Listen now or check us out on one of these platforms!
What does love and being neighborly have to do with the construction industry? We welcome Pete Dumont, the CEO of PrairieDog Venture Partners. Pete is a leader in the OS 2.0 ideology, whose goal is to get rid of waste in the industry. This starts in insurance, delaying pay, and other forms of over used safety nets that create frozen funds. The next step is to create healthy external relationships. Pete talks about the two most unhealthy business relationships and what OS 2.0 is pushing towards. To start fostering these relationships now, OS 2.0 has looked outside the industry to find inspiration in smart contracts and blockchain.
If you have anything we missed, feel free to text us! - 478-221-7009
Please consider subscribing to our podcast!
Tyler: Welcome to the Construction Brothers Podcast. I'm your host, Tyler Campbell, and with me like he is every week: My brother, Eddie Campbell.
Eddie: What's up, Tyler?
Tyler: Not much, Eddie. Well, this week we are reimagining construction.
Tyler: All right, well Pete, thanks for joining us today, man. Can you tell us who you are and what you do?
Pete Dumont: Yeah, Pete Dumont. Thanks for having me today. I'm here in the context of the OS2 initiative, CEO of PrairieDog Venture Partners. Glad for the invite. Glad to be able to share with you a little bit about OS2.
Eddie: All right. Well, OS 2.0, what is that? Tell us more about it.
Pete Dumont: Well, it's an acronym. It stands for Operating System 2.0, and it's a term that actually was never intended to stick, but really came about a few years ago because we were sitting around conceiving ways to make this industry better and somewhat jokingly saying, “Gosh, we're in many ways executing projects the same way we have for decades, we're still kind of stuck in the mud in our original operating system, our original management science, whereas manufacturing is at ‘manufacturing 4.0’ or ‘industry 4.0.’ Why can't we at least be in our second generation of management science? So gosh, if we could just get to OS2, wouldn't that be nice?” And so it ended up sticking, but it's probably a dumb name. But nonetheless it's the name that most people have kind of tagged this initiative with, like it or not. But it started a number of years ago, and really a reflection, and Stephen Mulva, the director of CII, is really credited with putting this out there in the market. He and I actually went to grad school together many years ago, and when we came out of grad school in the late 90’s, got together and actually conceived a new business model for the industry. We were young and just recently married and all these things, and it just wasn't something that we were ready to go jump off and do. Plus we didn't even have the technology solutions back then to do what we thought needed to be done. We couldn't even conceive of the ways we would go about it. Fast forward 20 years or so, and a few years ago I was the president of CURT, and Stephen’s the director CII, and we got back together and said, “Hey, let's dust this thing off and give it the light of day.” And so Stephen did that and got it launched on the CII platform. I guess the core premise of OS 2.0 is that we really need to redesign and fix the business model for the construction industry. And what I mean by that is, for years we've studied ways to improve work processes and we've focused on project management improvements. It's all been kind of a cost, schedule, quality, safety discussion on “how do we make the project better,” but we're not really focused on what is the project's purpose in fulfilling the mission of the business that's delivering the project. And what are the business drivers behind projects, and how do we more closely tie the business side of the business building the project and the project team that has to deliver that asset? Historically, they've been mutually exclusive discussions that have not been interconnected. But we believe that the real conversations transcend the traditional cost, schedule, quality, safety, and it's much more of a business focus, and enterprise or portfolio longer term focus. And despite our investment and researching new best practices— I mean, like AWP, and by the way, I believe in AWP, it's a great best practice that’s improving projects, or Lean and IPD, Integrated Project Delivery, or the technology solutions we have, and they're just proliferating out there, right from the BIM solutions to integrate in project management solutions and job sites or drone technology, whatever it may be. If you look at the business performance of the companies in the industry, it's generally not getting any better. In fact, in some cases it's getting worse, and you see examples of companies going bankrupt, and that’s just pre-COVID. COVID has created its own set of issues, but pre-Covid, the general health in the industry: Low margins, high-level distrust, unfair risk shifting, onerous and contentious contracts, things that don't usually get discussed. Now, there's some exceptions. I mean, there have been people discussing it, the Lean Construction Institute and others, and CII has done research on this, but we generally have not really been focused on those as areas that we need to fix—the areas of finance and accounting and tax and contracts and how we come together on projects and the structure, the inherent structure of the supply chain. So OS2 is really about questioning those things and looking at, can we transform the structure of the supply chain to drive out waste and make projects dramatically more effective to deliver a return on investment or whatever the business objectives are for those companies delivering those assets? And so it's really a business transformation, in short, and it's creating a series of different solutions now, and concepts around solutions, that are different things than our industry's considered before. So we're very excited about where this is going. The research has really only been underway—and it is a research and development project, that's an important point—the research has only been underway for a little over a year, but already