For this episode of the “PLM Quick 30,” #GPSL expert, Scott Allshouse, joins Patrick Sullivan in a discussion on managing complex content for effective service delivery. Listen to ArcherGrey’s latest podcast to hear first hand.

Contact us if you’re ready to discuss a dynamic PLM strategy.

Transcript

The transcript is close to a literal transcript of the spoken word. Please excuse any grammatical errors, spelling errors or break in the flow. The podcast is a non-scripted conversation with natural flow aimed to deliver value.

 

Patrick: What does digital transformation mean to you?

Scott: How do you explain away millions of dollars in unplanned downtime because the
technician can’t find the right information fast enough. It’s the cost of repair now.
Engineering costs are a lot higher than service costs. Now you’ve got three or four
people working on the same problem. How much did it really cost to fix that system?
Going back and looking for people with more experience we call them the gray beards.
And these gray beards are starting to retire. I talked to one fellow here a while back and
he said that in six months, 360 years of experience had left their service organization
and they were left with a lot of younger people.

Patrick: All right. Welcome to another PLM Quick 30 with Archer Gray. I’m your host Patrick
Sullivan and today we have a very special guest, Scott Allshouse with GPSL. And GPSL
specializes in content management and if you don’t know what that means, you are
about to get educated. Scott’s the VP of sales at GPSL and has a long history related to
PLM and content management. So we’re excited about talking with Scott today and he’s
been gracious enough to spend a little bit of his time and share his knowledge with
everybody listening. So thanks for listening to the podcast. And without further ado,
let’s hear a little bit from Scott.

Patrick: So Scott, thanks again. I appreciate you being on the podcast.

Scott: Hey, thanks Patrick. It is fantastic to be here. I’m really looking forward to our
conversation today.

Patrick: Yeah, great. So I just gave probably the shortest summary of what GPSL does. But could
you give everybody a little bit of history and bring us to the present? What does GPSL
do?

Scott: Well, let me give you my view from 30,000 feet of who I am and what I’m doing here for
GPSL and what our company is doing for our customers out there. A little bit about me, I
am a career sailor from the US Navy. I worked on combat systems on aircraft carriers for
a long time and absolutely loved it. I miss it a lot. My interest in service and parts
manual started there. And I used them a lot in my day to day work and even today in my
hobbies, use a lot of service manuals. So to get under the hood of my truck and wrench
around in there and try to make it work better. I was fortunate to be on an assignment
during my Navy career to transform about 12 years of proprietary tactical information
and graphics into a form that made it a lot more useful for fleet readiness.

Scott: That was just a huge success and they’re still using it out there today. My career after
the Navy still kept me in contact with a lot of folks in aerospace and defense and some
major manufacturers worldwide. My focus during that time was on best practices for
intelligent graphics and tactical illustration that was born out of 3D CAD data. Now it’s a
pretty rich source of information and being able to use it in a better way for tactical
illustration, for parts and service manuals downstream was pretty important. So I
enjoyed playing a role in that and still involved in some of those standards today.
Another thing that I was really keen on was human factors. We make great service and
parts information, we make great illustrations, but how is that actually being consumed
by people like you and me and technicians that come and fix our stuff for us. It’s
sometimes under some pretty arduous conditions. So I had a chance to study that as
well.

Scott: Today I’d say my role’s matured a little bit. And something I’ve been doing for a long
time and that’s really helping clients realize the business value of well made solution for
service and parts information and instructions. It’s fantastic to be on board with a
company like GPSL or Global Publishing Solutions as many know us. The company that’s
global, we’ve got just the absolute best talent in the industry regarding solutions for
publishing military specifications. One of those is S1000D that’s trending a lot right now.
Our roots go back to the early 1980s. We’re under a different name then called 3B2 and
we were solving some really complex publishing problems for manufacturers. Some
professional publishers, media and even legislatures all over the world from where
you’re conducting the podcast from today, your state legislatures using our help for the
entire process of law making and publishing that information out.

