comes down to articulation.

Jonathan Hicken [00:27:10]: And those things are complimentary and there's a lot of overlap and so these things can complement each other and there might be some people in the universe that resonate more with Findable and Fundable as a framework and there are others who are going to resonate more with the identity impact gap, and both of those can exist.

Eric Ressler [00:27:30]: And I'll take it a step further. I think it's good to have conflicting points of view. I'll shout one out that came up recently for me, two people who I follow and respect a lot, Glen Galich of the Stepski Foundation and Kevin Starr who runs Mulago. Both very outspoken, convicted, strong points of view. And Glen recently wrote a book called Control. I haven't had a chance to read it yet. I do follow Glen and his org in general and Kevin actually wrote a little bit of a counterpoint of view. He had some criticisms. He challenged it. And what's really cool is Kevin's going to go on Glen's podcast called Break Fake Rules and they're going to talk about it.

I think that's healthy. I think that's healthy in this space, especially if it's done in good faith, if it's done because we care about these issues and we want to come up with the best solutions or multiple good solutions to these problems. So I think we have to get over the, oh, we all have to live in harmony. Strong, differentiated, even conflicting points of view. I want as many good ideas about how to solve these issues as possible and I don't think that there's any one right answer to them. So I really appreciate when leaders come out and say, "Hey, this is the work that we do and here's how we think we should do it and here's why we think this is best," and be willing to be challenged on those points.

Jonathan Hicken [00:28:55]: I think that's really important because in the space we often want to collaborate and for good reason. And I think there may be a fear that, "Hey, if I put my point of view out there too strongly, maybe one of my collaborators isn't going to agree and that's going to threaten the relationship." And fair, but also maybe this, you have called on our sector to change and to grow and to get better. And maybe this is one of the ways we need to do that.

Eric Ressler [00:29:20]: I think this is a really important way we do that because we need to learn from each other. This should be approached to some degree like science, right? And take it back to the work that you do. One of the beautiful things about science is people need to do research, they need to develop hypotheses, they need to publish those, not just think about them in their brains. I would like to see a lot more people doing that. And this is why to take it back to the top, it irks me when people say, "I don't have a point of view on that." And my answer to you is, "Well, you should have one then."

Jonathan Hicken [00:29:50]: Or you do and you haven't done the work to articulate it yet.

Eric Ressler [00:29:55]: And I don't think that means that you need to have an opinion about everything that happens in the world, even in your space. And I do think it's worth it to have some humility and be like, look, I'm not an expert on this topic. And sometimes the right choice for me is to just say nothing about it. I do that all the time. But there's something that you should have a point of view on. I believe if you run a social impact organization, especially at the leadership level, you should either have or should be actively developing a strong and differentiated point of view on the work that you do.

Jonathan Hicken [00:30:25]: Here, here, man, preach. I'm really glad that you're a voice in the space because I think I personally am feeling motivated by this call.

Eric Ressler [00:30:35]: And I mean, hey, even reflecting, that is a meta point of view. One of my points of view is you should have one. So yeah, I think hopefully this is at least a good thought experiment for people to be like, "Hey, what are the elements?" Even start at the base level. What have I observed doing this work? What are the patterns that I see? What are some of the opinions that I'm maybe starting to form about doing that work? And start to think about how might I package that all up into some overarching point of view, even if you don't publish it out there as a manifesto or a podcast. I think it's an important thing to be keeping in mind.

Jonathan Hicken [00:31:10]: Cool. Well, dude, thank you for bearing it all today and working through it chicken dinner style.

Eric Ressler [00:31:15]: Yeah, this is fun, man. Thank you.

Jonathan Hicken [00:31:15]: Thanks, Eric.

Eric Ressler [00:31:20]: If you enjoyed today's video, please be sure to hit like and subscribe or even leave us a comment. It really helps. Thank you. And thank you for all that you do for your cause and for being part of the movement to move humanity and the planet forward.