Sentient IAM - Unlocking Success Through Human-Centric Leadership

Sentient IAM is a new approach to cybersecurity that recognizes the importance of the human element in protecting information. It involves understanding the psychology of trust, motivation, and team dynamics and incorporating these principles into the organization. Traditional security training falls short because it focuses on what not to do, while Sentient IAM engages employees on an emotional level to make smart decisions. Building a culture of trust and empowering employees is key. Transparency and vulnerability are important in leadership, and a shift in mindset is needed. This approach leads to improved security, better incident response, and increased employee morale and engagement. Tools and techniques include storytelling, gamification, and data analytics. All right, so we're diving into Sentient IAM today. Yes. You sent over some really interesting stuff. Oh, good. Yeah, I got to put this whole sentient thing in cybersecurity, it really piqued my interest. Yeah, it's a fascinating new approach. So what exactly are we unpacking today? Well, we're going beyond just like firewalls and passwords. Sentient IAM recognizes that the human element, it's just as critical as technology, especially when it comes to protecting information. Right. So it's about really understanding the psychology behind it, the psychology of trust, motivation, team dynamics, and then actually building those principles into the organization. So it's like, we're taking like a page from behavioral science and applying it to cybersecurity. Yeah, exactly. I'm already intrigued. Good. I mean, the research you share paints a pretty sobering picture of the challenges facing businesses. I mean, there's technology debt, training gaps, rising costs of data breaches. How does this human centric approach, how does it actually address these real world issues? That's the question, isn't it? Let's take data breaches, for example. So many are caused by human error, someone clicking a phishing link, or using a weak password, or sharing sensitive information accidentally. Right. Sentient IAM recognizes that, that traditional security awareness training, it often falls short. You can't just tell people what not to do. Right. You have to actually engage them on an emotional level. You have to build a culture of trust, and empower them to make those smart decisions. It makes sense. I mean, fear tactics and checklists can only go so far. Exactly. So. Yeah. How do you actually build that culture of trust? Especially when we're talking about a field so focused on mistrust. Zero trust is a core principle of cybersecurity. It is, absolutely. Right. This is where things get interesting. We don't abandon zero trust when it comes to system security, but we create a nuanced approach. Think of it this way. You can have all the right protocols in place to verify, access, and protect your systems, but you need to build an internal culture where people feel safe to speak up if they see something suspicious, where they're not afraid to admit to a mistake, and where they're actually motivated to contribute to that shared security goal. So it's like. Yeah. Almost like, I don't know if this is the right analogy, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Yeah. But in cybersecurity. You got it. That the trust within an organization. Yeah. Is actually one of the most powerful weapons against external threats. That's right. One of the articles you sent me highlights a case study. A company implemented sentient IAM principles, and they saw a significant reduction in phishing attacks. Oh, wow. They found that by fostering open communication and empowering employees to take ownership of security, they were able to create a more vigilant and a more responsive security culture. That's a pretty compelling example. But how do you put this into practice? It can't just be team building exercises can't be the answer. Oh. Team building exercises don't hurt. But you're right. It goes much deeper than that. The research suggests that truly embedding sentient IAM, it requires a fundamental shift. A fundamental shift in leadership approach. Okay. I'm all ears. Tell me more about this leadership shift. One of the most important aspects is transparency. Leaders need to be open and honest with their teams about the security risks, even if it means admitting vulnerabilities. So, vulnerability is not a weakness, but a strength when it comes to building trust. That's it. Okay. Another key element is empowering employees to be active participants in security, not just passive rule followers. This means actually giving them the training, the tools, and the autonomy. They need to make informed decisions about security. This sounds like a radical departure from the traditional top-down approach to security. It is. I'm curious though, can this cultural shift really happen overnight, especially in larger organizations where hierarchy and control are so ingrained? You raise a very good point. It's certainly not a quick fix. It requires a sustained commitment from leadership, with ongoing communication, and a willingness to adapt and evolve. And I imagine there's pushback along the way. Yeah. People who are used to the traditional way, the command and control security model, might resist this kind of change. You might. Change is never easy, especially when it comes to security. Right. But the research suggests that the benefits far outweigh the challenges. Okay. So, we've talked about the why of Sentient IAM, the need for trust, transparency, empowered employees, but what does this look like in action? Can you give me an example of how this framework plays out? Sure. Let's