is making incredible progress. And so we're actually very pleasantly surprised how fast it's moving. The research is being led at the University of Texas in Austin and being driven by the CII group, the Construction Industry Institute and their research engine, and they're outstanding at research, and so it's perfectly suited there. And the development is being supported by CURT, the Construction Users Round Table, a sister industry organization to CII. And CURT has stood up a business called PrairieDog to go out and deliver and implement into the market the OS2 research solutions. So that's the mission of PrairieDog. And so that's something I'm very passionate about, and why this OS2 initiative is so important. It's being led by CII and CURT kind of co-championing this initiative in the industry. And so it's bigger than any one company, probably 2 to 250 different companies that are in that population set of the current CII members. So it's really more of a rallying call for a bunch of companies to say, “Enough's enough, let's really finally transform and improve this industry,” and create a better environment so that all of these great solutions that are out there can really have a bigger impact and thrive. All the great technology solutions, all the BIM solutions, all of the best practices we're coming up with, if we can put them in a healthier business environment, they can be even more effective and deliver even better results and really recapture profits back in the supply chain. So can we create a new ecosystem that on the one hand saves money, delivers faster projects and increases the return on investment for the developer, for the owner, and simultaneously increases profitability and lowers risk for those companies delivering those assets, the engineering firms and construction firms and the suppliers and so forth, can we simultaneously achieve that? Well, we think we can, if we can design an ecosystem that drives out a lot of this transactional waste that's like a boat anchor on the industry. So some initial studies and research we've done show that on an average non-residential project, about 40% of the capital dollars are, if you will, wasted on transactions. And that's just quite honestly unacceptable. But it's a result of the hierarchical supply chain, the lack of trust, the dysfunctional relationships and so forth. So that's a major focus area, and that leads us into the first four areas of research and development that we're tackling as an OS2 team. And the OS2 research has some financial backers from the industry. So some of the major oil and gas companies have put money into this. Some individuals are putting money. So there's money coming in from other consortiums and so on—we can always use more—but anyway, this is being supported by not only the entities themselves, but some put some organizations that are believing in this cause because they just kind of have a shared vision of the industry. I can get into that in a minute, but maybe I'll take a breath and see if you guys have any questions so far.
Tyler: So many questions.
Eddie: Well, I want to hear about some of the logistical things that were kind of flagging, like what evidences were you seeing of the construction industry, like that 40%, that really told you that this has to change, this can change, and it's worth the reset to get to this new operating system?
Pete Dumont: Well, when we talk about waste, we typically, our minds as engineers and constructors typically gravitate towards field waste. Materials, waiting on people, people waiting on materials, that sort of thing. The typical things that we are taught in Lean and Six Sigma around waste identification and elimination—and those are still, by the way, prevalent, we still have construction waste in the form of work process waste, no doubt. And Lean is tackling that, AWP is tackling that, and they're making great strides and they have for years, at least in the case of AWP, but there's a whole other series of waste that's more financial related or logistics related. It's the fact that we generally don't do a good job of logistics as an industry. We tend to do it on a project-by-project basis, not a portfolio basis. Trade credit, the fact that we pay companies late. The cost of capital that sits in the rate structure because we pay companies later than we should. Debt financing. Anytime one company buys another and the debt that's financed in those transactions, that sits in the cost structure. Duplicate of insurance, the average capital project, non-residential again, is 3 to 350% over insured. Why is that? Well, the hierarchical nature of the supply chain. Now, once in a while, you have an OCIP program, which is an Owner Controlled Insurance Program that wraps in all the participants, but those aren't that common. More often than not it's individual insurance acquired by each company that kind of adds up in this layer cake of a supply chain. We have crime, fraud, and counterfeiting still that exist in the industry, and so forth. Surety. I mean, sureties are, by their very nature, waste, because I don't trust you and you don't trust me. So, “Hey, Tyler, I've never worked with you before, so you better get a performance bond because you might fail, or you better get a payment bond ‘cause I don't trust you to pay your subs on time, and I don't want them to leave my property because I don't trust you. I need some sureties that you're going to perform.” I understand why those sureties exist. And many people make profit and the entire industries have grown up around these forms of waste. And we have a lot of cost centers in our industry that exist because we don't trust each other, essentially. And we're very dysfunctional in how we relate one company to the next, but these are things that we do need to question and we do need to challenge. And I'm not going to say surety goes away in the future, maybe it exists in some form, but I think it will change. And I think if we can restructure companies in a different way and create a collection of companies that agrees to behave by a different set of rules, we can make a lot of this waste go away. So.
