Tag: strategic framework

Post Covid

**“Follow the leaders”, sculpture by Isaac Cordal, Berlin, Germany April 2011**
**Also known as “politicians discussing climate change”**

Blog 4 on Post Covid disruption, resilience and innovation.

This blog will explore the role of the government and how it needs to change to be effective in the ‘living with Covid’ or ‘post Covid’ world.

As I have talked about in other blogs, the context to talk about the governments role is against an individual centric world, which is not a company or government centric view. Individuals are the building blocks of societies. As depicted in Figure 4-1, from the individual in the centre there are concentric circles going out for the economy, society and the environment. Defining the social contract between individuals and their societies, or countries, sets the parameters within which the different actors must operate and the goals they must strive to achieve. The actors are the market economy, the government, the 3rd sector, and the public themselves. For a longterm sustainable world there must also be a social contract with the earth. We must live within the resource constraints and operating system of the earth to keep it in balance – clearly an area where we are currently failing at on most fronts. Finally, this model implies that the sum of the country/societal models rolls up into an aggregated view which then ideally operates sustainably from an earth and climate viewpoint.

The role of the government (the state) that I refer to is against the the model of advanced countries, which are both democratic and market economy driven. Against almost any set of comparative measures analysing country performance, these two factors are key descriptors of success. It is worth noting Winston Churchill’s famous quote on democracy, “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”. The majority of what I discuss would apply in different forms to all countries.

To start, one of the key questions is what is government for?  Lee Kuan Yew, Prime Minister of Singapore from 1959 to 1990, stated, “the ultimate test of the value of a political system is whether that society establish conditions that improve the standard of living for the majority of its people.  He always stated that the proof is in the pudding; rising incomes for the broad middle class, health, security and economic opportunity.  Based on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), I would overlay onto this the concept of social inclusiveness on core human rights.  These rights would include minimum rights related to income, shelter and food; equal access to quality health and education; equal treatment, rights and opportunity; and, freedom of speech and movement.

Based on this definition, we can all see shortcomings in our own countries.  This pandemic along with other challenges, including economic, the ‘black lives matter’ and ‘me too’ movements, and the climate and environmental challenges bring to light shortcomings.

It is worth looking at what the roles of the government are in the advanced countries (Figure 4-2).  Broadly, there are three different sets of activities.  The first set are core roles typically linked to the base functioning of a country.  The second set are government roles associated with the provision of public services to individuals.  The final set are roles linked to the goal of contributing to the development and stability of the economy and protection of the environment.  Not all advanced countries effectively cover all these roles.  For example, the US does not have universal healthcare and the provision of education to all children is highly imbalanced.

Effective government is complex and challenging at the best of times. We all worry about whether or not the government is focused on the right things, whether or not they are spending their money wisely against the priorities they have set, and what is the true impact of their spend versus the rhetoric we hear.

As I see it, and have noted before, the strategic framework that I set out for businesses is also the same framework for the government (Figure 4-3). This is required of a system based framework.

For each role of the government, it ideally should be able to define the economic, social and environmental impact they want to achieve, the delivery model for achieving the impact and the way that it is financed fiscally and/or through debt financing. Wouldn’t it be great to have a government report card against each of its roles so that there was clear accountability!

The pandemic has affected all parts of the governments in most countries in profound ways. Healthcare, welfare and education systems have been deeply affected, tested and come up short in many ways. Public transport systems usage has collapsed. Police forces and the military have been asked to perform different tasks. The levels of economic support provided and demanded are at unprecedented levels. The level of cross border cyber attacks have grown. The need for multi-lateral coordination has increased. And, the list goes on!

As we move, to ‘living with Covid’ and, hopefully then a post-Covid world, reverting to governments previous modus operandi will not be adequate in most countries. There are also other large disruptive factors that have not been effectively addressed; these include, climate change, social fairness and growing geo-political tensions; and in each country, they will have their own additional lists, such as Brexit for the UK. All of this creates a complex cocktail of challenges for governments to focus on going forward.

There are four overall areas for the government to think about (Figure 4-4). Firstly, their role in the welfare of the public, their key constituent. This includes being ready for the next equivalent pandemic, making sure that at all times normal medical treatment can be provided, and solving how to continually improve the quality of healthcare services with an ageing population and tight financial requirements.

