From Firefighter to Safety Leader: Jim Mangas on EHS, Emergency Response, and Lifelong Service

Hilary Framke:

Hello listeners, welcome to the next episode of Elevate EHS. I’m your podcast host, Hilary Framke, and I’m here joined by Jim Mangas today. Hi, Jim.

Jim Mangas:

Hello, good morning.

Hilary Framke:

Good morning. Let’s just get right into it. Let’s start with your journey into the EHS field. How did you find EHS and why do you stay?

Jim Mangas:

So I found EHS in the early 2000s. I was a Firefighter Paramedic and I was asked to do some training at a local company for fire inspections, like fire extinguishers and kind of fire safety and started working with that company on my days off and the more I got involved, they had some safety classes they offered and I started taking the classes and really got interested in it and at one point, I was working more in safety than I was as a firefighter and I had a job opportunity come up as a Safety Manager and I decided to make the leap out of Emergency Services and then to safety.

Hilary Framke:

Have you continued to do Emergency Services in the background?

Jim Mangas:

I sure have. So I started in Emergency Services as a cadet when I was 14 and I still do it today. So I spend many hours each week and evenings and weekends as a firefighter and I love it. Once it gets in your blood, it never goes away.

Hilary Framke:

Oh my gosh. So you’re dealing with potential emergencies really every hour of the day, possibly.

Jim Mangas:

Pretty much. Yeah. It’s a lot like what we do in the EHS, right? We had to prepare ourselves. We have to have a plan and then, there’s those times we have to respond. I think both jobs have made me better at doing the other. Just the process part of it and training and all that. It’s very similar in a lot of ways and different in others.

Hilary Framke:

Oh my gosh. That’s such an intense career choice. EHS, as we know, can be very demanding and then you add on EMS in your free time. What keeps you doing it year in and year out?

Jim Mangas:

It’s really about people. The reason I made the jump from fire and EMS to safety, or to EHS, was about people. I wanted to do more to help prevent people from being hurt, prevent fires and incidents and I saw EHS is a way to do that. So you know, they’re both very passion driven careers and there’s such a shortage really in people in both areas. So I’ve found a way to balance both and do it for many years and I think it’s made me better. So I really enjoy the people part of the job. The emergencies are not always emergencies. Sometimes it’s more of listening to people and giving them a helping hand and comforting them and I find the same thing in EHS, sometimes people just need somebody to lean on and ask questions and listen to them. I think, again, both are very similar in how we do things.

Hilary Framke:

So true. I feel like it’s a complete honor to be with someone on a very traumatic experience, isn’t it? And to walk with them on that and make it as less traumatic as possible. Provide them with that comfort. It’s such an honor.

Jim Mangas:

Definitely is. I think, people they don’t understand the emergency until they’re in it and for a person who has an emergency going on, whether it’s a car accident, their house is on fire, they’re sick, whatever a sick relative or someone’s injured we approach things the same. We want to respond safely. We want to take care of the people and control the situation, protect the environment. So we do all those things, but people are always number one and as long as we keep people number one and focus on what’s best for them even in the hardest situations and the most stressful, at the end of it, if we’ve taken care of the people as best we can that’s the ultimate goal. From the EHS standpoint, protecting people is our goal, but as we know everybody has a bad day and when that bad day happens, we have to be prepared for it. So sometimes it may just be an unsafe act or unsafe behavior. Other times it maybe resulting in a laceration or a fall. The way we handle people I think, ultimately what I like about it is instilling safety in people every day and making sure they know that we’re there for ’em. We’re going to watch out for ’em, but they also have to have that personal responsibility to take care of themselves.

Hilary Framke:

Absolutely. You bring up a really good point and I think like your experiences of being in firefighting, paramedic has provided you with such a unique perspective on risk and safety, right? Because you really are doing a lagging response, right? The incident has already occurred. You’re being called to deal with that and to help people get through it. How do you feel like your background in emergency response has influenced your approach to EHS where there’s both leading and lagging responses?

Jim Mangas:

A lot of it’s storytelling. When you’re doing training with employees, new employees or annual training, whatever and you can relate a incident that you’ve been on or you’ve seen before and explain to them how you responded to it and share that information. It’s much more impactful. So I’ve always taken situations. One of the first stories I told as a safety professional was when I was a paramedic, we had a forklift driver that had driven off a shipping dock and was critically injured. So when I taught forklift for the first time, I brought that up.