look at incident response. In a traditional security model, when a security incident occurs, there's often a lot of finger-pointing, blame-shifting, and rushing to cover up mistakes. The whole system goes into, like, defense mode instead of problem-solving mode. Yeah, that's a good way to put it. Yeah. Sentient IAM takes a very different approach. Instead of focusing on blame, it emphasizes learning and improvement. It encourages open and honest communication about what happened, why it happened, and how to prevent it from happening again. So, it's less about punishing individuals and more about improving the system as a whole. You got it. Okay. This approach can have a huge impact on team morale and effectiveness. Makes sense. When people feel safe to admit mistakes and learn from them, they're much more likely to be engaged and proactive in preventing future incidents. Creating that culture of psychological safety can really go a long way. It can. It applies to other areas of IAM as well. Access management, risk assessment. It's about shifting from purely technical controls to a more holistic approach that takes into account the human factors. So, it's not just building stronger walls. It's about building a stronger community inside those walls. That's a great way to put it. And the research suggests that this community-based approach can be incredibly effective in mitigating risk and building a more secure future. Now, I'm interested in the leadership's role in this. The articles you shared talk about sentient leadership. What exactly does that entail? Sentient leadership is all about leading with empathy, with vulnerability, and a genuine commitment to your team, creating a culture where people feel valued, respected, empowered to do their best work. That sounds like a tall order. It can be. Are there specific qualities or behaviors that characterize a sentient leader? Yeah, definitely. One of the key traits is active listening. Sentient leaders take the time to actually hear, to understand their team's concerns, perspectives, and ideas. They don't just dictate. They engage in open dialogue, seek out different viewpoints, and create space for honest feedback. So, it's less about being the boss and more about being a facilitator. A guide. Exactly. They also recognize that they don't have all the answers. They're willing to admit when they're wrong. They ask for help and learn from their mistakes. This sounds like a very different type of leader than what we usually see, especially in cybersecurity. It is. Requires a shift in mindset, a willingness to embrace vulnerability, and a genuine belief in the power of human connection. And I imagine building this trusting connection takes time. Absolutely. It's an ongoing process that needs constant attention. Okay. So, we've established that Sentient IAM is about trust, empowering employees, fostering a more human-centric approach. How does this all translate to tangible outcomes? What are the benefits of this? One of the most significant benefits is an improved security posture. So, what? When employees feel trusted and valued, they're more likely to be vigilant and report potential threats. So, it's like you're creating a human firewall. Exactly. Okay. Sentient IAM also leads to better incident response. When people feel safe to admit mistakes and learn from them, incidents are addressed much quicker, much more effectively. A culture of openness and transparency. Yeah. And for faster learning and adaptation. Exactly. Okay. Another key benefit is improved employee morale, improved employee engagement. When people feel like they're a part of a team, valued, trusted, they're much more likely to be happy and productive. So, it's not just about improving security, it's about improving the workplace, the whole experience. Absolutely. This has a ripple effect throughout the organization, leading to better collaboration, more innovation, and overall better performance. Now, I'm curious. Are there any specific tools or techniques that are used to implement these principles? Is it all about workshops and training programs? Well, training is important, but sentient IAM goes much deeper. It's a comprehensive approach that includes everything. Rethinking your communication strategies. Even redesigning performance management systems. Wow, okay. Can you give me like a concrete example? Sure. One example is storytelling. Using storytelling to engage employees in security awareness training, instead of dry lectures. You can use relatable narratives that highlight the human impact of breaches. So, make security more personal and relevant to people's lives. You can also use gamification to make security training more engaging. Yeah, I could see that. Make it interactive. Appealing to a wider audience, for sure. And then data analytics as well. Yeah. To identify and address potential risks. Yeah. Analyzing user behavior, network traffic. You can identify areas where human error is more likely and implement targeted interventions. You're using data to inform a more human-centered approach. Precisely. Sentient IAM also emphasizes continuous feedback. Continuous improvement. Right. It's not one and done. It's a process. It's about constantly evaluating, soliciting feedback, and making those adjustments. So, it's a really dynamic and adaptable framework. It is. It's a strength. One of them. It allows an organization to tailor its security to its unique needs and culture. Now, I'm curious. What are some of the challenges that organizations might face with implementing this? It seems like a pretty big departure from traditional security. It is. One of the biggest challenges is overcoming that resistance to change. Right. People