Tyler: All right. So let's restructure how we do business. What are you talking about? How does that look? What are you proposing?
Pete Dumont: Well, the way we operate on projects today is we tend not to trust each other, and I've said that a few times. We often act as strangers. I heard a saying when I got into the industry many years ago, “We come together on projects as strangers and we leave as enemies.” And sadly, that's all too often true. You know, we do behave as strangers where, “Hey,”—again, I'll pick on you, Tyler,—“We just met. And gosh, now we're going to go do a project together. And boy, I better be careful, because you might have bad intentions.” And I don't know if I can trust you, and you probably feel the same about me. And so what we're going to do is, we're going to assume worst intentions. And therefore we're going to shift risk on the other party to the greatest extent that you'll tolerate it or I'll tolerate it. And then we're going to carefully position ourselves with these big ugly owners’ contracts, conceiving of every possible way that you and I will try to take advantage of each other. And we want a paper around that. And this creates this very friction-filled relationship. It doesn't need to be so friction-filled, but it is, because that's just how we tend to contract and treat each other in the industry. Now, there are notable exceptions to this. I'm speaking very broad brush. But IPD, that's trying to solve that issue. It's trying to create a collaborative, shared risk reward, everyone having a similar goal and the right objective and that sort of thing. But generally speaking, those are very rare occurrences and they're certainly not systemic. Now, strangers. We've established the “stranger danger,” if you will. The opposite construct to that is a family unit, right? Where you have trust and love and respect. Yes, I used the word “love” in a podcast in the construction industry, go figure. You don't pay for anything in a family, right? It's always the benefit of the doubt. You loan your daughter 20 bucks to go to the mall. You don't ever sign a contract to repay it and you trust that she'll probably spend it on something reasonable, who knows. But that's not practical for business. That's actually probably somewhat unreasonable. But in the middle, there's a middle ground that we can maybe get to, that we in the OS2 research so far have called the “neighborhood.” Maybe that's a bad term, like too, too, I don't know. But that's what we're calling it. A neighborhood. Most people get that because a lot of us live in neighborhoods. Now, a neighborhood is interesting because it has elements of both. You have an individual identity as a homeowner. In this case, in business, where you have a profit objective, you have shareholders, you have a purpose in life as a business, right? But you're not just a standalone island going alone. You're actually part of a greater thing. You're part of a community of like-minded companies where you might have some shared rules of the road. You might have some expectations that transcend the project and they go into a much longer term view. There's some guidelines around transparency and trust and working together and collaborating. And we envision a neighborhood construct of many different kinds of companies. Maybe there's many neighborhoods. We're not sure yet. Maybe it's neighborhoods that are developed by industry sector, or maybe by geography, we don't know, but we certainly conceive of a neighborhood that can have multiple owners in it simultaneously, multiple contractors, multiple engineers, multiple suppliers, and so forth. It's very organic, where companies can come together within the neighborhood and respond to deliver an asset in a collaborative way—from pricing that, i.e. acquiring the work, to collaborating in the design of that, i.e. what the aerospace industry and the automotive industry have figured out how to do, and then collaborating to deliver the construction and the fabrication and the assembly of that, i.e. what's happening in other industries as well around fabrication and monitorization and so forth. A lot of these neighborhood concepts we're talking about aren't necessarily that revolutionary. In fact, we borrowed a lot of concepts from other industries that have done similar types of things, and we're saying, “How can we take what these other industries have done and transfer them into our industry to make them work for the construction industry for the built environment?” But if you get any, if you get this right, it does a lot of interesting things. And so one of these things, if we drop the risk profile of the enterprise of the neighborhood quite dramatically, ‘cause if you have a group of trusted companies, let's say they have the air quotes, “better housekeeping” seal of approval—they're neighborhood approved, if you will—they, by very definition, would already be a trusted company. Now we have to figure out how to govern this thing. We don't know that yet. The research is figuring out, how does a company get into the neighborhood? How do they get expelled out of the neighborhood? Once in a while, they say, “misbehaved,” did they get kicked out? Well, who makes that decision? You know, we don't know those things yet, but this is where the research is going and exploring this idea. This combines with a few other concepts around like dynamic risk modeling. How can you now dynamically