The 10x Organization: Redesigning for the AI Era with Org Topologies

In this episode, host Dave West sits down with Alexey Krivitsky and Roland Flemm to explore a systemic approach to enterprise agility and performance. As organizations scramble to integrate AI, many are finding that their current structures—riddled with silos, handoffs, and conflicting mandates—are simply not "fit for purpose".

The authors of the new book they co-authored with Craig Larman, 10x Org Powered by Org Topologies, argue that to stay relevant in an AI-driven landscape, companies need a 10x improvement in adaptability and learning. They introduce Org Topologies (OT): a framework-agnostic method that uses mapping and assessment to make hidden organizational challenges transparent.

In this episode, we discuss:

• The 10x Performance Leap: Why organizations must reshape their structures before rolling out AI capabilities to avoid amplifying global inefficiencies.
• OT Mapping: How to visualize value flows and dependencies to create a shared language for improvement.
• The Mandate Problem: Understanding how organizational mandates impact team autonomy and the speed of delivery.
• Beyond Scaling Frameworks: Why Org Topologies is unique in its ability to map and improve any existing framework, from SAFe to LeSS.
• Practical Experimentation: How to start small with "change experiments" in tribes or release trains to test adaptive practices.

Whether you are a leader navigating a complex digital transformation or a manager looking for a shared language to align your teams, this conversation provides a roadmap for elevating your organization’s performance through systemic design.

Transcript

moderator: 0:00

Welcome to the scrum.org community Podcast, the podcast from the home of Scrum. In this podcast, agile experts, including professional scrum trainers and other industry thought leaders, share their stories and experiences. We also explore hot topics in our space with thought provoking, challenging, energetic discussions. We hope you enjoy this episode.

Dave West: 0:25

Hello and welcome to the scrum.org community podcast. I'm your host, Dave West, CEO here@scrum.org in today's podcast, we're talking about enterprise agility with org topologies. Org topologies is an approach that helps leaders evaluate and then align their structure so they can stay relevant, deliver the right outcomes and remain fit for purpose. So over the last few years, I've really paid a lot of attention to or topologies, you know, and saw its evolution. And the reason why is because it's a really different approach to enterprise agility, and what I really like about it, and I'm sure there's lots of other things that people like about it, it's quite a broad set of ideas, but the thing that I really like about it is it really helps you make the challenges transparent through this thing called ot mapping. And I really like that, because ultimately, transparency, I think, is at the heart of many of the challenges that we have and and I really like that. So there's a book just about to, or might be just published. I saw an early copy of it, so I'm I'm in the know, so I thought that would be a great opportunity for you all to hear from the authors of org topology. So I've invited them to the podcast. Welcome to the show. Alexi krivichki, Alexi and Roland phlegm welcome to the podcast, gentlemen,

Roland Flemm: 1:56

thank you for having us. Yes, thanks.

Dave West: 1:59

It's great. Now, all right, we have to start, I'm afraid, you know, at a at a very simple question, just to sort of kick it all off, our listeners might not be familiar with org topologies. So Roland, you know, you've given me this intro like 20 times, because I can be a bit slow. Can you help our listeners understand what org topologies is,

Roland Flemm: 2:21

yeah, sure, thanks. Although maybe you know one of the simple questions to start with, it's a very vital question, because if we don't know what we're talking about, then this whole podcast really doesn't make sense. So yeah, orc topology is, it's, let's start with the main thing it offers is to give you a language to talk about how your organization is trying to create value. So we're not looking at the organogram that was created. We're we're really looking at how value is being created, how assignments are being handed off from hand to hand, and flows through the organization from concept to cash, and we make that visual so people can talk about it and disagree or agree on how value is being created, which is a starting point, because that gives you insights on whether you think that is fit for purpose or not. And with that visualization, we offer a method to start working on, you know, we call it made. It's map, assess design and elevate as a systemic way to try to improve your organization, to make it more fit for purpose. So I think, yeah. And in addition to that, like you said, there's a lot of stuff supporting these, these ideas with principles for design and, well, a very thick book with all kinds of knowledge that we accumulated over the years.