You know why it’s important to keep your arms and legs inside the forklift and wear your seatbelt. When I could give them that real-life experience, I just didn’t read it on some website or hear about that incident. I was there treating the person. They hear my passion for safety and they hear how I care about people, but I don’t want that to happen to them and so when you can relate something that really happened it makes a big difference. I was teaching a class last week on safety culture and when I do that, I put in a lot of pictures of different things. One of them was an unsafe electrical act that someone had wired some things they shouldn’t have, very common picture these days. I talked about how it’s the most common way the houses catch on fire is usually some electrical issue. At least in the US that’s a big issue we have is electrical fires. So when I can relate to them and say, Hey, I’ve seen this before, people do this and here’s the result. It gives you more credibility that I’m not just saying, I heard about this and it sounded really bad. I’ve seen it. This is what happens and this is the result. So I think it definitely makes me a better safety professional and on the fire side of things when we respond to incidents I’m that overseer, right? I’m making sure we’re working safe. It’s tough because you’re in an environment that’s inherently dangerous. But we’re under pressure. Firefighters and Emergency Medical Responders have to be put in positions every day that we don’t want to put our employees in at work, right? We don’t want you to rush. We don’t want you to be fatigued. We don’t want you to be distracted. And when you go to a house fire, a car accident, or medical emergency. All of those things are happening. You are essentially rushing to the scene. There’s a lot of being up in the middle of the night up and down, you have the fatigue factor. I think it helps me kind of balance both and have that experience as well.

Hilary Framke:

I bet your emergency response plans at your business are just cutting edge.

Jim Mangas:

I would like to think so, there’s always room for improvement.

But yeah, I think you look at things like that from different perspectives and you can plan ahead a lot better, that pre planning and foreseeing what could happen. I think that gives me an advantage and I’ve worked in several different industries from chemical to agriculture and recycling. So I’ve seen incidents and fires and things and different buildings and different scenarios and it really gives you a better perspective on how to plan, and have that forethought, it’s not just planning what happens when the fire alarm goes off. It’s what happens when we do have a fire, so it’s definitely one of my stronger areas for sure.

Hilary Framke:

I’ve always had a pet peeve with Emergency Management on not drilling and practicing enough with that group of critical leaders who are going to lead response efforts for the ones who are shutting down equipment, who are checking to make sure that doors are closed, who are running headcounts and communicating that back up to the incident commander, managing the first aid area, things like that. I would always hear from my business, we haven’t done a drill. We haven’t gotten employees all out of the building. I’m like employees have been doing that since kindergarten. Everybody knows to go out the closest emergency exit and get out the building. What about those critical response roles and actually practicing with those people?

Jim Mangas:

Yeah. Practicing is critical. If we don’t do the drills and we don’t do them to the full extent, I’m a big believer in drilling often. Training and drilling is really critical to our success. We don’t do those well, we won’t be as prepared. There’s a saying I heard many years ago that the first time you do something shouldn’t be the first time you’ve done it. I always go back to drilling and training is, you learn in a controlled environment, you practice and you focus on improving on those weaknesses and then the day something does happen, you’re better prepared and that’s really the truth. Just hearing it and training or talking about in a meeting doesn’t do justice because when you’re really put under pressure of a situation that potentially is life and death.

You’ve got smoke and fire, a chemical spill, whatever it is people are going to react differently when it’s real, but they’ll react better than they would have if they didn’t have drills and training. We really have to make sure those are our key elements of our programs and take the time to do them.

It’s a pain to do drills and training, but I think it’s the payoff in the end that it may take you years to see the payoff but when something happens and you see how well people respond you’ll be well pleased.

Hilary Framke:

So true. It never ceases to amaze me how many times we’ve asked employees to take extended responsibilities. Let’s just talk first aid response as an example, right? We spend all this time and money to get them trained. To get them certified, right? And then, we don’t have them do anything with that certification. They don’t feel comfortable responding. They don’t know how they’re going to be told, that someone needs help, right? Like, how am I going to get there? How are we going to get them to the scene? They’ve never cracked open the first aid kit or the trauma kit. They have no idea what’s inside, how to use it. This was always a shock to me. Has this been your experience as well?