understand what the risk profile of the neighborhood is? Or what's the risk profile of an assembly of companies within the neighborhood that go to deliver an asset? Now, could we create different types of insurance instruments or sureties? I use the word sureties, but how can we assure the performance of this network in nontraditional ways? Are there new insurances, like a captive, for instance, that could get wrapped around this group? But if you get this right, theory is, the risk profile of the whole neighborhood and everyone in it starts to drop dramatically, right? And companies can now,if there's some way to govern behavior— So for, you know, I don't know if you have ever, all of us have auto insurance, but you know State Farm, and State Farm gives me this little monitor I can put in my car. And if I'm a safe driver, right, and I think some of the others, Progressive, they may all do this, but if I'm a safe driver, my rate drops. So it's a way for them to kind of monitor my performance. And there's a financial incentive for me to behave in the proper way. Well, could we do similar concepts in here where, you know, Tyler and Pete are both companies in this neighborhood, and Tyler and Pete might be competitors, but we could also be complimenters? And we might also have an incentive now to also support each other. Maybe Tyler's working on a project today, he's a mechanical contractor, and I'm also a mechanical contractor, let's say. But I am also motivated to make sure Tyler does well, even though we're competitors, because there's a greater thing we're trying to achieve. And maybe there's a financial benefit that accrues to the entirety of the neighborhood that I could even benefit from, even if I didn't work on today's project. Again, ideas and concepts we're playing with to really try to get what we call “goal congruence.” How do you get everyone marching in the same direction towards a common objective where your own personal profit objectives and motives are looked after, but they're not done at the expense of the overall venture's return on investment objective? Can we achieve both simultaneously? What we do today in contracting seldom achieves it, whether it's lump sum contracting or reimbursed. However we do it today, we seldom get a good outcome. It happens once in a while, but those are the case studies you hear about at a conference. “Hey, we had a great project. We did this, we did this, we did that.” But what they're not telling you is we had 24 other projects that weren't so good. We don't talk about those in the case studies, right? We talk about the ones that went well. Is there a way to comp with some companies differently? So this is a key element here to get that right. Again, we don't have the answers, we’ll figure it out. We welcome ideas and participation. So this is an open call, anyone listening to this podcast, join our mission, our crusade. We are really on a mission to improve this industry. And we have lots of questions. We don't have all the answers yet. We think we're directionally correct. We may not be precisely correct in everything that we're looking at, but we think we're directionally correct. Now, another layer of detail that might be of interest: How do you have a solid data foundation upon which to govern an entity like this, or to have a data link or data information now to do these risk assessments and to look at surety and insurance of this network? Well, this is really where blockchain comes in. We don't envision a future state without having an immutable, trusted data source that everyone can participate in, that's trusted by all, but not necessarily owned by any one company. So this is way beyond a database. This is a, if you will—and if you know anything about blockchain, it's a shared network, a distributed network across multiple participating companies, and it's structured in a way that data can be put into the blockchain information, and algorithms can be run. Some meaningful results can be derived from that data to the benefit of the parties. But the information that's put into it can be masked or cloaked if so desired. So in other words, Tyler, you and I could put in our confidential information, maybe it's an estimate. Maybe it's a perception of a risk. Maybe it's, whatever it may be. And then if there's enough of us putting information in, then we can derive some meaningful results on that. But I would never know that Tyler put in Tyler's information, you would never know that people would in-feed this information, but the blockchain can house that and provide great value to the community. Now, the other key piece is smart contracts. Now, smart contracts are important here too, because they can greatly streamline the execution of the contracts through using technology. So a smart contract is essentially a digitized version of a paper contract. You know, today we put these contracts together and they're like a PDF, right? They're literally a paper contract. And then the companies scramble around figuring out, well, okay, how do I administer this thing? Oh gosh, I better go gather some data, I better evidence my time I charged, or I better evidence that I delivered you some materials. And I got to amass all this paper and the information and it accumulates in a monthly invoice. And then I submit that monthly invoice to you. You then receive my mountain of paper, pour through it laboriously and oh, you found an error on the 29th