There are big concerns over the quality and impact of education during Covid. There is a lot of work to do in understanding digital education delivery and putting in capabilities for either fully remote delivery (for emergencies) or ongoing hybrid education. The opportunity should also be taken to see how education impact can be enhanced vs. the current normal in-person education delivery.

Restoration of freedoms. The pandemic has resulted in significant restrictions on individuals and in many cases undue use of private information. There have been losses of freedom of movement and of socialisation. There have been restrictions on the ability to work with remote working being mandated in many areas. Many countries have put in curfews in locations with high outbreaks. Last but not least, in a number of countries, individuals have had to sign up to apps so that the health authorities can track their movement. There have been requisite loss of freedoms for businesses and organistions to operate. Eliminations of these restrictions and restoration of normal rights is a critical part of moving to a new normal; no one wants a full time ‘nanny state’.

In addition, across all parts of the government, they can make a big impact by ensuring the optimum levels of employment in the supply chains related to their services; this includes, having a careful look at the role of local vs. international sourcing.

Secondly, restoring the performance of the market economy. Universally, the performance of the market economy is the key driver to economic growth and the improvement of the welfare of the population of a country. One of the key roles of the government in advanced economies has been to reduce the impact of a recession and contribute to its rebound – economic smoothing. In the post pandemic environment, this includes helping sound economic companies and sectors to recover; looking at challenged sectors and thinking how to assist them in reconfiguring into a successful relevant sector going forward; and, providing stimulus in the form of research and development, and financial support, to key strategic and growth sectors going forward – including driving the green agenda.

Thirdly, investing in infrastructure and public goods to get them appropriately focused for impact going forward and to improve employment levels. With a ‘new normal’ being driven off changes in consumer behaviour, the government needs to incorporate this into the specific requirements and capacities needed for each service they provide. There is also a period of excess resources required for catch up in areas such as the health sector where diagnosis of ailments and treatments have lagged during the crisis.

Building resilience against future disruptions (including pandemics, fires, flood, tornados, etc.) should also not be forgotten. It is very clear that a number of countries were highly unprepared for a pandemic despite everyone knowing that it was a possibility. Just look at the preparedness of countries such as S Korea, Singapore, Japan and Germany and the superior outcomes they have achieved vs. the woeful performance of the US, UK, Spain, Belgium and many South American countries among others who were caught unprepared.

Linked to resilience is the need to shift services to include the use of digital capabilities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery as well as resilience. Improved administration efficiency, digital and hybrid healthcare and education delivery are other clear areas. Japan, under its new prime minister, Yoshihide Suga, has just announced a minister responsible for the digitisation of government services.

The other area governments should look at is bringing forward investments that create a multiplier effect on employment and the economy. Climate change is one of these areas, where accelerated investment is critical in any event to help countries meet their Paris Climate Agreement commitments. As with this pandemic, climate change also demands each of the governments to improve levels of global cooperation. Global problems need global solutions.

There are limits to investment capacity, so governments need to make tough choices on where to focus their efforts and then what combinations of the 3 Fs (frameworks, financing and fiscal) they use to stimulate the market economy. Frameworks are regulations and other non-financial mechanisms that the governments put in place to shape markets, drive consumer behaviour, deliver public services and protect individuals and organisations. Clearly, financing and fiscal are the financial mechanisms for funding different activities. To the extent that the government can find ways to help the economy recover without always reverting to financing, then we are all ultimately better off. This could be as simple as re-zoning roads to provide plenty of room for outdoor seating for cafes and restaurants to help them rebuild their businesses.

One of the leading modern economists, Mariana Mazzucato, has been pushing to create/recreate dynamic public-private interaction and the creation of mission oriented industrial strategies. She clearly identifies that the state is instrumental in many parts of our economy, including helping to stabilise and grow the economy, yet the spoils of their involvement is never appropriately compensated vs. the risk. Virtually all the upside where the government is assisting accrues to businesses and their shareholders despite the public (through taxes) taking the risk. Whether the government is helping businesses to recover, helping sectors to reconfigure or stimulating the growth of new sectors, through R&D or investment, the government should be looking for a fair reward structure for their successful involvement. This should help reduce a governments debt burden, and the consequent public tax burden, over time. It should also help drive improved corporate responsibility.