Jim Mangas:

It has. I think it’s one of those things that we don’t expect people to respond in the way that they’re going to have to. I think we plan on the small cuts and lacerations or somebody just not feeling well but then, we’re not looking at our most common injuries, right? So you have a deep laceration from whatever, moving part that cut them and now you’ve got somebody who’s really bleeding that needs direct pressure and needs a quick response and maybe they’re feeling like they’re going to pass out. Those first responders, that may be the first time they’ve seen anyone bleed like that before. That maybe wasn’t a family member or something and all of a sudden, they’re running a machine one moment, the next moment, they’re having to put gloves on and stop someone from bleeding. That’s a shock when you don’t do it all the time. Again, if your training is not well, if you’re not prepared, you don’t know where the equipment is, or if you haven’t looked in the first aid kit since the last training that was last year or whatever, that doesn’t do them justice. We need to practice, we need to talk about things and make sure they’re prepared and that makes the response go better. Plus it makes your patient, your injured worker feel better if they know that person that’s trying to help them, seems like they know what they’re doing and that makes a big difference too. You got to have that level of comfort

Hilary Framke:

And more credibility, as you said, to the EHS department and to the programs that we oversee. I would always build in the drills to the meetings, right? We were always pulling the first aid team members into a quarterly meeting and just them sitting behind a desk and let’s do a drill, right? Let’s have an actor, let’s have them pretend to have this injury. Let’s get out the first aid kits. Let’s have them talk through how they would respond, right? Let’s make it interactive so they can feel like they’re really getting something out of this certification.

Jim Mangas:

That’s right. I think when you train for emergency response and medical emergencies especially, people have issues that they bring to work, right? You’ve got personal medical issues, and then you have incidents that happen at work, and sometimes those two run into each other and cause an injury or illness, so that practice part of it makes your team more comfortable. They may not be able to fix everything, but even just comforting someone who’s having a medical emergency is going to be a good thing to do. Maybe there’s no bleeding, maybe there’s no band aids to put on. It’s more of a breathing problem or something or chest pains and that makes a difference if your team has talked about it. They’ve heard about it. They practice with it and you give them that level of comfort and the response will go much better.

Hilary Framke:

Totally agree. We chatted a little bit about your reluctance to solely rely on OSHA regulations and your emphasis on doing what’s right for safety rather than just meeting regulatory requirements. I would love to have you elaborate on that why you believe compliance doesn’t necessarily equal safety in every context and share with me some of your experiences to date with that.

Jim Mangas:

I think one of the first times I was challenged when I got in EHS position was I had an employee or a supervisor, when we were doing training or I forget, it might’ve been during a safety audit and this person said show me in the OSHA standard where it says that we have to do it this way and that situation was one I could call out right in the OSHA standard, right? This is where we’re supposed to do it and that was a fairly common, pushback that you get from people, show me where OSHA says we have to do it. And that is a major misconception. They’ll always go back to the general duty clause about if there’s a hazard, we have to fix it. OSHA doesn’t have a standard for everything. There’s not a performance standard for everything. So when you’re challenged, I think that’s one issue that we have and that always bothered me because I thought people wanted to work safe and I thought OSHA was the high standard, right? And what I learned over the years was, especially when I got into the chemical industry, when you’re looking at a bunch of other standards, right? OSHA doesn’t have everything. PSM doesn’t cover everything, right? So you’ve got to look at ANSI and ASME, all these other standards, performance standards, and that was a shock to me. So I was getting educated as I was working and, for me, it’s again about people and a lot of us want to do something because it’s the right thing to do. I don’t want to necessarily, say OSHA is not important because they are, we have to have regulations but they don’t have a regulation for everything. So we identify a hazard, we need to take care of the hazard. We need to fix it and make it safe and do all the things that we should do to be successful. But if we only meet the OSHA standard, we’re not going to hit everything. There’s a lot of dangerous activities that we do on a day to day basis that you may not be able to find an OSHA standard for. But it all comes back to, is it dangerous, is it unsafe, and can we do it safer? If we focus on the regulation, we’ll get bogged down in numbers and how people interpret things. Everybody interprets the OSHA regulation like people read the Bible, right? They pick out one line. They don’t look what’s above and below it. So that’s not really how you should do it. Cause you’re missing the rest of the story. So as EHS professionals, I think we have to realize that, OSHA is the minimum we do want to be in compliance, but we do have to go above and beyond. If we’re going to get as close to zero injuries as possible and reduce our potential for serious injury and fatalities, OSHA is not the standard. We have to go above and beyond that because when you get into behaviors and decision making and leadership a lot of that is unwritten that we have to educate ourselves on and educate others and the coaching and mentoring. I say this often and I talked to our executives about it and I talked to employees and say that, compliance doesn’t equal safety. We can still have a serious injury fatality and be an OSHA VPP site. That doesn’t mean that you’re a 100% safe. That doesn’t mean you’re going to avoid something major. It means you’re in compliance. And your site individually, your business, your industry, you have to look at the risk that you have and the hazards that are common and what you’re seeing routinely through near miss reporting and hazard reporting, you have to look at all of that and really gauge your process by what you’re seeing. We’re always looking for, those gaps, right? Like we haven’t seen this before, we got to deal with it. So you’re constantly reassessing and identifying where you could have a problem.