Scott: And it’s just a huge amount of information for the legislature’s to process. So anyway,
when you look out the window and across to where those folks are out there making up
new laws, you have an idea that we have a piece of that. Demand for our content comes
in a lot of different forms. GPSL’s critical in supporting all these different industries. So in
a nutshell, I’ll just sum it up that we’re experts and organized and in structuring really
complex and critical information. And then we want to make sure that it’s getting to the
right people at the right time and in the right format.

Patrick: I mean, that’s quite an introduction. You did a much better job than I did.

Scott: How do I expand a little bit?

Patrick: I mean, that was really great information and I appreciate you taking the time. I mean,
first off, thank you for your service. We live in such a great country and it’s folks like you
that allow us the luxury to live in such great country. So thank you.

Scott: Well, thanks for acknowledging that. There is a lot of folks out there that are still
carrying the torch today and doing a fantastic job and we never want to forget what
they’re doing for us as well.

Patrick: Absolutely. So one of the things that you had mentioned that I’m particularly interested
in, because everybody’s talking about digital thread and 3D, the promise of 3D and how
it’s used is also something that people are very interested in. You had said that there’s a
lot of 3D work that you guys specialize in related to instructions and how people use it.
I’m curious at what point are you involved in establishing best practices or leading
practices around 3D to help ensure that when the 3D designs are being created, that it’s
the right information required for people to leverage it in an effective way when they’re
servicing?

Scott: Well, there’s obviously the bill of material information, which engineering is often
preparing in some form. That is going to be important for downstream consumption and
where they’re going to take the engineering bill of material and transition that over to a
service bill of materials. So that’s one of the areas that we’re helping our customers
translate that in a good way to set up a consistent linkage. The other thing that we’re
helping folks with is being able to consume that rich 3D CAD data that’s being generated
upstream for tactical illustration purposes downstream. If you’ve got engineering
modeling everything that is necessary for the service team to create high quality
graphical content, you are way ahead of the game and you’re going to have fantastic
service information. There’s no doubt about it. So I think the service organizations and
engineering have been communicating with each other for a long time, over the years,
getting CAD data in a form that they can use it.

Scott: In some cases the engineers actually created the graphics for the illustrators and writers
in the service organization. It wasn’t their primary job. And they just gave a little story
here where the illustrator or the writer every day they keep going back to engineering
and saying, “Can you open up this model for me? And then if you could, I need you to
position it this way and I need you to explode these parts off in that way. And could you
put a few call outs on there for me.” And of course the engineer’s totally happy to stop
doing what his assignment was to help out the writer. So they produce this and the
writer goes away and he starts to look at it. He says, “If this was turned another five
degrees, it would be even better.” So he goes back. Okay? So that going back and going
back after a while the engineering department puts a welcome sign on their door that
says, “Illustrators and writers keep out.”

Scott: So the idea of improving the process so that the service organization can consume
engineering data on their own for the purposes of illustration or parts information
obviously brings a lot of goodness to the engineering department because they don’t
have to worry about it anymore. And I think another piece of this, the engineers don’t
have to worry about writers or illustrators actually making changes to the engineering
data. That used to spook some people out there. We know they didn’t want the design
being changed. They’re not.

Scott: The process is set up in such a way that they’re only consuming it. And should the
engineers make any changes, Patrick, they’re actually alerted to those changes
downstream. So they’re able to understand what the impact of an engineering change
is. Do I need to go in and update these 25 illustrations that were based off of that
model? Do I need to change steps in a procedure because of the engineering change?
They didn’t know this in the past with the exception of they might find out about it
during a meeting that they had every two weeks in a conference room. Today the
capabilities are there to let them know automatically that this change has occurred and
you can tell I’m really [inaudible 00:12:01] about this stuff.