In summary, for each government this is a complex equation of where to spend and how much. The three categories of potential spend are addressing fundamental shortfalls in public services, providing market economy recovery and growth support, and bringing forward government programs that will create a job multiplier effect. Some example areas are shown in Figure 4-5.

Integral to the development of a ‘new normal’ is also a society aligned with accelerating progress against our critical environmental challenges of addressing climate change and biodiversity. Clear focused programs on these must be included. As an example see Figure 4-6.

Behind all these factors and potential initiatives to restore and progress economies, is the simple truth that uncertainty is the enemy of progress. Having clarity on government actions and programs, confidence that they won’t unsuspectingly change and some forms of longer term certainty that individuals and the market economy can plan on and rely on is critical. This gives individuals and companies confidence, horizons they can plan against, and an improved ability to raise further financing.

#Covid 19 #pandemic #post Covid #strategy #disruption #resilience #innovation #WHO #McKinsey #Accenture #EY #UN SDGs #WEF #blacklivesmatter #metoo #DoughnutEconomics @Kate Raworth @Mariana Mazzucato #biodiversity #remote working #strategic framework #climate change #government role #social contract #public #infrastructure #fiscal policy #monetary policy

Tags biodiversity, climate change, digital, economic stimulus, education, employment, fiscal policy, health, infrastructure, living with Covid, monetary policy, post Covid, public goods, public services, role of government, strategic framework, UN SDGs

REBOOT Strategy

REBOOT Business Strategy

“It always seems impossible until it is done”, Nelson Mandela

Blog 14 of the Business Strategy Series

In this second blog describing the strategic framework (figure 14-1), I will cover off talking about the delivery model which is the strategic component behind the purpose of the business that drives both the economic and impact model of the business.

The delivery model aligns the customer proposition with the delivery components that are comprised in a circular strategy, to address climate and environmental impact, and the social strategy that focuses on economic and social impact (Figure 14-2).

Behind all businesses are the dimensions of customer – product fit. The three key strategic pieces of this comprise a powerful proposition to the customer, ensuring the proposition is differentiated from its competitors, and focusing on a market segment that is attractive or ideally large and growing.

Achieving and sustaining a differentiated customer proposition is critical to success. To this end, having an intense and ongoing understanding of a business’ existing and potential customers in terms of purchasing decision making and behaviours, usage and post-usage behaviours, and the factors that will drive emotional engagement are vital. We can see the potential components of a proposition (Figure 14-3) and the ways to differentiate are growing over time. The newer dimensions include differentiating over environmental sustainability and responsibility, the business model as discussed in Blog 9 of this series including channels to market, and a number of technology based dimensions.

Potential Components of a Value Proposition,
Figure 14-3

In many ways, the bigger challenge is sustaining differentiation vs. the initial achievement of a differentiated proposition. Success attracts copycats. New technology or technology convergence invites disruption.

There are a number of components businesses need to have in place to succeed in sustaining differentiation. Firstly, superior customer knowledge of existing and potential customers. Secondly, and closely associated, is superior CRM (customer relationship management) capabilities. The purchasing and usage experience of a product or service drives customer retention, which results in repeat buying and referrals. Relentlessly improving this experience will be even more critical going forward as the environmental movement drives longer life products and higher levels of service. Thirdly, the collection and use of data, including competitive information. Fourthly, having innovation capabilities and agility to continuously improve, react to problems and opportunities, and to integrate major changes as new technological capabilities. Speed and agility in many sectors are mission critical for success. Finally, none of the other dimensions matter if you do not have the financial capacity to progress on these factors and withstand competitive pressures.

Now let’s move on to look at environmental impact. To truly embrace environmental impact and set ambitious targets from an attitudinal, operational and strategic perspective you need to look at your business through the eyes of a circular strategy. My first exposure to this concept was over 15 years ago when I read ‘Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things’ by William McDonough and Michael Braungart, where they presented an integration of design and science that provides enduring benefits for society from safe materials, water and energy in circular economies and eliminates the concept of waste.

