Latest / Growth After Headcount / Rethinking Go-to-Market with AI — Jonathan Kvarfordt (Salesforce) #012

Transcript

Rethinking Go-to-Market with AI — Jonathan Kvarfordt (Salesforce) #012 · Growth After Headcount

• Haris: Jonathan, you coached over ten thousand people in your go-to-market AI Academy. and now you're scaling autonomous AI employees at one mind. So I think it's fair enough to say you're an AI expert in go to market. And I remember you said that everyone is a bit behind in AI adoption, but relax, you have enough time. But at the same time I heard you're saying two thousand twenty six is the year where the gap is closing. Where are we? Coach: Well, that is a very good question. First, I just want to say thank you for having me and thanks for the audience listening in. It's a pleasure and honor to be here. So just want to say thank you. Yeah, it it's been an interesting time being in the AI space now. I started back in twenty twenty two, so but I should say I started before that, but I started educating on it back in twenty two. I've been in the AI for about seven, eight years now. and it's been interesting to see how much has changed since I first started. And then now where it's like obviously gone mainstream with Chat GPT launching and then all the changes that's happened over the last four years. I feel like last year w when when I was at momentum, a lot of people doing a lot of experiments and this year's the year I feel like a lot more People are doing things like, okay, what's what's the actual results of what we're doing with AI, not just is this a cool experiment or toy we can play with? Because, you've probably seen the news, people are asking questions about how many tokens are being used and what's the expense of it and what's the ROI based on those tokens, and should we even be doing this or not? there's a lot of conversation around, yes, we could do this with AI, but are we needing to do something a little bit differently to make sure it's it's good from a business point of view, So it's been a very interesting ride to see. see where we're going and again I think that this is the year that those who start to actually really double down on what AI can do are gonna accelerate faster than anyone else will and they'll have an insane advantage if they're willing to do the work that's needed to be done to get that advantage. Haris: Yeah. And I think in the book I'm making the distinction of AI native companies who started probably around two thousand twenty two or later to and used all of those available tools to become AI native from the beginning. And then we have the incubants Coach: Yes. Haris: that existed since many years, have a big brand reputation and they are transforming. I think I Coach: Mm-hmm. Haris: had Jacko von der Koy from Winning by Design also here and he talked People need to build a revenue system. So and you I think mentioned talk about it, about reinvention. And how far are the companies, what are you seeing in this journey? in doing their own transformation? Coach: it's a good question because everyone's in obviously very different places and it also depends on what size of organization you're talking about. It's much harder to transform a massive enterprise with thousands of people versus a smaller one. And so you have examples in the news, for example, Square Block just had this major news thing where they laid off forty percent of the team. So they had ten thousand people, laid off four thousand of and then the CEO Jack put out his his message around hierarchy to intelligence. He just talks about how they're going to rethink how the team is organized from a leadership point of view. So it's not, it's no longer going to be the hierarchy that we're used to with this pyramid type s pipe structure and going into more of a a cycle or a circle where it's centered around intelligence and AI, which is fascinating. So there are teams who are doing that extreme version. but I'll have to be honest with you, I know I know because I've either have friends on other teams, most of the other companies that are saying they're laying off people and then blaming on AI are doing lay. payoffs that they would have done anyways, but they're blaming AI when it's not Haris: Yeah. Coach: really an AI replacements. So I feel like there's a lot of fear mongering going on as a result of people saying, we're afraid of AI taking our jobs. And I don't think that's necessarily what is actually happening. I think what's actually happening is they see they're overhired and using this as a reason or excuse because everyone else is doing it with AI. Because very few companies are actually transformative. And I know this from momentum, because we were working with some major massive companies of enterprise Fortune 500 companies that we knew what was going on internally, and there was nothing drastic happening on the internal point of view to make it justifiable from AI to lay off people. Does that make sense? It was definitely like they're doing some cool things with with momentum. Momentum's not an AI replacement. Replacement tech is a human documentation tech because it's just about automating the data from human-human conversations. So it was nothing that we were in the data enough to know if someone's going to be replaced or not. But because we were there, I also knew that that wasn't happening. So, anyways, point is that the reasons they say publicly are not usually the reasons they actually are