Right.

One of the neat things that I think we're also seeing based on your question that you just asked was coming through this process of transition, making these, these upgrades and implementations is we're seeing a paradigm shift used to be, this is an it event.

And now we're actually seeing a pivot to this being a business and it event.

We're seeing the group at the table, which is fantastic because doing it in disjointed efforts can be.

much of a regret move because then you're not necessarily setting up your overall infrastructure with the end in mind, because it's about future-proofing how you want your system to be and making some of those critical decisions while you're making that transition to cloud is the right thing to do.

And creating that both IT and business infrastructure business case together is important.

And having them all at the table, all understanding why one person is asking for one thing and the other person is asking for something else, and being able to share that information is critical.

Do you want to open it to you?

So how do you balance that? How do you balance that kind of precision that is often there with government work regulated work like this with still the ability to be adaptive and change and pivot when needed?

Every government contract, even let's say a firm fixed price, right? And in the old days, we said what we call cost plus, right? Where we would build something, if it costs a little more than it would be accommodated for.

If it costs a lot more, it would be accommodated for.

But now as we get closer to these firm fixed prices, where you don't have as much deviation in there, What I found is you take a large epic or a feature and you kind of reverse engineer it to say these are the things that we need to do to get to this point.

So we're still contractually obligated to deliver something in 18 months.

You know, 18 months seems like a ton of time.

It's like Parkinson's law.

So when I'm going in and I'm working with someone