The book put forward a design framework characterized by three principles derived from nature. Firstly – “Everything is a resource for something else. In nature, the “waste” of one system becomes food for another. Everything can be designed to be disassembled and safely returned to the soil as biological nutrients, or re-utilized as high quality materials for new products as technical nutrients without contamination”. Secondly – “Use clean and renewable energy. Living things thrive on the energy of the solar system. Similarly, human constructs can utilize clean and renewable energy in many forms – such as solar, wind, geothermal, gravitational energy and other energy systems being developed today – thereby capitalizing on these abundant resources while supporting human and environmental health.” Thirdly – “Celebrate diversity. Around the world, geology, hydrology, photosynthesis and nutrient cycling, adapted to locale, yield an astonishing diversity of natural and cultural life. Designs that respond to the challenges and opportunities offered by each place fit elegantly and effectively into their own niches.”

The circular economy is most easily visualised by Figure 14-4 below.

One of the real champions of this approach are the Ellen MacArthur Foundation who have been working with major corporations to rapidly and dramatically reduce the carbon footprint and environmental impact they are having on the planet. Their mission is to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation works with business, government and academia to build a framework for an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design. Figure 14-5 identifies the main components of the thinking within a circular strategy.

The starting point for developing a circular strategy is to know where you currently stand in terms of both economic cost and environmental impact (Figure 14-6). This sets the business’ starting point.

Secondly, explore ways that you can add value and revenue growth by making changes to your business model. Getting the right business model is critical to align with a circular strategy. As I noted in Blog 9 of the series there are many alternative business models that can be explored. Below in Figure 14-7 are some examples of business models of some newer businesses.

Achieving a full circular strategy in product based businesses is a major commitment of time, energy and resources. This also requires full alignment across all parts of the business and its supply chain. Defining the end point allows the business to define the journey and time frame to achieving it in order to deliver on the financial performance and meet the impact requirements of a responsible business.

Integrated with the circular strategy, a business needs to overlay a social strategy, which includes economic impact. I believe the acid test of a strong social strategy is whether or not, or to what extent, the company is contributing in its own way to reducing inequality, ensuring inclusivity, and contributing to future generations of all children being better off. This is positive impact.

The constituents of a social strategy are the customers, employees, people within the supply chain and communities which are touched by the business (Figure 14-8).

The social strategy can impact on many of the SDG’s (Figure 14-9) including ‘responsible consumption and production’, decent work and economic growth’, ‘quality education’, ‘good health and well-being’, ‘gender equality’, ‘reduced inequalities’, and ‘clean water and sanitation’.

The impact focus of the social strategy will range from compliance with core principles such as anti-slavery, fair trade and gender equality, to specific proactive stances against behaviour that violates the core values of the businesses, or finding areas where the business can add some real specific value (Figure 14-10).

Most recently, we have seen the incident with Patagonia who removed its advertising on Facebook in a “Stop Hate for Profit’ campaign. Alex Weller, Patagonia’s marketing director for Europe said, “It’s no secret that social media platforms have been profiting from the dissemination of hate speech for too long. Facebook continues to be the most resistant of all the social media platforms to addressing this critical issue and so that’s why we decided to take action against it specifically.” Since Patagonia’s stance others like Adidas, Verizon, Coca-Cola and Unilever made similar moves. Patagonia has said that it will stay the course and stand by this commitment for as long as it takes. We will see the strength of the stance of other companies as time passes.

Overall, companies need to think about what their social balanced score card should look like (Figure 14-11).

Just as with the other components of the thinking requiring short, medium and long term views, so does the organisational thinking. This organisational thinking for the organisational components per the McKinsey 7S model (Figure 14-12) needs to be matched against both the time horizons and the alternative strategic scenarios in order to be properly assessed.

Critically, to get each of the organisational components right there needs to be clarity on the performance requirements (Figure 14-13) of the organisation. Arguably, if there are some big strategic shifts in the business as a result of also needing to drive impact, then there will likely be some material changes required to the organisational needs of the business and linked to this the incentive structure to drive alignment.

Finally, as the environment changes, the sector evolves and the company learns, there will need to be continuous adjustments to the strategy and the components of delivery in order the achieve both the economic and impact goals of the business. Integration and alignment of these components is critical as well as continuous feedback across the cascade of components with appropriate adjustments (Figure 14-14).