legit doing it, which is fascinating to see. so that's no number one thing is like people are saying that it's AI, but it's really not. It's just trying to figure things out. Because what we saw was that a lot of what we call operationalized AI is pretty Haris: Yeah. Coach: much just throwing licenses at people and then saying we're transformed because everyone has a co-pilot license. And that's not transformation. It's just throwing another tool with someone hoping they can figure out what's going on. What I feel like is transformation is actually rethinking how people approach the entire revenue structure. How how do they handle buyers, like what's the buyer's journey like, what's the team journey like? And are we actually doing something differently that's actually better for both the internal team and for the external team? And that's what we're doing at One Mind is just trying to rethink, okay, what if AI, if you have a seven-step sales process, what if AI could actually handle the first three? And then it gets handed off to a human at stage four versus stage zero. And then that person who is going through the process has a better experience from as a buyer point of view. And the seller's having a better experience because they get a very warmed up lead that's already been down the path of stage three versus stage zero. So it becomes a better experience across the board. The question I'm asking to other people is, are you open to making something better than you were before versus just doing something better, faster, cheaper than you were doing before? So it's just it's taking a willingness to rethink how you do things from scratch and not just Haris: Mm-hmm. Coach: trying to do things the old way faster. Hopefully that makes sense. Haris: Yeah. Yeah, it's yeah, it's exactly that. And so it goes then to back to the topic of AI adoption and AI transformation. And do you you you probably saw some companies you mentioned somewhere it's got slower or maybe where do they fail? Do you see common patterns of companies that have failing with their AI adoption? Coach: all the all all all the time, sadly. And it's not what I the research that I'm seeing backs up what I'm seeing more and more is that a lot of the failures are coming from a couple of different places. One is either disconnected systems, so the data can't communicate, therefore AI cannot work as well because you don't have the data communicating to what needs to be communicated, or two, it's a leadership problem. And the management's not giving the empowerment to the team to be able to do what they can do. And they're also not rethinking how things can happen. Because AI gives us this ability to really rethink how we do things both organizational structurally and then just from go to market. And a lot of people are again are using it to think, okay, we can do the old way faster. And they're not being willing to think outside the box. So and that's to me is the leadership problem. It's not an individual problem. Cause I think individuals, when I have people go through the academy and I have An individual contributor, they are more than willing to learn and they want to learn, they're very passionate about it, but they're restricted by the tools they have access to or to the data they have access to internally, so they can't fully release AI's power as a result. Now, the challenge is in a lot of larger companies, even mid-market and smaller companies, security is a major concern. So it's just trying to figure out how do we balance this mode of connecting all the data in such a way so that actually works, and then also making it so we don't have any security data issues. Issues because if you give everyone access to a claw that can access and change your Salesforce, that's a problem. So it's like it's just trying to figure out how how do we give that connectivity while keeping the security at the same time and do it in a way that's AI native because again, most people are using a CRM as the middle ground. And the CRM was not made for AI agents. The CRM was made for humans to under data. So we're in this interesting place where people being creative with how they're doing this with either an air table or doing some sort of rag graph system of some kind. It just depends on the team and their maturity level as far as AI is concerned. But everyone, I think this year, that's why I'm saying this year is the most important year because it's where teams get to figure it out and really start to scale something that is more AI native versus just trying to do the old systems. Haris: No. The point about the leadership was interesting. Do you think it's a risk aversion against trying something that it's new to them, they have no experience, or is it more like they're not willing to face the business risk like the topic of data risk, etcetera? Or is it a combination of both or something else even? Coach: It's a good question. It changes based on the person. some people are just not comfortable with it. They're they're Yeah, hesitant, I guess you could say. some just don't know. Sometimes it's a budget issue because I'll give the example. Anthropic, one of the heads of commercial, just presented what they do at SASR twenty six, which was two months ago. And in that chat, they talked about the tech stack they have access to, and they have all the classic SAS tech stack. They Gong, they have Salesforce, they have Outreach, they have all this stuff. And the only difference