Dave West: 3:44

Okay, we'll talk about the book in a little while, but so the the outcome is, is ultimately, you get organizations that are better aligned to purpose and and deal with many of the misconceptions inside the organization and the word that you used in the book, or it's the title the book, 10x 10x which was, I thought was a really powerful 10 times. I assume that's what I read it as Alexi talk a little bit about what 10x means,

Alexey Krivitsky: 4:20

yeah, so we know it's a bit of a bold statement to say 10x and to put it in a bolt gold at the cover of the book. And we also know, you know, from the secrets of consulting the book from Jerry Weinberg, he said, never promised more than 10% to your customers as a consultant. Otherwise, you know, if you really deliver more, there will be in a trouble, because, you know you should not. But here we are with the with a 10x Org book and the method, and we picked that title and Craig alarm, our third author, a. Actually influence and voted for this title because we believe the times are changing, and 10% 20% increase in performance will not actually cut it, and what's really changing? That's AI, right? I mean, we have to mention it quite early in the podcast, because, you know, AI is changing everything, and because we are working in the field of management, you know, we really need to consider how the landscape is being changed. And one thing to mention is that sooner or later, probably in couple of years, there'll be a first one person, $1 billion dollar company, you know, because one, a person with a eyes, will be able to achieve more than 10s and hundreds of people, which will will be at a 10x or even 100x you know, a company. And so this is just a matter of a time. And imagine you are not a startup, a you're not a one person company, but you are a larger, established organization, and now you have to compete with all this small and nimble AI augmented companies, which are actually going way faster than they had in the past. So you need to consider, like, how you can actually reshape yourself. Because if you have hundreds and 1000s of people you know, like running another change program, aiming for 10% increase will not actually make it more competitive.

Dave West: 6:39

So so let let me see if I get this right. Alexi, so what you're saying is, ultimately, 10x isn't the dream. It's actually, no, we need to do significantly more improvement.

Alexey Krivitsky: 6:51

Yeah, you can. You can call it a call to action or an aspiration, but also a reality. Because for some companies and I'm programming these days with AI myself as much as I can to see how's it going. Actually, I'm amazed every day. So 10x is a call to action for organizations who still not sure that they need to invest in that. But for other orgs, it's already a reality, you know, because people can get so much faster and more efficient. And here comes a twist. I use the word faster and efficient. If you go to, you know, like developers in any large organizations who had been given Co Co pilots and different Gen AIS, they will tell you they are going faster. They will say, Well, this thing actually helped them to maybe implement unit tests in an hour that they never had time before. You know, like things like this. You hear this stories a lot, but then you go to managers and upper managers, and you ask them, Do you guys see the actually the performance gain at the global level. And I'm not talking for every company, but for the companies we talk to, and for my clients, no, they actually just see the costs are rising because of all these licenses and stuff you need now to pay. But they don't really see yet, or maybe ever, their performance gain, and that's because, you know, local efficiency gain does not directly convert to global gain.

Dave West: 8:37

I thought that, and I don't want to, well, actually, you've brought up the AI thing, so I'm going to lean in, you know. So it's interesting. You brought up the mark and Grayson, obviously, at 16 Z or or X, yeah, 16 Z, he the investor. He is now instructing all of his all the companies that come and pitch to him. He's basically saying you need to reduce your team to less than three people, and then I'll invest in you, which is just like, Oh my gosh. You can imagine that you're like, three founders, and you're like, Oh, can't, can't, can't do that. But, and I think the point that you're making, Alexi, isn't that, you know, Bank of America is suddenly going to go down to a three person company. But what your point is that Bank of America is going to be competing some of its products are going to be competing with organizations that maybe aren't three people, but a much, a much smaller Roland. What do you think on that

Roland Flemm: 9:36

I was I wanted to chip into this one as well, because you were talking about the difference between the small companies right that now start up and that can be like, very nimble and fast, because they don't have this legacy. And then the bigger enterprise, existing enterprises, they have this legacy. And now, like in the example that Alexei gave, where, you know, licenses are being sprinkled like fairy dust in the organization. And thou shalt be faster, it's not going to work, because it's going to amplify the existing bottlenecks of the organization even faster. So what we say is, listen, hold on, have a look at your organization. First think about how your organization creates value, possibly redesign it fit for purpose, and then add AI, because then you will get the global benefits.