Patrick: Oh, yeah. I love that you’re going into detail on these stories and bringing examples to
life because I’m sure anybody listening who’s experienced this, whether on the service
side or on the engineering side or somewhere in between or manager level, they see
opportunities to be more efficient. And essentially what I keep hearing from you is in
essence some aspect of digital thread. Which if we take a step back for a second, I’m
curious because I talk with a lot of clients and prospects and PTC for instance, has done
a really good job about putting in digital transformation into this world of PLM and
elevating what the legacy definition of PLM or maybe the utopian definition of PLM and
putting it in the context of digital transformation, digital thread. So I’m curious because
in this Q4 for instance of 2019 and going into Q1 Archer Gray is trying to help our clients
define what digital transformation means. And what I’m finding most commonly is that
it means something different to everybody that I talked to. So I’m curious from your
perspective, what does digital transformation mean to you?

Scott: Well, let me start out with where I first started hearing about it and learning about it.
It’s coming to mind from several years ago. And it’s relevance to marketing initiatives.
Companies had a lot of different channels of messaging that were going out in hopes of
generating business. But there was just no way for them to be consistent or capturing
response or feedback to all of this messaging. Some smart people started figuring out
ways to make that marketing messaging more consistent. And through methods of
feedback that are available to them today, they were trying to determine which
messaging was effective and which wasn’t. And how they could improve on that to
improve the sales of their products and services. So that’s where I first became
acquainted with the terms around digital transformation. Then started applying that to
all the goodness that a manufacturer might be doing through their conceptual designs,
design, manufacturing processes and everything downstream to service.

Scott: And one of the areas of digital transformation, I’d say this is a subset of it. But
something that I became really interested in was what was referred to as servitization.
This is where a business transforms to realize greater value from the delivery of service
or from their service organization. The key to success in this is making sure that they’ve
got a mature service and parts information process and if they can connect to that rich
data that is upstream from them. And the engineering and third party business systems,
it’s even better. And you’re mentioning our partners PTC in there and they’ve already
built out this entire end to end process with regard to digital transformation.

Scott: It does allow a company to focus on their business initiatives, be it around the products
that they’re making and selling to customers. Or if those products are intended to be in
service for a lot of years. They’re going to require a lot of maintenance over those years
and they’re going to require repair over those years. How are we as manufacturers
going to be able to service them effectively so that they’re always available to the end
users if it’s in the commercial space or relating to how the service might use them? It’s
all about mission readiness. Is that equipment available to the commander to be able to
go out and support the missions and also protect those soldiers, sailors, Marines, and
airmen that are out there in the field too? So those were things that I’m thinking about
with regard to digital transformation.

Patrick: So to extend that a little bit and dig into digital transformation. Is that changing the
discussion that you’re having around, I mean first of all, it sounds like it does, but the
present trend of IoT and digital thread, is it affecting how you’re interacting with clients
and prospects?

Scott: I think to some extent you have the clients that are bringing up digital thread, they’re
bringing up IoT and oftentimes that is their initial focus. They’re thinking about those.
They’ve been hearing a lot about those things. But I like to, I guess educate a little bit on
the importance of having a mature service and parts information instructions process.
The IoT is collecting information from sensors and that’s fantastic. You know that it’s
doing that and I think it’s doing it better than anything that I’ve experienced in the past.
By the way, I think IoT has probably existed in different ways for a lot of years. We just
didn’t call it that. But all of that sensory information that’s coming in from the field is
being processed. But at the end of the day you have to diagnose something and you
need to repair or maintain something based on that information that’s coming in from
the field. So that IoT process needs to be able to reference the up to date and accurate
service and parts information that was born out of that digital thread process connected
to the upstream engineering information.

Patrick: Yeah. It’s interesting. We just recorded a podcast with the gentleman from the ANSYS
on simulated digital twin. And he had mentioned that there’s three pillars necessary in
order to successfully pull off implementing a simulated digital twin and taking advantage
of it. The first obviously is executive support and he wasn’t talking about getting
funding. He was talking about them being an evangelist throughout the organization
and reinforcing that that’s a vision that they’re pursuing. And the second one, which
surprised me but made a lot of sense after he explained it, was having a strategy around
IoT. It’s one thing to implement it and collect a lot of data. But if you don’t know what
you’re going to do with the data or what you’re intending to and what the goal and
purpose is implementing simulated digital twin will be flawed and aimless.