is is that Anthropic, who obviously has Claude Code and I would assume has a bajillion tokens they could burn if they wanted to. they are using Claude as a connective tissue in between all this stuff, but they have All the classic SaaS tech stacks. So it tells me, okay, a team that has the talent and the means and the tech to build your own technology is not. And why is that? And then two is really thinking what were they doing that was innovative and different? And a lot of it was just placing AI at the middle of everything versus a human at the middle of everything. So it just shifts how you think about it. But and they did it because of necessity. when they scaled the first part of this year, they grew so fast that they they couldn't hire fast enough to do what they needed to do to get the results they needed to get. So it's it's them being innovative with the technology that made it really successful, which I nothing but applaud them because I think it's awesome they did that, because they had no other option. what do you do when you have no other option? You have to just be innovative and do what you can in the mean meantime. So it's it's just being willing to look at how are you thinking about this and are you going to restrict yourself based on what was happening in the past or think of a new way? Haris: Yeah. And I think a new way is a great Zegway. What you guys are doing at One Mind. Can you give a brief explanation what Mind One Mind is? Coach: Yeah, so s simply put, we use what's called superhumans, which is our advanced agentic technology that is meant to be either a voice, a face, or like a character. That's the engagement layer that people actually engage with. But behind it is a very advanced go to market brain and context graph that gives people the ability to have this very amazing rich data set of information that can engage and do advanced things. most people are used to I like to compare it to like a Sales engineer versus an SDR. an SDR is an amazing person, but they don't have quite the skill or talent level or knowledge level as a solution engineer. So a lot of other AI technologies or chatbots are basically SDRs who can answer basic FAQs. one mind is more like a solution engineer that's an expert, can demo, can give, can even vibe code and create slides on the fly, all these really cool things. But the purpose of it is to create a good buying experience for the buyer so that they no longer have to wait for an answer. answers that they get immediate answers in the moment, either on the website or if we're on a Zoom call or a call like this one, you could have a superhuman in the call itself to answer questions if the web needs help. So it's really thinking, how do we make the business and buying experience better for buyers in a way that that unleashes growth for the business leaders who employ the superhumans so they can actually have the growth they wanted to without having a ceiling. Does that make sense, hopefully? Haris: Yeah, I think it's very interesting. one company I'm currently working on the head of customer success was like, ooh, we need this for our for our lower level customers. So Coach: Yeah. Haris: which are not too critical. And do you see them working complementary with humans or do you see them for some activities like in this customer success example, that for those lower volume clients that they can be fully in the call and just to the onboarding. how do you see that with the customers? Coach: Well, I I think we need to define what that actually means because I think it's a couple things. one is I think that things need to be dictated by the brand and the customers, the buyers themselves. what do they prefer? And I think that it right now let's just let's I'm gonna ask the question by backing up, let's look at the problem first. Right now, for a buyer to go through a process, they have to talk to six or seven different people to get to a final answer. Or if they have a question for a CSM, if they become a customer, and if I'm using 11 labs or something, I have to wait for someone either to respond to me by email or something else, or if have an enterprise type company, I have to put in a request to get a call, I have to wait a week to be able to get my question answered. It's not a good experience. It's not good at all. So the question is, okay, what if we can make that better? So it's not about replacing a human in that loop. It's about saying, How can we give the support that people are wanting to have immediately and then allowing the human to come in when the buyer is asking for it? our vision is that the one mind is able to be able is going to be able to do Or create a B2C type experience inside of B2B because it's so advanced and so secure, they can actually do what a human could do in the process. And what we're finding is it's not about talent replacement, it's about talent optimization. Let me give you a couple examples. Zoom Info, I had a case study with them, we'll be releasing soon, where they talked about how they took their inbound team and we put a superhuman where they were at before, and they then took those same people and then moved them to a different part of the business that they needed to have for. report on which was outbound or for some of them became a e's they actually graduated from an SDR so it wasn't so much of saying lay off the team as saying okay where can we put this really good human talent that knows the business knows what we need