Dave West: 10:25

Yeah, it's so funny you say that running because I was recently with a talking to the leader of a large consumer packaged goods organization that's been doing some amazing things with AI, and they have this solution that they're building that, that they know they can do it, but they can't release it. It, it's not they've got they know how to solve the problem. They have a particular problem that is cross discipline, cross departmental and that problem AI can solve, but unfortunately, the organization can't deploy the solution because of the way in which the organization is structured around, in that case, ownership of value. You know, who says yes? Who says no, who maintains the context for this AI, who ensures that it's working effectively, who puts the governance you know that no department wants to take on the responsibility, but all departments would be would benefit massively from the deployment of this technology, and it would cut development of this thing from from from months, maybe even years, to weeks, because there's this underlying sort of like crisis that they have. And I can't tell you the thing, because it's, you know, big NDA signed, but it's just like, oh my gosh, why won't you let your organization breathe from its constraints? Because Hang on, I'm the leader of this department. I'm the leader of this department. I'm the leader of this department, etc, etc. So, so at the heart org topologies. The reason why I love org topologies is because of this transparency. I could just imagine in this particular company taking that and deploying it, this this transparency, this visualization, and getting everybody, even if you don't solve it, at least they know why, why they're not solving it, which I think super, super interesting.

Alexey Krivitsky: 12:28

Yeah, so several points to highlight from what you just said, Dave, so this ability or inability of an organization to do what's right, we did a bit of a study, and we've been working on this topic for almost what, five years now, Ireland, we discovered two key, what we call mandates that either unleash or hinder intelligence of organizations, and that's why the octopolis map has these two axes right? And one axis is the skills mandate, how much, how many skills people are allowed to apply to bring to work and also acquire or recombine this one dimension, the skills, and the second dimension is work mandate, how much of a broader picture people see and how directly they contribute, not just to outputs, but to the outcomes. And these two dimensions to mandates, they are almost orthogonal, because you can have a lot of work mandate, but have a very narrow skill mandate. For instance, you are a big manager, so you can change and you know this strategy, you can reproduce things, but you don't have the skill to do the work, and that's why you are relying on other people. And these other people can have a lot of skills, so they can be brought on the skills mandate, but can be quite narrow on the work mandate, because they are just given, maybe tasks because nobody had, you know, time to help them see a bigger picture. And these two dimensions create these a variety of different what we call archetypes. You can be almost anywhere on this map as an as an organizational unit, but depending where you are, you will either be able or not able to do certain work, and you will have some dependencies right to other units, and that eventually creates this network of different Org Unit spread across the map, and what you just guys said, the power of archipelago is as a as a shared language. Imagine you are able to gather your people and actually visualize that and see all this bad blocking dependencies and for. Example. Take example of that project, Dave, you just mentioned where the innovation was there, but because of some bureaucracy, was not able to deploy that. You should be able to see that somehow on the map, that they were lacking some kind of a mandate. And then you can go and start talking how we're going to break this up and how we're going to improve on that.

Dave West: 15:24

I think that's incredibly powerful and and I love the way that you, both of you, emphasize the word shared language or phrase shared language, because I don't feel that we have that shared language in most organizations. We we can talk about the work, we can talk about the mission. We can talk about even measures value. We spent a lot of time with blooming OKRs talking about that, or things like EBM, but we don't have a way of describing the organization, how it maps to the dimensions that you described, and to the structure, the topology, as it were, and I think that's that's incredibly powerful and and, and I guess that's at the heart of why this approach is so different to things like safe and less. Would you know, obviously, our listeners are probably very familiar with things like less and safe and another scaling things, the Spotify model, etc. Can you? Can you? Can you, in a nutshell, describe why this is so different to those approaches and complementary almost?

Alexey Krivitsky: 16:30

Yeah, I will just continue on the same line, yes. Actually, there are some local shared languages. Like, you know, like every framework provides some shared language, like, if you are implementing scale, agile, safe, that you are using some shared vocabulary, for sure, but this comes about, you know, different safe implementations actually might call things the same, but they actually might mean different things, you know, so and everybody says, We have agile teams these days, right? But some agile teams are more agile than the others, and without this level of detail, how will you be able to improve, right? So we we don't actually discard our frameworks. We have our preferences, and we like and apply some frameworks with our clients, but we try to build a method that can actually help you map other frameworks and create a broader shared language so that when somebody says, we have an Agile team, You say, Wait a minute. Let's go to the whiteboard. Let's draw this to accesses, to mandates, and really try to understand how much of skills and how much of work this team is allowed to apply. And then we see how to improve it. And then you'll be surprised. You know, some agile teams might not have, you know, all the skills they actually need because of some limitations. And there you go, and you start to implement it.