In final blog of this series, I want to talk in more depth about impact, strategic time frames, sustainability and resilience. I will also finish off with a short discussion on portfolio strategy for companies with multiple businesses.

REBOOT Strategy

REBOOT Business Strategy

Blog 13 of the REBOOT Business Strategy Series

This is the first blog discussing a new strategic framework relevant for the world we now live in. To date, I have covered off some background on how the world is getting increasingly complex from a societal, environmental, technological and disruption perspective; and the implication of this is a need to look at business strategies from a system based perspective so that business are aligned with economic, society and environmental goals. Critically, linked to this are that the general consensus on these goals globally are best defined by the 2015 UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, which also link in with the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement.

The next section then went on to cover off 8 gaps in traditional strategic thinking that need to be covered off for a strategy in the 21^st century. These gaps were driven by deep interconnections of a business with their environment, which is not just their business sector. These interconnections are vital to understand as there is continuous change and ongoing disruptions that are and will be affecting a business. These factors include societal and economic factors as we can see now with the Covid 19 pandemic and ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement, the impact of new technologies, and most importantly the need to globally address the challenges of climate change and other key environmental issues.

This new framework tries to create a shift in how we think about our business, away from just profitability for shareholders to goals that are also aligned other stakeholders including the public, consumers, suppliers, communities and governmental interests. It is worth noting that investors are now requiring this shift given that the long term interests of businesses are for a sustainable world and they can see real business risks on the horizon from climate change.

The traditional stand alone thinking (Figure 13-1) can be summarised by, firstly, a virtually exclusive focus on the shareholder as Milton Friedman had summarised,”the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits”. Secondly, an industry and competitor analysis as defined by Michael Porter’s five forces analysis matched to an understanding of the business’ internal capabilities. Thirdly, profit and market based key metrics.

A new system based framework needs alignment from the business through to the economy, society and to the environment (Figure 13-2).

To create alignment a business needs meaningful purpose that aligns with the business on delivering against both its own economic goals as well as creating impact (Figure 13-3). This is the challenge of strategy design, to cover the needs of both profitability and impact.

Clearly, this can add complexity as the performance measures are now broader; however, it also creates opportunity and new ways of differentiating and competing. For deeply entrenched players in the market who have adverse impact on the climate/environment, they are going to have to think about how they will use their resources and market position to evolve to a new sustainable strategic position and focus. For the younger and nimbler companies, they will need to think about how to use their speed and flexibility to create a stronger positioning ahead of their key competitors. If you are already there, then take advantage of your position.

A key part of this system-based framework is that it is relevant for all types of organisations whether in business, government or as an NGO. Clearly, each type of organisation, as with each business, has to be clear on their economic model and what their impact targets are in order to get clear on what delivery model they need. In the government and with NGO’s, they will have very different sources of funds; but, in any event they need to solve a sustainable financial model to survive rather than to make a profit. A governments whole raison d’être should be impact; although, for many of us it may well be that their targets and metrics of achievement are unclear!

Surrounding these triangles are three components that need to be full addressed within a strategy (Figure 13-4). Firstly, having a clear view of the key stakeholders of the business. Secondly, the business must be built to last – it must be sustainable. This means the business must be able to continuously deliver value to it customers, it must deliver the right economic performance for investors, and it must provide the appropriate impact for other stakeholders. And, the business must be able to adjust, adapt and move forward in a way that this continues over time.

Thirdly, the business must be resilient and thus have the capability to withstand and manage through different scenarios of disruption from the 5 types of macro forces – societal, environmental, economic, technological, and geo-political – to the core challenges specific to the

There are six tests of a business strategy:

Is the business Purpose Driven?
Can the business create real differentiated value for its target customers over time?
Can the business perform at a level to attract and retain investors?
Does the strategy integrate generating economic, social and environmental impact at ambitious levels for key stakeholders?
Does the business strategy create sustainability and resilience?
Does the strategy have ambitious and achievable triple bottom line metrics covering profit and impact targets?

At the heart of a business lies its purpose. It is the driving force and acid test of all business decisions. It is what attracts and retains employees, customers, other participants in the supply chain and investors. Sitting above the strategy are three components Vision, Mission and Values. There are a lot of different views about how to define vision and mission, and sometimes they are combined; so to clarify, I have created definitions that fit with this strategic framework.