to have in a place that's better Haris: Yeah. Coach: optimized for them same thing happened at Experity which is another customer they had an inbound person they they moved from inbound to an AE. So again another person who graduated so it's been fascinating to see where people were going and how How leaders of these teams are moving talent around versus just saying we're getting rid of you. It's that's not the question. It's thinking, okay, if AI can do these types of functions better than the human was doing and creating a better experience, should we get rid of the talent? No, we need to repurpose them and put them in a place where we need them, where we need that human touch and relationship still. So that's number one. Haris: Yeah. Coach: Number two is thinking about the things that we're doing now that never was possible before with AI. Let me give an example. How many companies pre-AI had an had their best expert on the website to answer any question at any time that anyone could answer in any language at any time. No one, because there's no way you can expand and scale that. The real true value of one mind is scaling something that no one has an economical model for because it's just clearly impossible to do so. So, when you think about having a website where you have a superhuman on the website like ours, ours is Mindy, it is the best of the best. she can demo, she can go into pricing, she goes into the questions, she can go into things about us. there's so many things that she can do that is different than your regular just a chatbot. It it makes it so the website becomes. a sales carrying quota entity versus just having an FAQ chatbot. and that's something that no one has right now. yes, you have people who I sit on the chat, I can answer questions, they do that kind of thing. But those people doing that are not the best of your best. They're your 22 SDRs who are doing the best they can with the FAQs that they have, you know what I mean? And that's not a good experience for the buyer. So the question is, how do we again make the best experience for the buyer in a way that we've never been able to do before because we've never could have scaled it? Another example is the ride-along, where right now very few companies have a one-to-one coverage of sales engineers to AEs. And the problem is as a buyer. If I have an advanced technical question, I have to wait for the AE either to ping someone to email or to wait for another meeting to be with a solution engineer to finally answer my question. That's not a good experience. So, what if you could scale and have a solution engineer on every single call so that for a majority of the conversations that are happening and for the majority of the questions are being asked that the AE doesn't know about, that they can have the support they need with a right-along superhuman to answer the question in the moment, making a better experience for the buyer, and they're leaving these solutions. Engineers to have the time and space to do the things that they can do best, which is the creative Haris: No. Coach: strategic solutioning, which they want to do more of, anyways. I was I've been in so many companies where the solution engineers would tell me, I answer the same 80% of questions on 80% of the calls I do, it's the 20% I get out of bed for, it's the 20% I get creative for and get a lot of joy out of. It's not the 80% of questions I answer all day long. You know what I mean? So the question is: okay, if we could get make the better experience, have have this AI that has this brain that doesn't Forget anything about the customer, knows every type of use case, knows, understands the context from when they talk the website to the entire both third-party and first-party signals and give a demo and answer questions on and all this stuff. Wouldn't you want that to happen? And then if the person needs a more customized or strategic solutions conversation, then bring in your expert of a human who can do that in a way that they get more joy out of, anyways. So it's really understanding and asking the question: can we make it better for our team? Which I would say yes, and can we make it better for the buyer? I'd say absolutely we can. Haris: No, no, that's perfect. And it kinda it's finding out which activities are AI first and which activities are human first, right? I think this balance every company Coach: Yes. Haris: needs to find for themselves. And let's say I'm a buyer and I interact with one mind. Do you have some feedback or experiences? Are buyers behaving differently when they talk to one mind? Or is it the same? Do you have some insights there? Coach: Yeah, we just released a report three weeks ago, four weeks ago almost now, where we talked about this very thing. so at Momentum, this was a company where we just analyzed and automated workflows that were stemming and founded on human-to-human conversations. So I did a lot of analysis and a lot of reports just focused on human-to-human conversations. so I have all that data and all the information that's all publicly available by the way. You can get it from the momentum.io website. And I took that and then compared it to the human to AI conversations and the differences are fascinating. And I come down to a couple things. With these conversations, unless you have a very, very close friend or a family member, we we put up social pretenses. we we want to make sure we we look good and we have a good image and a lot