Roland Flemm: 18:08

The main difference, I think, Dave to add to this is that orthopologies is really agnostic. It doesn't matter what you, how you, what kind of framework you've implemented. But we we try to look at how the value is being recreated, really being created, as we said before, and then when we see the structure, we can, we can, we can relate to the three main topologies that we see, which is the resource topology, utilization optimization, or the delivery topology, going for speed of delivery, or the adaptive topology. And when you make whether it's safe or less, or whatever you're doing, when you make that mapping, you can, you can, you can assess, okay, which topology Am I actually and with that in mind, referring to the business ambition that you have, the strategy in the market that you're in, you can now you have enough data, enough enough stuff to decide whether your organization is really fit for purpose, and then you can start tweaking and optimizing to make it, to make, to create a structure that will give you the performance or the capabilities that you need for the environment that you're in. Yeah.

Alexey Krivitsky: 19:23

So I would say the goal is not just to have a shared language, because we have been like in one, yes, we have been like in one. Now we have it, but that's not the point. The point is to be able to have a shared understanding and improve on that. And if you you know, like, if you go to a typical safe adoption and you ask, what are guys doing here? How do you see your organization in a couple of years? Not always, but sometimes you got blank stares, and people say, we just implement this framework, and it doesn't need to be. Safe. It can be about any framework, right? We're just doing that by the book. But then the question is, but now a framework is a vehicle to get you somewhere, but do you know where going, and if, and if the speed of that vehicle and the capabilities it brings you, does it allow you to go to that place? So arc topologies allow you know, to take a step back and ask that very difficult but fundamental question, like, what do you really need as an organization to drive your strategy? And as Roland mentioned, there are different topologies you can start building, and different frameworks, different approaches, will help you to build different topologies, and they're not good or bad topologies, but they might be not fit for purpose, not what your organization need as a vehicle.

Dave West: 20:54

So you've been doing this since 2021 about the last five ish years, right? I'd love for you to share with our listeners what you've learned during this journey. I remember when Roland came to me at a face to face, PST, face to face, and he was like, super excited about this idea. And I was like, well, well. And then slowly over the next two face to faces where I saw him, I think it was Paris. Actually, was the first one we talked about this, right? Which I loved, not just because we were talking about this, but because we're in Paris as well, which is such a great place to be. But so during these last five years, you've really been share you've really been exploring this with real companies, and I've seen the evolution of the the approach and your thoughts and and also the way in which you are describe it, the words you use to describe it, evolve over these five years. So any sort of standouts in the last five years that have made you go, hang on a minute. This is okay. This was a surprise. I didn't think that this would be useful, but it is anything that really stands out. I don't know

Roland Flemm: 22:06

Roland and really a nice question, and I didn't prepare this. So this is good. You know, I think people lack the patience to stick with one subject for a long time these days, and just, you know, the way you say, it's like ages already that we're continuously thinking about the same problem, and, and, and, and, you know, improving our approach to solve these, these problems that businesses have, fundamentally, nothing really changed, right? It was already there. We just discovered, but we crystallized. And I think, I think that gave me my epiphany, is actually that thinking longer about the same subject made it so rich and so insightful that it has become super simple for people to adopt. And in the beginning, the way we struggled just communicating, like, how does this company work? And the ease that we have now with our, you know, principles and language and visualizations and stuff, I'm surprised, you know, and people just pick up on it real fast, and they and they do great things with it. So I'm more grateful, actually, that we were able to stick to stick so long with this subject.

Alexey Krivitsky: 23:33

I think around you, you've just described, describe what we've learned, but you also been humble, because there are a lot of things the organizations that we bring this to are learning. I know you have this very interesting and insightful case in 2025 where you entered a company and the company had some issues problems. That's why they were looking for a consultant and he came. But the challenge was that they already thought of new, sort of knew what they were doing, going to do. They already have a Target Operating Model, and they were looking for consultants just to implement it. And there you put your orthopologies hat on, and you taught them to map the the current state and see problems in there. And then you ask them to map, map, the state of where the target model will would take them, and that would actually show them that that model they chose would not solve the problems they have. And that triggered a revelation. And reading your case study on that, I was really stunned to learn that you were able to actually help them go back to the drawing boards and pick a new org design that would actually, you know, address those issues that they really had. So this is like an example of. Lot of what we are learning that even impossible change is actually possible. If you, if you approach people with respect, we don't criticize what there is. We map it. We don't criticize the idea. So we map it, and then you help them to look systemically at that and make their own decisions. And when you allow this to happen, magical things you know emerge,

Roland Flemm: 25:29

yeah, thanks for highlighting that. Alexi, I also maybe, maybe the listeners think, yeah, but my organization is so big, I don't have the mandate, you know, to go in and tell what needs to be changed. And that's not a problem, because org topologies can also be applied. You know, locally, although your impact, of course, will be smaller, you can still drive performance in pockets or in cells or in departments of the organization.