Within this strategic framework, the purpose defines how the world will be a better place as a result of the business. The first component of the purpose is the Vision. The Vision is the business’ view of the better world that the industry or sector will contribute to. The Mission is the part of the vision that the company is targeting to fulfil. I like to describe the Mission as the North Star that the company wants to be continuously moving towards. Finally, the Values defines behaviourally how the Company‘s operates – what drives it, what motivates it, and how it will behave with its employees, customers, suppliers, communities, society and environment. The combination of the vision and mission should be something that engages, and gains agreement from, all key stakeholders.

Here are some examples of the vision and mission, or a combined statement, for purpose driven companies.

Orsted

Our vision is a world that runs entirely on green energy.

Mission: “We want to be a company that provides real, tangible solutions to one of the worlds most difficult and urgent problems.”

This is a Danish Company that started life as a state owned organisation focused on coal and oil. Most recently it has been recognised as ….

Here are some examples of the vision and mission, or a combined statement, for purpose driven companies.

Orsted

Vision: “Let’s create a world that runs entirely on green energy.“

This is a Danish Company that started life as a state owned organisation focused on coal and oil. Their current primary focus is on offshore and on shore wind farms. Most recently it has been recognised as the most sustainable company in the world in the Corporate Knights 2020 Global 100 Index.

Novo Nordisk

“Our purpose is to drive change to defeat diabetes and other serious chronic diseases such as obesity and rare blood and endocrine disorders. We do so by pioneering scientific breakthroughs, expanding access to our medicines and working to prevent and ultimately cure disease.“

How many other pharmaceutical companies have a missions to ultimately cure diseases where it derives all its revenues from?

Unilever

Vision – “to make sustainable living commonplace.”

Mission – “To add vitality to life. We meet everyday needs for nutrition, hygiene and personal care with brands that help people feel good, look good and get more out of life.”

Tesla

Mission: “To accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy“

We all know Tesla for it’s pure electric vehicles; however, it now has a full suite of energy products that incorporate solar, storage and grid services.

Ikea

Vision: “To create a better everday life for the many people”

“Our business idea supports this vision by offering a wide range of well-designed, functional home furnishings products at prices so low that as many people as possible will be able to afford them.”

Microsoft

Mission: “To empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more”

“Our platforms and tools make small businesses more productive, multi-nationals more competitive, nonprofits more effective and governments more efficient. They improve healthcare and education outcomes, amplify human ingenuity, and allow people everywhere to reach higher.”

Patagonia, an outdoor clothing company, has had a sustainable mission since the beginning and has self imposed an earth tax of 1% of revenues for support activities to save the planet. It has a very broad mission, “we’re in business to save our home planet”

It has defined it values in a different way to most companies that state the obvious ones of honesty, integrity, etc. Their values are more action oriented, very honest, and I think much more engaging:

“Build the best product – Our criteria for the best product rests on function, repairability, and, foremost, durability. Among the most direct ways we can limit ecological impacts is with goods that last for generations or can be recycled so the materials in them remain in use. Making the best product matters for saving the planet.

“Cause no unnecessary harm – We know that our business activity—from lighting stores to dyeing shirts—is part of the problem. We work steadily to change our business practices and share what we’ve learned. But we recognize that this is not enough. We seek not only to do less harm, but more good.

Use business to protect nature – The challenges we face as a society require leadership. Once we identify a problem, we act. We embrace risk and act to protect and restore the stability, integrity and beauty of the web of life.

Not bound by convention – Our success—and much of the fun—lies in developing new ways to do things.”

With a broader awakening of Boards and executive teams, as well as investor pressure, we should expect an increasingly rapid shift to much more purpose driven vision, mission and values? The companies not moving in this direction will inevitably be left behind.

The overall strategic framework tries to achieve 3 core objectives. Firstly, to ensure the business is systemically integrated into its economic, social and environmental situation context. Secondly, provide absolute clarity that the business is also focused on impact as well as profit to meet the needs of all key stakeholders. Finally, to have a true longer term perspective that considers both resilience and sustainability.

In the next two blogs, I will fill out the other components of the framework.