of times when you have sales conversations, a lot of buyers don't say the honest truth to someone face to face 'cause they don't want to be offensive and they don't wanna have a conversation they don't wanna have with a salesperson and It it just there's a lot of social masking that goes on. And what I also found fascinating is that from human to human conversation, there's a lot of filler words. So ums and so's and ands and all this other stuff. With human AI conversation, there's no social filter. So someone is less likely to have filler words, which we have statistically significant data points. It's like seventy percent less filler words when you don't have the pressure of social masking, which I find fascinating. And then two, that means that the signal is purer because the person who has a conversation with an AI isn't afraid being blunt or direct because they know it's it's not a human that who could get the feelings hurt. There's gonna be if AI, like a superhuman, we've had several conversations with people who are many will say something and be yeah, I don't want to talk about that. Let's talk about this. And they'll totally shift it and they say things in such a way because they know it's not going to offend an AI because it has no feelings, anyways. So the conversation we get is a lot more pure, both from a less amount of filler words and because the directness, the terseness of the human is more direct, which means the sp signal is pure, which means that the better that the AI is able to have deeper conversations and better conversational tone with the human, the more information we get and the better qualified they are which as a result, which is just awesome to see. Haris: Yeah. I think this resonates and I think everyone who listened interacted with a chatbot like Claude or Chat GPT. And we all know how you talk with such an AI, right? You're way more direct, etc. And it's basically Coach: Yes. Haris: the same in a conversation where you probably with another human you might for better or worse, you probably would not have talked like that. So interesting Coach: Right. Haris: to see that. And so it can be quite a benefit in that regard as well. And Coach: Yes. Haris: yeah, how how do you think we are gonna measure success in the future for a company? one KPI that I heard in a few conversations was revenue per employee making headcount as more efficient. Do you see the same in your work or Coach: Yes. I see it's gonna be revenue per agents or revenue for us is revenue per superhuman. and it all again it all depends on the brand, 'cause again, I wanna go back to the the kind of the foundational core, which is I think that just like when we travel and we go to a city, I have several options. If I get to an airport, I can walk, I can take a bike, I can get a taxi, I can get an Uber, I can get a Waymo, I can rent a car, I have options as a buyer of transportation. I think that same thing is going to happen as a result of brands. So when someone in engages with a brand, they have options. They can talk to a human, they can talk to an AI. And I think that more often than not, when someone has an amazing experience with AI, they're going to prefer an AI experience over a human. based on the context of whatever conversation might be happening or the product or service, whatever. But at the same time, there's going to be some people who just don't want to talk to an AI and that's okay too. they'll want to talk to a human. So brands and companies need to be ready for both experiences. how can they enable a choose your own journey type of experience? Going back to your question though, I think there's going to be an interesting reflection point where we really think about how do we make it so People going through our brand experience are getting what they need in the moment. And how does that data what what data informs us in such a way that makes it a good experience that's not creepy, but also very relevant for the buyer to make it better for them over long term? Does that make sense? Hopefully. I don't feel like I'm answering your question very well. Okay. Haris: No no. No no no, you did, you did. Then it's a free flow exploration here. And your background is also on the marketing side. And one question here now in this AI world, the role of distribution versus building, how do you see that? Coach: my background's actually not in marketing. My background is in Haris: I've said. Coach: RevOps and and enablement. I've been doing marketing, I have my MBA marketing and I've been doing marketing for last several years, but I'm actually more of a RevOps operator. So I have a little bit different take on that. I do think that I I listen to so many podcasts about marketing and AI because I'm just in the space and so I'm curious what other people think about it. I I do think that distribution or having access to your audience is gonna be one of the most important things you can have. And how can you have this I guess you could call it a loop experience for a human. how do you create a loop so that people keep coming back to you for information? So as an example, if I create a community, if I create a following of some kind, I want to make sure people know that they can trust me, that I give value, and that it's worthwhile for them, that there's something in it for them, and it's not just me talking about me, because I don't I don't get a lot of value for myself per and this is just maybe my opinion, but when when