Dave West: 26:03

Yeah, I love the reality is that we often go into a and we as consultants, do this as well. Not that I do much consulting anymore, but, you know, back in the day, when I was young, so it's a long time ago, we used to, we always go in with a solution in mind, really, you know, somebody phones us up, says, I got this problem, and you say, I've got the solution for you. And I love the fact that org topologies makes you step back and go, hang on a minute. Let's just spend not a great deal of time, but a relatively small amount of time with the right people and actually get that visualization. That's one of the reasons why I love the the OT mapping technique. I think it's, I think it is quite revolutionary. I'm sure there's other mapping techniques that are also revolutionary, but in our context, I think it is pretty revolutionary. And and then everything else falls out from that, the, you know, the change management practices, the archetypes, etc. I think that's really, really interesting. Okay, okay, so you've got a book. I do want us to move on, because I know we could talk for days and over wine and, you know, cheese in Paris, it would be a lot more enjoyable. But the you've got a book coming out, right? Yeah. So tell, tell the listeners about the book and why, you know, because there's a lot of material online. Your your website is very rich, and it's got some really cool examples and you know stuff. So here comes the book. Yeah, tell me a little bit about a 10x Org the book. Yeah.

Alexey Krivitsky: 27:45

So the book's title is a 10x Org powered by org topologies, a manager's guide to elevating business performance with people and AI. So that's really an AI book. We started, as you said, five years ago, before this big AI wave, so we didn't see it coming. But now you cannot really talk about, you know, performance and management and org change without mentioning AI. And we are adding AI to the book and to the story. So the book is written as a as a business novel. There's a story and the theory and the whole book starts with an HR director, Hannah. Her name is receiving a blunt message from her CEO, asking to start replacing people with AI, of course, it's a bit of irony and a Satir in that, but I think you know, we know this is going to happen. AI is here to stay. The capabilities are growing with and makes a lot of speed, and eventually this will happen. And what we did in the book, we applied the octopologist method that had been already developed to try to answer this question. How can we make people not irreplaceable, but rather, how can we elevate the intelligence of people within the organizations? And 10% will not be enough, so it should be a 10x and more to to elevate people, so that they become competitive with AI. And a good news here is that AI is a challenge. It's a you know, it will try to replace us, but if we know how to apply to elevate us. It can become a great tool. And the book really tells the story of how to rethink your organizational design and then apply AI to actually get to a better place. So the people you have, that asset that you have, you know, and. Ability of people to learn gets amplified with AI.

Roland Flemm: 30:05

I think it's good, actually, how I could ramble on again, but, I mean, it has to be like a real, you know, good, good addition. If anything, I would say maybe, maybe people who read the book will notice that we are biased. We have a preference for adaptive organizations, and that's because, in an adaptive organization, as Alexei explained with these mandates, people have broad mandates on skills and work, and if you give those people the ability to really use AI, you can have much more impact of what they can do with that stuff. So although the book shows you all the topologies, it is drenched. Or how do you call this simmered? I don't know what the good English word is. It's painted with this color of every organization needs to have some kind of adaptability to survive in the long run. Yeah.

Alexey Krivitsky: 31:07

So we were able to formulate eight principles by writing the book, and the readers will find this principle baked in the story of Hannah and her friends, and also in the theory bits between the chapters and one of the principle is a fit for purpose, right? You really need, as we, as we just discussed before. You really need to build your org so that it serves your strategy. But another principle is that you need to embed multi learning and amplify it with AI. That's like one of the principle, and here we say that, yes, fit for a purpose. It's important, and it is contextual, but adaptability and learning are becoming the purpose, increasingly, with a day by day, as people get challenged by AI replacing them. The only big difference between human brain, human human intelligence, you can say an artificial intelligence, is that we human, we we people, we can learn. AIS don't actually learn. They just operate with a frozen, you know, information, and they, they, they kind of imitate intelligence. You can talk to them as you as you know, and they can produce code and whatnot, but it's actually an imitation of intelligence. The intelligence is a measure at which you can solve novel problems, and we humans are actually built for that. The million years of our human brain evolution has actually have actually brought to that. And so if you really want so the bottom line of the book, without giving the story, is that if you want to keep your people relevant, and if you want to stay relevant in the business as an organization, you really need to 10x those abilities, those capabilities that people bring to your workspace, and one of them is this ability to learn. And here comes those two mandates. The higher you are on those two mandates, the bigger is the field where you can learn in these two dimensions. And we call it multi dimensional learning, or multi learning, as it's known in Scrum.