are comfortable with the way things are, and they may hesitate to embrace a new approach, one that involves sharing more information, and maybe even relinquishing some control. So, it's a cultural shift. As much as a technical one, another challenge, I would imagine, is finding the right people to lead this. That's right. Yeah. Sentient IAM requires leaders who are not only technically savvy, but also possess strong emotional intelligence, strong communication skills. That sounds like a rare combination. It can be. But essential. Absolutely. I'm sensing a theme here. It seems like the human element is really at the heart of all of this. You're exactly right. Yeah. Sentient IAM is about recognizing the importance of people. In cybersecurity, it's about building that trust, empowering those employees, and fostering a culture of collaboration and shared responsibility. And I'm guessing this approach requires a different way of measuring success. It can't just be about the number of security incidents or the amount of data protected. Right. It needs a more holistic approach to measurement. That takes into account employee engagement, communication effectiveness, and the overall security culture. So it's about looking beyond the numbers to assess the health and resilience of the organization. Exactly. It's about creating a security ecosystem that is not only robust, but adaptable, innovative, and ultimately more human. Okay. I'm starting to see how this all fits together. We have this new approach focused on the human element, built on a foundation of trust and empathy, and led by a different kind of leader. It's a pretty compelling vision. But I'm curious, what are some of the potential drawbacks or criticisms of this approach? Surely there must be some downsides to prioritizing the human element in a field that's traditionally been so focused on technology and control. You're right. There are always potential drawbacks to any new approach. Right. One concern that some people raise is that by emphasizing trust and empathy, we might be making organizations more vulnerable to social engineering attacks. Okay, that makes sense. If attackers can manipulate emotions, they can potentially bypass even the most sophisticated security controls. That's a valid concern. Yeah. How does Sentient IAM address that vulnerability? Well, it's important to remember that Sentient IAM doesn't advocate for blind trust. It's not about throwing out all the protocols and just hoping for the best. Right. It's about striking that balance between trust and vigilance. So being smart about who you trust. Exactly. And how you verify that trust. Sentient IAM encourages organizations to implement strong identity verification, to conduct thorough background checks, and continuously monitor user activity for any suspicious behavior. So it's not about eliminating security controls. It's about making them more intelligent and adaptive. Exactly. Okay. Sentient IAM also emphasizes the importance of training employees to recognize and resist social engineering tactics. By understanding the psychological techniques that attackers use, it helps them develop healthy skepticism and avoid falling prey to manipulation. So a more proactive and preventative approach. That's right. And it's based on the understanding that people aren't the weakest link. They can be the strongest asset when properly trained and empowered. I like that a lot. Okay. So we've talked about the social engineering concern. Are there any other potential drawbacks or criticisms? Yeah. That we should consider? Another concern is that sentient IAM might be too difficult or time-consuming to implement changing an organization's culture. Yeah. It's complex. Yeah, it's not like flipping a switch. It's not. It requires a significant investment of time, resources, and a leadership commitment. But the research suggests the long-term benefits far outweigh the initial costs. So it's about taking a long-term perspective. Viewing it as an investment in the future of the organization. And it's important to remember that it's not all or nothing. Okay. Organizations can start small. Right. Implement small incremental changes and gradually build momentum over time. So finding the right pace and approach for each organization. Exactly. There's no one-size-fits-all solution. The key is to start. And be persistent. Right. So we've talked about some of the drawbacks, but let's go back to the benefits. You mentioned improved security posture, better incident response, increased employee morale and engagement. Are there any other benefits that organizations can expect to see? Absolutely. Another key benefit is improved compliance. Sentient IAM emphasizes aligning security practices with regulatory requirements. Right. And industry best practices. So it's not just about meeting the minimum standard. It's about going above and beyond. Exactly. To create a truly secure and compliant environment. Sentient IAM also fosters a culture of continuous improvement. Right. By encouraging open communication, feedback, innovation organizations can constantly refine their practices and stay ahead of the threat. So a very dynamic and adaptable approach. It is. It's based on understanding that security is not static. It's an ongoing journey. Right. Now I'm curious, how does sentient IAM differ from other security frameworks or methodologies? One of the key differentiators is the emphasis on the human element. While other frameworks may acknowledge people, they often focus primarily on technical controls and processes. Sentient IAM takes a more holistic view. Okay. It recognizes the interconnectedness of people, technology, and culture. Seeing the whole