Patrick: But that was the second pillar and once you have those two then you’re essentially
ready to go. And the examples that he used to support that, he brought up VW where
rather than building and reiterating on a particular prototype, they’ve got the ability to
throw different scenarios at it so that when it finally goes to production, it’s already
gone through various aspects of testing based on the goals that they were looking to
originally achieve. So I think what you just described brings in another dynamic to it,
which quite frankly expands the definition of digital thread from my perspective, taking
into account the service side of things.

Scott: Yeah. It is important, is interesting you brought up the last podcast there and I think
about the technicians out there. Oftentimes with a new vehicle introduction, they get
the initial service information that was probably based off of a prototype. And how to
diagnose it, how to service it properly. And then once that equipment is out in the field,
then they start getting feedback in some form. Yeah, I’m not going to say it’s very
sophisticated all the time.

Scott: But now engineering organizations and service organizations are creating a whole host
of service bulletins. And technicians are having to first reference the service in the parts
manuals and then it’s like there are 84 service bulletins issued in the last [inaudible
00:21:35] which one do I go to? And how does it override the service manual? And this
digital thread process actually has the capability of probably dispensing with a lot of that
problem for technicians out there in the future. Because it is possible to dynamically
keep service and parts information up to date and accurate for those that are working
with it out in the field. And what does that mean for the technician?

Scott: Well, one the technician feels like he’s doing a fantastic job. He found the right
information quickly. And he got the equipment back in service. For the company I guess
if it’s a dealership, well they get to service more cars per day. Because the techs are
fixing them faster and the dealership’s customers are really, really happy because
they’re getting the cars back a lot faster than when they expected they would.
Patrick: That sounds like somebody who tries to fix his own cars.

Scott: Yeah, I do. But I know my limits and so I have a fantastic mechanic and he tells me
stories about all the cars that he works on.

Patrick: That’s great. All right. So if you don’t mind, I’m going to ask you a couple of questions
around content management because I’ve had exposure to it at least from customers
that we deal with implementing PLM and so I’m going to ask you what’s happening
today and the future of it. So who typically owns content management responsibility?
And so this is going to be a two part question. That’s the first question. And that’s today.
If they’re looking to implement a digital thread program, because you started off at the
beginning of this podcast talking about service and engineering folks collaborating early
on and then as service would come back to engineering, they used to become an
unwelcome ingest. But that iteration spoke to a need to have cleaner and more efficient
communication. So I’m curious ultimately who owns content management today? And
then considering digital thread and that efficiency aspect, who should own it in the
future?

Scott: Okay. Well, it’s a start with the owner and that’s not always an easy question to answer.
It can vary a lot by a company and industry. They have a lot of different titles. They
come from a lot of different roles out there. I’d say the top owner content management
is going to be somebody who understands how all this information is going to be
consumed by technicians, students, consumers or the subject matter experts that are
inside of the company. The content has to help the end user learn or perform a task
correctly. An example of such a person would be myself. I started as a technician
working on really complex systems aboard ship and later I was introduced to training as
an instructor and then I found my way into an assignment where I was creating and
managing service information.

Scott: With that said it’s not the only way, but it does require a good level of experience or
understanding how that information is going to be consumed. The second role of the
manager is ensuring that the information structured in the right way, trending in
aerospace and defense is S1000D. That is being used alongside other legacy standards
out there. There’s a lot of equipment that’s been in service with our military and airlines
for a long time. So they don’t always adopt the most current standard. But some of the
old ones continue to work well. But there are cases where a customer has old stuff and
new stuff. And they have contractual requirements to do both. We call this multi-spec.
And there’s just a lot of different ways out there that you can handle that. We’re expert
in doing it and I would say also in commercial manufacturing they’ve got structured
requirements too.

Scott: The third content management role, managing access to the source information that’s
going to ensure that everything’s optimized for accurate and up to date information out
to the field. The technicians, operators, even me as a consumer out there, we want to
make sure that we’ve got good information. I don’t want to be hoping that somebody
on YouTube is giving me the best way of doing it. I’ve got myself in trouble so many
times by watching YouTube videos. I prefer to have official information. And if YouTube
info is built off of bad tech data then we’re really in trouble.