I follow someone, I don't get value out of them talking about them. I get value because they're saying something that's for me as an individual. That's why I follow them, So I have the same opinion as me as a creator or or or the brand of One Mind. It's like saying, okay, what can we give value to our ICP that's actually relevant and important to them? And how can we do it consistently enough so it becomes this loop so they keep coming back? and that's something that just takes consistency and that to me is nothing new. It's just like how how do you build trust in a marketplace that's incredibly noisy and very busy? Which again creates this distribution model so that no matter what you do, you have a place to actually launch a new product to versus just, Going out to the ether and trying to build an audience from cold or trying to get things cold when you don't have trust is very, very difficult. But launching something new with with a a group of people who trust you and know you and you've already given a lot of information to is way easier. So I'd rather be on the side of building a distribution via trust and value versus not. Haris: No, that is definitely correct. I think it's now building becomes almost a commodity skill, especially with all the AI tooling, while building then a brand and the distribution around, yes, for that you need to have trust and you need to deliver a quality results so that the buyers are coming back to you. And Coach: Yes. Yes. Haris: I think the role of personal brand is also gonna be just more important. So personal brand next. to company brand. And you are in a way also a little bit a powerhouse. You have your academy, you have a podcast, big, you advise multiple companies, you teach as well, your VP job. Yeah, one man powerhouse. How do you leverage AI for yourself to keep Coach: Yeah. Haris: track of everything? Coach: I use AI all day every day. So to me, I use AI just as much as a thought partner. And what's what's interesting is that the last couple of years I've had to become better at communicating, clear at communicating. And then wha what I find interesting is that I've had to do I've had to create space where I can have more creative thought Before AI, I was doing a lot of the kind of I would say grunt work where it was like copy-pasting things from one Excel to the next Excel, or just doing things that was taking my time and energy that I didn't realize how much time and energy it was taking for me. Does that make sense? And now that AI is here, it's it's automating a lot of these different things that I was doing before that's freeing up my mental capacity to have more time to think. So as a result of this, there's times and places where I have to walk away from AI and I'm like in the shower, I'm walking with my kids or doing something. I have time to think more. And when I'm ready to engage with AI, it's there as a thought partner and also an execution person or entity, I should say. So I always try to think How can I push the boundaries of what's possible with AI in a way that accelerates me, not replaces me? Does that make sense? Because I always find I feel like I I find this level of performance and I unlock another level. And AI is something that helps me unlock and move up higher. And the more that I'm willing to push the boundaries of what is actually possible with AI, the higher up I go in my own performance and thinking. Does that make sense? And I'm not saying I'm superior to anybody else. My passion is about being superior to myself. I don't care about anybody else, to be quite honest with you. I care about me. how how am I becoming better? And using AI as that thought partner. And then the more and more connected is to my systems and to my things, my data, my tech, my stuff, it's able to actually do things for me. So not just think through a problem and and via text do stuff. But for example, I use Claude, I use Perplexity, I use a bunch of other tech, Hermes and some other stuff. And actually when when I'm ready to then execute and go from idea ideation to execution, it's getting better actually getting this stuff done. So I'm able to pump out things like crazy as a result. for example, last year. we released a book that I I wrote the whole book. Well I take it back. We did 40 interviews. I took all those transcripts. We wrote a book in a week. It took me a long time to edit it because it was just I found very quickly that AI is not quite there to write a book. But it's very good Haris: No. Coach: about writing chapters. And and I had to go in as a human and say, okay, how is this connected to make sure that the chapters flow from one to the next and ideas flow and doesn't have a lot of AI speak. it took me a week to actually write the first draft. Took me at least another month to edit it and get it to where it needs be. But if you look at that month and a week time of writing a book versus historically what it would have taken me to write a book, it would have taken me at a year at least to write the book. So a month and a week versus a a year is a dramatic difference in speed and acceleration that would have been before. And the book in my opinion is actually pretty freaking good. there was a lot of human in the loop in the inside the process. I edited and I sent off to a professional book editor and said, tear this apart, make it better. And the result was awesome. So it's just amazing to see the differences between those two and how much you're able