picture. Yeah, rather than just the parts. Another key difference is the emphasis on empathy and vulnerability. Right. Leaders need to be open, honest with their teams about security risks, create a culture where people feel safe to admit mistakes, and ask for help. Sounds like a radical departure from the traditional. It is. And control. A necessary one. Especially in today's world. And I'm curious, how does sentient IAM address emerging technologies? Artificial intelligence, machine learning. That's a great question. These are rapidly changing the threat landscape. They are. And creating new challenges for professionals. Sentient IAM recognizes that these technologies can be a blessing and a curse. On one hand, they can help us automate tasks, enhance threat detection, improve incident response. They make our jobs easier. In many ways, yes. But they can also be used by attackers to launch more sophisticated attacks. Yeah. And bypass our traditional controls. A double-edged sword. Exactly. Okay. Sentient IAM encourages organizations to take a proactive approach to managing the risks and opportunities associated with these technologies. Okay. And that includes staying informed, conducting risk assessments, and implementing appropriate security controls. So being aware of the potential risks. Yeah. And taking steps to mitigate them. Precisely. Okay. We also emphasize human oversight. When using these technologies, we need to make sure they're being used ethically, responsibly. Yeah. And that they're not creating new vulnerabilities. So it's about finding that balance. Yeah. Between automation and human judgment. Exactly. Technology is a powerful tool. But it's only as effective as the people using it. Now I'm curious. What are some of the key challenges that organizations face when implementing these principles? One of the biggest challenges is overcoming that resistance to change. Right. People are often comfortable with how things are. And they may hesitate to embrace a new approach. Especially one that involves sharing information. And maybe relinquishing some control. So a cultural shift as much as a technical one. Absolutely. Yeah. It's about just finding the right people to lead this charge. Right. Sentient IAM requires leaders who are not only technically savvy, but who also possess strong emotional intelligence and communication skills. It seems like, we've said this a couple of times now, it seems like that's a rare combination. It can be. Yeah. But it's essential. To find and develop these leaders. Yeah. The human element is really at the heart of this. It really is. Yeah. Sentient IAM is about recognizing the importance of people. In cyber security. Building that trust. Empowering employees. Fostering a culture of collaboration. And shared responsibility. And this approach requires a different way to measure success. Like we've said before. It can't just be about the number of security incidents. Or the amount of data protected. That's right. Yeah. It requires a more holistic approach to measurement. That takes into account. Yeah. Employee engagement. Communication effectiveness. And the overall security culture. So looking beyond the numbers. Yeah. To assess the health and resilience of the organization. Exactly. Yeah. It's about creating a security ecosystem. That is not only robust. But adaptable. Innovative. And ultimately, more human. Okay. I think we've laid a really solid foundation here. We've explored the why of Sentient IAM. The principles behind it. Some of the challenges and benefits. But I want to dive deeper into the practical side of things. In the next part of our deep dive. Let's unpack some specific examples. Of how this is applied in the real world. And explore some of the tools and techniques. That organizations are using to bring these principles to life. I'm ready. Real world examples. Are where it all starts to click. Exactly. Yeah. It's one thing to talk about these concepts. Yeah. But I'm sure our listener is wondering. How does this actually play out? Right. So. Let's start with something as simple as a team meeting. In a traditional environment. A security briefing might involve an expert lecturing the team. You know, talking about the latest threats. Talking about policies. Right. A sentient IAM approach. Turns that lecture into a collaborative discussion. So the expert might share a real life example. Of a phishing attack. But then they ask the team. Okay. What red flags would you look for? How would you respond? If you received a suspicious email? So instead of just passively absorbing information. Yeah. They're actively engaged in problem solving and critical thinking. Exactly. It empowers them to take ownership of security. Rather than seeing it as someone else's responsibility. I like that. Shifting that mindset. From security is something that's done to us. To security is something we all contribute to. Yeah, that's good. Another area where we see sentient IAM in action. Is incident response. Remember that case study we talked about? Where a company saw a reduction in phishing attacks. After implementing sentient IAM principles. Yeah. Key part of their success. Was creating a blame free incident reporting process. Okay, that's interesting. In most organizations, admitting you clicked a phishing link is a quick way to get reprimanded. It is. At least. Yeah. And that fear of punishment discourages people from reporting these incidents. Which allows a threat to spread. Cause more damage. Right. This company flipped the script. They created a culture. Where people were encouraged to report anything suspicious. Without fear of repercussions. So instead of hiding mistakes. They're off to light. And everyone can learn from