Hilary Framke:

That’s what the incident history is telling us every single day that a new incident occurs if it’s a near miss or a hazard identification or even a first aid or a more serious injury.

These are details, right? What I like to call an overflow, right? So we’ve got our controls in place and when incident occurs, that tells us where there’s holes in, in that wall. And we should be looking at that and doing a thorough analysis to find out, what did we miss here?

Is it we didn’t recognize the hazard, the control wasn’t present like we expected it to be, the control is inadequate to prevent the serious injury from happening. These are all things that we should be using dynamically.

Jim Mangas:

And I think that’s why your TRIR and your number of recordables isn’t the guidepost for safety performance. Yeah, at the end of the day, if we’re not getting people injured and then our TRIR is going down, that is what we want, but it’s all those things that we do that should be dropping those numbers down the end result, right?

And I had to learn this as well when I started in safety. I got into safety without any formal education. I was self taught then I went to college and learned and, working for some companies, you have better on the job training and their focus on certain key performance indicators helps you understand what you’re really looking at.

But I had to learn that as well. I thought the TRIR and recordability was the guidepost and I learned through the course of years that’s not really what we should be looking at, right? We want to look at those leading indicators, the things that we’ll do that will drive down the lagging indicators.

So whatever I’m doing to have less injuries, I should be focusing on that and then my TRIR recordables should be going down. That for me, again, it goes back to that compliance part, right? The OSHA log that we hang up at the end of the year, isn’t the whole story.

That’s just a couple of numbers that we look at. It’s all those other things we did well and progress takes time. You’re not going to turn the ship around in two months or six months, sometimes it’s very complicated, very dangerous and sometimes your efforts take a while to really sink in.

Especially if you’re trying to change culture and behavior that’s a long term journey. It’s not an overnight success. That’s why it’s so important to report near misses and report those hazards. There’s nothing worse than starting an investigation for a serious injury and hearing another employee say we knew this was going to happen, and they start talking about near misses that have been happening for years.

It’s like we’ve never heard about this before. It was never reported and again we have to take ownership and say, we should have done a better job at whatever, but it’s very frustrating when you hear that, especially if there’s something really bad happened, it’s so preventable and if we could have done something near misses are only crystal ball in a lot of situations, that’s the only time we’ll really be able to see what could happen. Getting those reported is really important to us.

Hilary Framke:

Totally agree. Reporting culture is a huge part that tells us about our maturity, right?

Of not only of our people, but of our process, right? Are they not reporting because we’re making reporting really difficult? Are they not reporting because they don’t feel comfortable and they’ve been yelled at in the past and told, we don’t talk about that or, is it a leadership issue, et cetera.

So important to even do that mini investigation, right? Into why we’re not getting the participation with our employees that we want to see. Because that is such, like you said just such a missed opportunity for us to have prevented something horrible from happening to employees. I want to go back to the leading and lagging indicator comment that you made because again, I think this is a shift that I’ve seen, right?

But what’s been interesting, I want to know your opinion, Jim. I’ll put you on the spot. This pendulum has swung, right? With leading and lagging indicators, right? It used to be all lagging and that was all we were looking at that was all that we cared about I still think there’s a lot of companies who are there and that’s all they’re reporting on scorecards and that’s their main strategy but interestingly enough now I’ve seen this pendulum swing and i’ve seen businesses and been a part of businesses that only look at leading indicators, right?