Dave West: 33:32

It is. I spend a lot of time talking to organizations at the moment about how AI is going to fundamentally change the way in which they align to their outcomes, how you know what, what, what the job titles are, etc, etc. And I think you said it very nicely in the book about the adaptive organization and their support for learning and their empowerment to make decisions and to build the skills necessary to deliver value, I think is, is a crucial elements in the in the future organizations, though, based on experience with the the internet, you know, compute, personal computing revolution, it seems organizations have a great capacity to not actually take advantage of this. The difference is, I'm not sure they're going to have the choice, and I think that those smaller organizations are ultimately going to eat them up, just in the same way that Amazon has fun, even though it's significant size, organization has fundamentally changed the face of retail and distribution, and now in the US, it's going into pharmacies and changing that massively as well. So I thought that was really interesting from from the book, and the principles of autopologies help. Think people understand that and hopefully release that potential in their organizations. All right, so we're coming to the end of today's podcast. Most of our listeners would love to know what would be the words of wisdom that you would want to leave them with, other than obviously buying the book or gaining access to the book, going to the website, seeing what org topologies are. But what can they take from your from the last five years of learning and this, this approach that you have developed, what can they take today and use in their in their situation? I don't know. Roland, do you want to start? Have you got some words of wisdom for our listeners to leave the to leave the podcast with,

Roland Flemm: 35:43

yeah, a couple of years ago, we used to say, let's make thinking sexy again. And I think that still holds people need to think things through and not just expect that performance emerges magically in an organization. It has to be crafted. It has to be designed.

Alexey Krivitsky: 36:04

Yeah, we use, we found this wonderful quote from Deming. There's no Eastern pudding Exactly. Should we use as not putting a quote in the book so you cannot, like you should not expect immediate improvement. You really need to go and study your organization, understand the problems, map and then you can improve. So this is like one thing you really need to understand before you improve it. But actually, this might sound too heavy for many people, right? And if we're looking for an easier way out here, I guess another line of wisdom from this book would be, get the change going. You don't need to understand everything. You need to improve everything you know you can do better with maybe couple of teams and experiment a keyword, how to become more adaptive and how to apply AI more strategically to actually reduce the handoffs and dependencies between the siloed teams. And you don't need to change the whole organization. You can just start with the mandate of change you have, ideally, not just one team, because, you know, improving the parts will not improve the whole but if you have mandates for a couple of teams, maybe it's Spotify tribe, or maybe it's a safe release train, or maybe it's a less product group, you can start there. And most likely, you already have enough mandate to experiment with certain things, and this and this book will give you a lot of ideas and practices. We call them elevating katas, those simple rituals or techniques you can start experimenting with to get the change going. But still remember, there's no instant pulling. You need to be systemic. And you need to be you need to, you know, work the change, to see the effects.

Dave West: 38:11

And I think in the age of AI, everybody's in in responsible for change management, everybody needs to be driving how to take advantage of this technology in a different way and thinking about the the their domain in a very different way. So that great words of wisdom. Thank you, gentlemen. Roland, Alexi, thank you for coming on today's podcast and talking a little bit about org topologies. I really appreciate you taking the time to share of our listeners about the book, but about the idea of org topologies. Thanks for having thanks

Roland Flemm: 38:48

for having us again. Yeah, you're

Dave West: 38:50

very welcome. So listeners, that was interesting, wasn't it? We talked today about this thing called org topologies, an approach that helps leaders elevate and then align their structure so they can stay relevant and deliver the right outcomes and remain fit for purpose. And how important that is in the age of AI as we're looking to take advantage of this technology in very different ways so we can become, as the book says, even better than a 10x improved organization. And thank you for listening to today's scrum.org community podcast. If you liked what you heard, please subscribe, share with friends, and, of course, come back and listen some more. I'm lucky enough to have a variety of guests talking about everything in the area of professional Scrum Product thinking. And, of course, agile. Thanks everybody. And scrum on foreign you.