them. Exactly. Yeah. This approach led to much faster detection. Much faster containment of threats. And because they were analyzing incidents openly. They were able to identify patterns. And implement more effective security controls. Turning security incidents into learning opportunities. I'm sure our listeners are seeing how this can have a real impact. What about technology's role in all this? Is there specific tech that's used? The technology is important. But it's not about a magic bullet. It's about using existing tools and platforms. In a smarter way. A more human-centered way. Okay, so it's not about the tech itself. It's how it's used. Exactly. Can you give me an example? Sure. Take data analytics for example. A lot of organizations are already using science systems to collect and analyze data. But in a traditional environment, that data is often used for reactive threat detection. Identifying attacks that have already happened. So looking in the rear view mirror. Exactly. Sentient IAM encourages organizations to use this data proactively. To understand user behavior. Identify potential risks. And tailor security awareness training. To address specific vulnerabilities. So instead of reacting to incidents, you're trying to anticipate them. Yes. Prevent them. And because you're taking a more personalized approach. The training is more likely to resonate with employees. Yeah. And lead to lasting behavior change. Okay, it's all starting to come together now. Yeah. But how do you measure the effectiveness of this? How do you know if it's really working? That's the big question. You know traditional security metrics. Like the number of incidents. Or the amount of data protected. Are still important. But they don't tell the whole story. When it comes to sentient IAM. Exactly. So we need to look beyond the traditional metrics. We do. Sentient IAM requires a more nuanced approach. It needs to take into account things like employee engagement. Communication effectiveness. And the overall security culture. Can you give me some examples of how you might measure those things? Sure. One way to measure employee engagement is through surveys and feedback. Okay. You ask employees questions like, do you feel like you have the knowledge and resources you need to make smart security decisions? Or do you feel comfortable reporting security incidents without fear of punishment? So you're getting a pulse on how employees are feeling. Exactly. About their security and their role in it. You can also measure communication effectiveness. By tracking open rates and click through rates of emails. Or the number of people who attend training. So you're looking at whether the message is actually getting through. Yes. To the audience. And to measure the overall security culture. You can look at the number of incidents reported voluntarily. Or the time it takes to resolve incidents. So a whole new set of metrics to consider. Agreed. When evaluating the success. And it's important to remember that these metrics may vary depending on the organization. And it's specific goals. Right. The key is to identify the metrics that are most meaningful. And track them consistently. This is really making me rethink how we approach security. It's not just about building walls. And implementing controls. It's about building relationships. Fostering a culture of shared responsibility. That's it. Yeah. The research shows that this approach can lead to significant improvements. In security posture. Incident response. And employee morale. Now I'm curious. What are some of the organizations leading the way in this? Are there any real world examples that we can learn from? There are a growing number of organizations embracing Cension IAM principles. Across various industries. One example that comes to mind is a financial institution. They completely revamped their security awareness training. Oh wow. They moved away from generic training modules. And created interactive workshops. Yeah. That were tailored to different employee groups. So instead of one size they personalized. Exactly. And they went even further. They created an online forum for employees to share their experiences. Ask questions. Learn from each other. They built a community around security. Exactly. That's cool. And it worked. They saw a big increase in employee engagement. A decrease in phishing attacks. Yeah. And a noticeable improvement in their security culture. That's a really good example. Are there other organizations doing cool things with this? Yeah. There's a tech company. They implemented a bug bounty program to encourage their employees to find vulnerabilities. So they're turning their employees into security researchers. In a way, yes. Okay. They recognize that employees are on the front lines. They have unique insights into the potential weaknesses. Right. By incentivizing them to report these vulnerabilities. They created a more proactive and collaborative approach. And I imagine that helps build a sense of ownership. It does. Among employees. And it's not just about finding bugs. The program also encourages employees to come up with creative solutions. So it's fostering innovation in security. Exactly. And this is a key principle of Sension IAM. Recognizing that security is not just about following the rules. It's about thinking critically. Challenging assumptions. Coming up with better ways to protect things. These examples are really inspiring. It's clear that Sension IAM is more than just theory. It's something that's happening right now. But what are some common pitfalls or mistakes that organizations make when trying to do this? What should they avoid? One common mistake is treating this as a one-time