And they almost have these lagging ones back on the last slide as an appendix, right? Like we’re barely even watching those and honestly, for me and then I’ll go to you I feel this is a mistake because don’t get me wrong leading indicators are fantastic. You need to have them but how do you know you’re tracking and doing the right leading indicators?

If you’re not also managing the lagging indicators, right? Okay, our leading are going up, but our lagging are also going up. This is not right. We have to have a good holistic approach. So I want to hear what your thoughts are.

Jim Mangas:

Yeah, I think your leading indicators have to be predictive of what’s happening in the company.

One company I worked for, we had a really strong behavior based and exposure based safety process and our facilitators for those programs could tell you where the next injury would be, what area and what body part by what we were getting from our observations. They could also tell you if we weren’t getting enough observations that’s going to be a major issue pretty quick and they were always right. So I learned there that, our leading indicators really have to tell us, where we need to focus our efforts and if they’re the right leading indicators to track we’re going to be able to predict things. One company I worked for, we were doing around 20,000 safety observations a year. An employee would report something hazardous in the workplace or a deer ran out in front of them on the way to work, and some of them really weren’t relevant to what we were doing. They were safety related, but not relevant. And this gets to my point, doing 20,000 safety observations a year, but our recordables kept going up every year, so those numbers, were not supportive of each other, essentially.

So it showed me that our value of the hazard reporting wasn’t good, right? We weren’t getting the hazards reported that were causing our injuries. It was on all these other things that it just became a numbers game. So you have to make sure that your leading indicators are accurate. So Responsible Care had a really good set of leading indicators and I’ve always went off of that. I think the oil and gas industry has really good indicators and you have to look at your industry, obviously. Sometimes you have to tailor that set to what you need. But there’s always three or four that I think are key for everyone.

And if you’re doing those well, and you’re responding well, in the case of near misses, if you need more near misses reported, if you’re not getting them reported, they’re happening and you don’t know and you’re not preventing things, you don’t have that opportunity.

So if you’re getting near misses reported, the other half of that is doing something about it, right? So it’s not just reporting, are you closing out your action items? Did you create action items from that? So there’s really a group of things that you have to look at for your site, for your industry, your company.

But if you look at the end of the year, end of the month, and right now I’m working on our monthly report we have to do something with that data, and if you look at those lagging indicators, it’s really, compared to finance, it’s like your profit and loss, right? Either we’re making money or we’re losing money, and either we’re having injuries or we’re not.

You always have to have those. Those are the bedrock. At the very end of the story is, did you get somebody hurt or not? And I know that not all injuries are necessarily controllable. You’re going to have the bee stings and one company I worked for, we had a horse bite an employee and it wasn’t even our horse.

There’s things that, Yeah, getting to zero is very important, but it’s almost more of the philosophy than those controllable events, right? I can’t control a horse or a bee or there’s certain situations. And I think our goal is that we’re tracking the right things that are showing us, what the true story is. Like how well we’re really doing. So we’ve got to have both, I think they have to complement each other. Nick Saban talked about this in football, college football, the time he kept telling the players, don’t look at the scoreboard. He said, do your job. If you’re executing your job and everybody’s doing their job, that scoreboard is going to look like we want it to in the end.

I think if you look at it from that perspective is, we have to do the right things that are going to result in less injuries, less incidents. And so those leading indicators are critical, but also we’re still going to have the TRIR, the lost time and your recordables and sustainability efforts are looking heavily at lost time.

And, internationally there’s some organizations that look at different things with lagging indicators and it’s always been there. I don’t think the lagging will ever go away because again it’s really the result of the injury.

Hilary Framke:

No, I totally agree. Let’s talk about infusing something, a new classification, SIF and PSIF.

So Serious Injuries Fatalities or Potentially Serious Injury Fatalities or PSIF. What do you think this brings to a business? How does this help develop an EHS program?

Jim Mangas:

From my standpoint, I think when it comes to SIF and PSIF the part that we were missing for a lot of years for a lot of companies that really wasn’t known.

And I think in the past, some companies would call those high potential incidents. But I think as SIF has evolved there’s been a lot more definition and understanding and clarity around that, that the recordable injury that could be, three stitches again, goes right on the OSHA log next to a fatality or a serious injury.