Patrick: You might appreciate this story. I have a colleague that is a gear head who likes to take
apart cars and engines and all that stuff. He watched a YouTube video on how to clean
well, see you can tell I’m not a car guy because I don’t know the part. But essentially
where the pistons fire, he needed to clean it out. And I think the suggestion was to get
crushed walnuts and basically used a power sprayer to basically clean it off. And I think
that was a YouTube video unofficial but he did it and he said it worked like a gem.

Scott: All right. I know that crushed walnuts do work well for cleaning parts as long as it’s in a
parts cleaning machine. I haven’t seen them used. I’m going to have to look up the
YouTube video. It’s either going to be an aha moment or it’s going to be, oh my gosh,
are they really doing this?

Patrick: Well, I’m going to have to connect you with them. And by the way, anybody listening, I
do not advise you to try this out. I’m not a mechanic.

Scott: No, and we’re not jumping off the roof here. Don’t do this at home.

Patrick: That’s it.

Scott: Good.

Patrick: All right. So I think we’ve got some good background here. So, as I had mentioned, a lot
of clients are pursuing this. And from our perspective it’s this evolution, right? Of PDM
to PLM to some will say digital transformation if they’re looking at it through the eyes of
PLM. But digital thread, right? It’s the data required to build and maintain a product. So
from your perspective, what building blocks need to be in place for a client to be ready
to really have effective content management?

Scott: Well this relates back to something I said a moment ago. They need to understand a day
in the life of a technician or an operator. If this is about service and parts information
they work under all different types of conditions. Is it sunny, snowing, wind blowing, is it
day night? Where’s the equipment located? So they need to understand those things. A
lot of times people that are looking at service and parts information upstream or
downstream, they’re creating all of this in a laboratory environment. In the factory
bright lights are on, it’s 72 degrees everyday all day long. And their equipment may be
subjected to a lot of different conditions out there. And the people that are operating
and maintaining it are subjected to the same things. So that I think is number one that
they need to take into consideration.

Scott: The other thing that they need to look at is making sure that the technicians can find
that information quickly. So that it helps them do the job right the first time. One, it
makes them really happy that they did a great job and the recipients of the service. The
end users, the operators, they’re happy because they’ve got the system available to
them. So if everyone that’s upstream and digital transformation or service information,
PLM processes keeps that technician or operator front of mind, there’s a lot of goodness
that’s going to result from it. From a tactical perspective, the service organization, they
need to first understand best practices and structure such as S1000D or other standards
that they want to work with or maybe they’ve recently been contracted to work with it.
For aerospace and defense, a lot of new contracts that are coming out from defense
agencies to these manufacturers is specifying S1000D and a very specific issue of
S1000D on how this is going to be created.

Scott: Meanwhile, others are specifying legacy standards out there. So it’s up to them to make
sure that they understand that structure. And then it’s time for them to look upstream,
collaborate with their engineering partners up there on how they’re going to consume
that CAD data and how they’re going to consume the bills and material and have an
effective link to that information. Knowing that there’s wonderful people in engineering
love to make changes. And the folks downstream need to be able to see when those
changes are being made and subsequently be able to recognize all of the service and
parts information that has been impacted by those changes. And oftentimes that can be
done in minutes. It’s not the weight for that conference room meeting that you had
every two weeks in the past. So setting up a solid data exchange it may require some
adjustments in old processes. I’ve seen it a lot of times, but the key is to keep your focus
on providing value and excellent information to the end users and changing some
upstream processes is a good thing.

Patrick: So says the person responsible for the content?

Scott: And the user of the content.

Patrick: And the user. That’s right. Well I can imagine that because I wanted to ask a couple of,
well I think you mentioned them because you’ve mentioned that’s 1000D and the
importance of understanding the structure and the order in which it’s assembled, right?
What are some compelling justifications and or pain points? I don’t know if we want to
cover both of them in the same question, but essentially what are some of the
justifications for somebody to have effective content management practices that can
help them overcome the pain points that they’re experiencing?