day, put a restart on the 30 day clock. Right? And you kick it back. And so we play this crazy dance of paper pushing. Well, all of that can go away with smart contracts. You can literally automate performance of the contract and have all that business logic completely coded into the smart contract. So whenever a payable event occurs, then that could be recorded in the smart contract, and you actually can pay based on that. So now what we can get to is not only taking work hours out of the project process, because we don't have so much burden administrating the contract, but now you can get to a point where we can actually get paid much faster. You literally can create net one day payment terms, okay, where you can have an environment of micropayments. Now, the cynic is going to say, well, why would I want to do that? I love to pay late because I get to hold my cash, right? This is why we have 75 day payment terms on average, because starting with the owner, going to the contractor going to the sub and so forth, everyone pays late and they all think they're being clever. Now, if you're the only one in the world that pays late, sure, you're a winner, because you get to hold your cash or whatever. But if everyone pays late, and that's the environment we have today, all of those late payments manifest themselves in the cost of capital that sits in the rate structure. Because Tyler the mechanical contractor isn't a bank. Chase or Bank of America is a bank. Tyler's not a bank, Tyler’s a contractor. So Tyler can't float that cash. What is he gonna do? Because by the way, Tyler still has to pay his people and buy his materials and do all those things, meet payroll. So what does Tyler do? Tyler goes and gets a line of credit. What, do you think those are free? Of course they're not free. In fact, Tyler's line of credit is probably a fairly high interest rate, because Tyler's a contractor, he doesn't have a lot of assets. Usually the owners can borrow money at much lower rates because they have assets. They have plants and equipment and all these things, right? Owner's cost of capital might be 4 or 5%. I'm making numbers up. The contractor's cost of capital might be 10 or 12%. So why then does the owner push the cost of capital burden onto the contractor ultimately? If the owner thinks the contractor doesn't have that cost of capital in the rate structure, they're crazy. Of course they do. They have to, or the contractor would be out of business. So this cost of capital is like this, again, a boat anchor in our industry because it's inflating the rate structure. Now we won't change that overnight, but smart contracts provide an immediate opportunity to start paying faster and to start increasing the velocity of cash flow in the industry. And that's a very important area of waste to target. Now, smart contract’s just computer code. So if you didn't want to pay net one, that's fine. If you weren't quite sure you can always plug in plus 30 or plus 45, you can put any payment terms in there and still get the benefit of the automation process and administrating the contract, you know? And by the way, if you pay contractors faster, what happens? They tend to like you more as an owner, right? ‘Cause Tyler, who are you gonna work for? You gonna go work for the owner that pays you net one, or are you going to work for the one that pays the net 120? Pretty easy decision, right? All other things equal. Of course this is maybe a silly example, but the point is, you know, people like to get paid for the work they do, especially contractors. So let's just respect that and move on and do it. Anyway. So that's one of the benefits of smart contracts. The other, just creating a much greater level of accuracy and fidelity and transparency into the contract administration process. So it provides a tremendous amount. And that's why smart contracts are really exploding in usage in other industries. They're coming into insurance and real estate, because they're smart, it's smart to do it, right? Hence the name.
Eddie: The fact that you're driving towards that kumbaya-like solution, like you even said, you know, “I mentioned love in the context of a construction/contractors podcast.” And they're like, you know, who talks like that? That's downplaying. The goal is, as we treat each other right, as we get into these systems, as we start to hone and streamline, that we can address the actual waste in our industry, that we can address these core problems, these core dysfunctions that are keeping us from moving forward as an industry. And as we treat each other, right, then we will be treated right. And I love that reciprocity that is there, that, yeah, maybe you want to hold onto your cash, but you don't want them to hold onto your cash. You want to be paid. And so if that trickles down, everybody benefits, and there's an actual cost benefit for it. This is a very demonstrative and positive change that I don't feel like is just, like I said, “kumbaya”—like this is something that's backed by technology, analytics, obvious statistics about things that are wrong. And it's more than just a call for everybody to just kind of get together and “let's just do it because.” Like, let’s do this because there's a reason.
Tyler: Yeah. It's for the good of the neighborhood. Getting more into more of the technical questions: If I wanted to use a smart contract, what do I need to do? Where do I need to go? Where do I need to look?