So it’s more than just the recordability, right? You can go for years without a recordable and then you have a serious injury or fatality. And that’s usually a big smack in the face to people because they’re looking at that lagging indicator saying we had no recordables.

And that’s a shock. So we’re not looking at everything we should. So when you look at SIF and PSIFs, it’s really evaluating those incidents that could lead to so much more. They did lead to more in the company I work at now, we had a recent event where I’ve introduced them to SIF and this philosophy and they’re getting it and you’re seeing that in the reporting, because if you look at our recordables I think last year out of the recordables, we had only two had SIF potential.

The majority of those did not. They were cuts and lacerations, some minor sprains and strains. So you can’t just go by the recordability. This is looking at near misses and other things that we would report around hazards And when you get into PSM, there’s obviously a whole set of metrics you can look at there with mechanical integrity and things.

But I think for the everyday company, it’s looking at those near misses and saying, hey, we got really lucky because that recordable we had, we didn’t want it, but this could have been so much worse. We really got to focus on this. And yes, I’m worried about the cuts and nicks, but I’m more worried about getting everybody home safe.

And that means, no serious injuries or fatalities. So our programs really have to make sure we’re looking at those incidents and taking them serious. Some people have a hard time looking at something and foreseeing what it could have been. Some of it’s really obvious. Someone almost gets hit by a car, almost gets hit by a forklift.

Something reasonably could have resulted in a serious injury or fatality. You could make any incident a SIF potential and this exercise of determining, what’s a SIF for you you can say anybody that trips and falls and hits their head could be a SIF, right?

Realistically that’s not always the case. I think that term reasonable has to be in there. If someone falls and hits their head on, something that reasonably could have led to serious injury or fatality then yes, your average slip and fall in the ice may not have SIF potential.

The companies I’ve worked at, we’ve came up with a matrix, questions and answers on, could it have led to these things? Then, I think that’s really good. You have to do that. And I think that’s the first step is saying, hey, we have a lot of risks that we’re not looking at that really could have led to something more serious. And so we can’t get bogged down. That can’t be a blind spot we have of not looking at those near misses and the situations that occur that we’re like we just got lucky it was a near miss and we move on, we better look a little closer because the outcome could have been, or it could be different for the next person.

So it’s really important to focus on SIFs and then, looking at those as a leading indicator, look at what we’re preventing and identifying and that’s really working on the right things. As important as all this other stuff is, you’ve got to prevent those SIFs.

You’ve got to identify them and then, do something about it.

Hilary Framke:

I love this, Jim, and I think it’s so vital when we talk about once you get to a point where you’re not having a lot of recordables and you don’t have these lagging metrics and you get this idea, this false sense of security that we’re safe.

This SIF and PSIF is like a peel the onion, right? So let’s peel the onion to the next layer. And let’s look at the serious things that are occurring, whether it is an actual injury, it’s a SIF, or it’s a near miss, it’s a PSIF, right? Let’s make that classification and start tracking those, right?

And taking a look at those and working harder at those investigations, those corrective actions to stop those things from happening. What I also suggest to businesses who like, oh we have great record, but I feel like there’s still a lot of risks in the organization. How do you move forward?

How do you make that justification for your business that there’s still more work to do. I always suggest going back and trending all of your incidents, and putting them in risk categories. And then, like you said classifying with serious potential and then saying, you can set metrics. We want to have 10% less electrical incidents. We don’t want to have 10% less fall incidents, right? You can start to hit those metrics around your specific risk exposures that you’re seeing and want to control in your work environment.

Jim Mangas:

Definitely. I completely agree.

Yeah, you really have to look at your data. When you get a monthly report, and I send our monthly report out every month, one of the things I really focus on is what are we doing with that data. Are you sharing it? Are you looking at it? Do you understand your risk at the site level and then globally what it is?

And sometimes those are different. It depends on your industry, your business, but you have to do something with that data.

Absolutely.

Hilary Framke:

Jim, we’re out of time. I feel like we could go and go for episodes and episodes, but, we have already hit so much, so I just can’t thank you enough for all that you’ve contributed to EHS and for your emergency management career and everything that you’ve done as a firefighter and a paramedic.

Big thank you from me and the rest of our listeners and thanks for being on my podcast today.

Jim Mangas:

Oh, you’re welcome. Had a great time. Thank you for the opportunity.