to get done. when you're leveraging AI versus when you're not. And for me, the key is just being curious and open to asking the question, what if I could do this with AI? And being willing to try it and half the time it's gonna bomb and fail. And you have to be okay with that as a result. and I think that's where people get stuck is they're they don't allow failure. And something I learned from a graphic designer friend of mine is that they go through if they want to get to one good idea, they go through nine and n iterations that are horrible just to get to the one. And I feel like we need to do that more often with ourselves and go to market is to give us that space to have some place we can ideate or try or experiment or do whatever without being, dramatic impact on the business, but have a safe place we can actually do that and try things so you can experiment and see what what becomes better. Cause unless you have that space to do that, you'll never get there. Haris: No, yeah, no, that sounds very beautiful. What I did recently is when I'm working on documents, right now I'm doing a little audit or question to ask. I put in the beginning in the header, do not use AI, ex cause use everything in your head and once you're stuck, then put add AI on top. So basically forcing myself also to think a little bit more extra. And then once I'm done with Coach: Yes. Haris: that, then I'm gonna run it To all my transcript that we're in granola, all my knowledge base that I have, Coach: Right. Haris: and then it can complement and add it because I see it for myself. Sometimes you can fall into the trap of becoming a little bit lazy. That you Coach: Yeah. Haris: are you could actually you have it in you and then you get an output from AI and it seems, wow, this is good. But then I think Coach: Uh-huh. Haris: my realization recently is okay, but if I would not have done it with AI pushed it myself. even if I didn't want to do it a little without AI. And then it I notice it extract this extra layer of still maybe human expertise. So it's kinda again to the topic of human first, AI first, and how much do we outsource to AI. Coach: Yeah, it's interesting. It's like I I see a future where and then this is outside of one mind, but let's give an example. If I have a team or a fleet of AI agents, let's just call it a swarm, and these AI agents can take everything that I do as as an expert in my field or as a nerd or whatever I nerd out on. And if I can expand my reach, there's two things I think it could happen. One is I then can leverage my own talent and knowledge in such a way that I've never been able to do before. And when companies have the ability to how use MCP or API or whatever the case is, imagine a world where I have let's just take marketing for example. Where I could be a full-time marketing leader at four or five companies because I have the AI agents who extend my reach in such a way that I can be infiltrated inside of each company. And that the all the agents know how I think, they know my strategy, they know my theory, they know how I do about different things. and all it takes is for me to have the thinking time and space so that throughout the day I'm I have two hours for one company, two hours for another company, two hours for another company. And the value that I bring is not in my time, but is in my IP, which is inside my my agents which is inside of what I can do for the company. So that's where I think things could potentially go in the future where I'm no l I personally am no longer limited by one company and it's not even it's not even saying I'm a fractional marketing leader. It's like literally I am a full-time resource, but I'm not full-time by the sense of time. I'm full-time by the sense of impact. Does that make sense? so that's a world I look forward very greatly to having that experience with. We're not quite there yet because of if a company doesn't have that MCP server I can connect in and understand what's going on. I don't have that ability yet, but I definitely see a future where we'll be able to plug and play our AI agent swarms of us as an individual. We can plug in to wherever and have Haris: Yeah. I think I recently talked with somebody to mention something similar. basically the product becomes your domain expertise. And how you deliver that, be that in person, be that through an MCP, be that through a SARS platform, is almost becoming irrelevant because it's like your domain expertise that you kinda can add to those companies and the swarm would be like your distribution channel of that. Coach: Yes. Haris: Let's see what the future brings. Amazing Jonathan. This was a great chat. Thank you for being here. And if anyone wants to learn more about you, about what you do, where can they find you? Coach: best places LinkedIn. it's my dumping ground of all things AI. So that's usually the best place. I also have a newsletter on Substack. And then yeah, so those are the those are the best places to go to right now is just to see everything we're doing at One Mind and obviously oneMind.com, if you haven't had experience of talking to one of our superhumans, please go there, talk to Mindy, she's awesome. She can give you a demo and show what we can do. Otherwise just find me on LinkedIn. I'm happy to help any time. Haris: Perfect. I will put all the links into the show notes as well. All right. Then thank you very much and let's stay in touch. Bye bye. Coach: Cool. Thank you. Appreciate it.