project. It's not something you can just check off a list. It needs a sustained commitment from leadership. So it's a journey, not a destination. Ongoing efforts. Another pitfall is focusing too much on technology and not enough on the people. Sension IAM is about using technology to empower people, not replace them. So it's about finding the right tool, but understanding how to use it in a way that supports this approach. Another mistake is failing to communicate the why. You can't just tell people to be more security conscious. You have to explain the rationale. You have to explain the benefits. So they understand why it's important. People buy in more when they understand the reasons and how it will benefit them. Yeah, makes sense. Here's another pitfall. Failing to provide adequate training and support, Sension IAM requires a different skill set. Than traditional security. So you need to give your team the tools. To succeed. Not just technical training, but training on communication, collaboration, critical thinking skills. So it's significant investment in development. It is. But it's worth it. Right. Okay, I think we've covered a lot here. The practical applications, the challenges, the benefits, the pitfalls to avoid, but what's the future of this? Where do you see this going? As technology keeps evolving and the threat landscape gets more complex, the need for a human-centered approach, it's just gonna become more important. Do you see Sension IAM becoming even more relevant in the future? I think we'll see a greater emphasis on AI and machine learning. You know, to automate tasks, enhance threat detection. So technology will play an even bigger role. Yes. But, not at the expense of the human element. Okay. We'll see a growing recognition that technology is only as effective as the people using it. Right, so it's not about replacing humans with machines. No. It's about finding that balance. That's right. Between the two. And this will require a new breed of security professionals. Okay. Who are not only technically skilled, but who also have these soft skills. Communication and collaboration. Right. Critical thinking. Yes. The future will need to be, I don't know, a Renaissance person. In a way, yes. Okay. Able to understand both sides. And bridge the gap. Sounds challenging. But rewarding. It is. And a career path that's only gonna become more important. Okay, I think we've given our listener a lot to think about. We've explored the principles, the practical applications, and the future potential. But, what are your final thoughts? If I had to boil it all down, I'd say security is not just a technical problem. Okay. It's a human problem. Right. And our solutions need to reflect that. We need to move beyond this us versus them, this idea of security professionals versus everyone else. Yeah. And really embrace a more collaborative, inclusive approach. So recognizing that everyone has a role to play in security. It's about empowering people to take ownership of that role. Not scaring them, but inspiring them to be active participants. Yeah, it's not about scaring people into compliance. It's about inspiring them to contribute. This really highlights the importance of leadership. Absolutely. Describing this change. Leaders set the tone. Right. By modeling the behaviors they wanna see. Being transparent about the risks. Admitting their mistakes. Actively seeking out diverse perspectives. Sounds like a different style of leadership. It is. Than we're used to. It requires vulnerability. Trusting your team. Empowering them to make decisions. But this approach gets results. It does. Not just in security, but. Employee morale. Right. Innovation. Overall performance. It's about creating a culture of psychological safety. Where people feel comfortable speaking up. Sharing their ideas. Taking risks. And that is essential for any organization. Absolutely. So, our listener. What are some practical steps they can take to implement these principles? Where do they even begin? Start by having conversations. Talk to your team about the challenges, the risks, your vision for the future. Ask for their input, their ideas. Open the lines of communication. Create a dialogue around security. Be transparent. Right. Share information. Explain the why. Right, the more they understand the why, the more they'll buy in. Exactly. Invest in training and development. Give them the knowledge, the skills they need to make good decisions. Ongoing communication is key. Absolutely. Feedback. Regular check-ins. Get feedback. Make adjustments. Because it's a journey. This has been so eye-opening. It's about protecting people. It is. Not just data. Ultimately, security is about enabling people to live and work safely in this digital world. Absolutely. And that requires us to put people first. Well, I think we've given our listener a lot to think about. What resources would you recommend for further exploration? There's some great books, articles out there. We'll include links in the show notes. And I'd encourage your listener to connect with other security professionals who are passionate about this. There's a growing community committed to building a more human-centric future. That's a great point. I think that's a great place to end our deep dive. Remember, building a more secure future starts with a human element. It does. It's about trust. Empowering people. Creating that culture of shared responsibility. Leading with empathy, vulnerability, a genuine commitment to your team. Thank you so much for sharing your insights. It was my pleasure. And to our listener, thank you for joining us on this deep dive into the world of sentient and IAM. Until next time, stay curious. And stay secure.