Pete Dumont: I'm glad you asked. (Laughs) No, no, no. We actually at PrairieDog are beginning implementations of smart contracts in our industry. Like I mentioned, we're not smart enough to invent smart contracts, if you will. They exist in other industries, there's other places where they're being done. And we're like, wow, that is cool. That is really working well and is streamlining transactions. It's driving a ton of cost out of processes. Love it. Now, can we apply it to construction? So we're just getting started with this now. So anybody listening, you're right on the verge, the beginning of this transformation. So it's a really cool time right now. So yeah, we're just getting going with us. There may be some others in the industry tinkering with this, in fact—and I have to think that there weren't—but we're not really aware of any major concerted effort that's underway right now to start implementing this in the industry. But we're super excited to now start because OS2, as it gets implemented, needs a starting point. Where you are talking to companies and the research is progressing on how do we design, how do we kind of architect this neighborhood and those rules. But in the meantime, we can start with smart contracts today. ‘Cause it's existing technology. We can start with blockchain, it's existing technology, and it works and it's great. And so we can get some companies kind of going and so they can start to get immediate benefit and cost savings, but they're also now priming the pump, if you will, for this future transformation. They're getting ready, they’re getting, if you will, almost kind of getting that “Good Housekeeping” seal of approval readiness, right? For the OS2 neighborhood participation and so forth. So it's a good time for companies that are curious. And the thing that a smart contract is it's very low cost of implementation. It's not like buying a license of a piece of software or implementing an ERP. A lot of those are very cost prohibitive, a bunch of upfront costs. This is very low upfront cost. And once you turn it on, you start saving right away. So it's a very compelling thing to do. Gets into the category “no brainer,” but I'm passionate about this, so that's my opinion on it. The other point that I don't want to lose here is the fact that we really don't envision replacing or making irrelevant a lot of the great technology solutions that are in the industry today. But rather, if we get the ecosystem and the neighborhood right, it creates an environment for them to thrive. So if we get this right, the good point solutions, be they engineers, constructors, technology plays, key vendors or suppliers, can really now grow and thrive. And we see the future environment of the industry being one where the best of everything can really win. So can an owner or an asset developer assemble an A-team every time? Now how do they pull the A-team together every time? Well, get the neighborhood companies together, but how do you coordinate that? What's the logistics around that, right? How do you get 20? You know, can I hire one company as a general to manage everything? Or could I actually go get the 20 myself? And they're sure I get the right team, you know, that kind of thing. So how do we do that? So we're trying to figure out, how do you integrate that? What's the technology solution to help with that? But we believe the future is going to reward any high, really high-value player. And I know that’s another apple pie statement, but as opposed to somebody that exists in the industry to promote waste, or they're just a “transactioner” of stuff, they're in that 40%, that's the part of the stuff we want to get rid of. We really then say, okay, now what are the high-value plays? Let's find a way for them to thrive. And then let the market forces move them forward in the industry.
Eddie: We ask all of our guests to just give us kind of an elevator pitch. And we say, hey, if we gave you a megaphone that the whole construction industry could hear for 60 seconds, what would you tell the industry?
Pete Dumont: Don't be complacent with the waste in our industry. Don't assume contracting models have to be the way they are. Don't assume relationships have to be the way they are. Be curious, get involved in OS2, if, for nothing else, just follow what we're doing, watch—but you know, better yet, bring your good ideas and your thought leadership forward, join us on this. ‘Cause we need other people. We need other folks from all the different industry sectors and so forth. There's a lot of value for you we can recapture in the industry. We're hoping, our goal is to drive about a 35% cost reduction on average on projects, we think that is very achievable, and about a 50% time reduction. We also think that's achievable. Those are both aggressive numbers. And if we did both, it would be on average about a 60% improvement in return on investment or capital efficiency for the owners. At the same time, improving the profitability for the supply chain, for the engineers, the constructors and suppliers and so forth, by maybe 2 to 300% at the same time. And also increasing the volume of projects in the industry. Because if we have greater capital efficiency, if we're getting more construction for the money—one of PrairieDog’s taglines, “more construction for the money”—then we theoretically will have some of those back burner projects that owners can now afford to bring them to the front burner and get them into execution. Because today they can't afford to, they're spending their money on the other projects. So you know, join the cause, join our crusade. That's what I would leave people with.
Eddie: Pete. It's been a pleasure having you. I'm charged up, I'm fired up. So I appreciate that. Where can people find you, man?
Pete Dumont: Our website, Prairiedogvp.com. By the way, also, I would say, there's a OS 2.0 page on the CII website.
Eddie: Alright, well, thanks so much for being with us today.
Pete Dumont: Thanks for having me, guys. It's been fun.
Tyler: Hey guys, Tyler here. Just really quick before you go, do me a favor and leave us a rating. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, it helps us out so much. Make sure that you join our community group—you can text us at (478) 221-7009. And also, go check us out on social media at constructionbrospodcast. We're on Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter, and also on TikTok, believe it or not. So thanks for being with us this week. Hope you have a great one. Go build something awesome.