Scott: Oh, I got a long list for you on this. So here’s some of the triggers. Why I think a
company would want to become a lot better at service and parts information instruction
processes. So it wasn’t that long ago that I read that a technician spends 46% of his day
trying to find the right information before they can perform a task. That’s almost half a
day. You know that a technician is trying to figure out how he can do something before
they even get a chance to start turning a wrench. Obviously that starts to stack up a lot
of things that need to be fixed or repaired. Another thing is how do you explain away
millions of dollars in unplanned downtime because a technician can’t find the right
information fast enough to put the systems back in service. This happens more often
than you think out there and you may have those technicians going back and looking for
people with more experience.

Scott: We call them the gray beards. And these gray beards are starting to retire. I talked to
one fellow here a while back and he said that in six months, 360 years of experience had
left their service organization and they were left with a lot of younger people inside the
company that didn’t have the same experience. So they were relying on tech manuals
for some pretty complex systems in the factories. And they oftentimes couldn’t find
information fast enough when a system went down. By the way, this system in the
factory were all censored up. So they quickly told people whenever they were hurting,
but there was no direct linkage into the tactical documentations. So even though they
got an alarm that something was wrong, it took them a long time to get in there and
figure out the fix for it and then get it back in service and do all the testings.

Scott: So these are real pain points that companies have out there. The other thing, whenever
you escalate problems up to the gray beards or engineering is now you’ve got more
people working on a problem that could have or was expected to be solved by one
person. It’s the cost of repair now. Engineering costs are a lot higher than service costs
sometimes and now you’ve got three or four people working on the same problem. How
much did it really cost to fix that system? So those are things that need to be thought
about as well. And I’d say a lot of folks haven’t done that in the past. Go ahead.

Patrick: If I might interrupt you for a second hear Scott. So with all those examples which I’m
seeing all of those scenarios happen all over the place with our clients. So have you seen
customers, everybody talks about ROI and I’ve seen a few do it effectively, right? Where
you understand the objectives that you want to achieve, the pain points you want to
overcome or at least improve upon. And then you justify this implementation and the
strategy to do it. Have you seen people come back in and do a comparative analysis to
make sure that the KPIs were achieved?

Scott: I think customers are just starting to do that. They’re coming back and starting to
measure what they actually gained by improving on the digital thread process. I know
companies go in with some soft metrics on what they expect to gain and I’ve had a
chance to look at some of those with some of our customers. And I think some of them
are very conservative maybe a 30% efficiency across the organization and how they
create and manage and publish their content or how they were doing it previously. I
would suggest it might be a lot higher. If they were reusing the 3D CAD data for
illustration purposes in the proper way, they may be gaining 50% or more efficiency
over how they were doing illustration in the past. So those things internally in the
company, they should definitely be able to go back and capture that as long as they
were doing some measurements of their legacy processes leading into the new
initiative.

Scott: With regard to field service improvements, that goes back to the service organization
partnering with them, make sure that you’ve captured metrics up front. And then
through being able to provide more up to date and accurate information to the
technicians. Did we reduce the time defined information from 46% of the day to 10% of
the day? Did we reduce the amount of escalations from service up to engineering?
Which obviously results in a reduction in cost of service for those companies. So I don’t
have any hard examples of a customer that would be willing to say, “This is what we
gained broadly.” And some of them are very protective of that information because it’s
a competitive differentiator for them and how they are creating and delivering service
today.

Patrick: Well, I think those are good examples to point people in a direction so they can begin
thinking about how to even measure that in the first place. The statistics and KPIs will
just be prioritized and relevant to each organization, right? As you say, in many ways a
competitive advantage. But I think your advice in tackling some of those key ones that
you typically see, will get a lot of people some value and some direction as they’re
developing their plans. So that’s really good insight. Thank you. So I know we’re coming
up here on the end and I want to be respectful of your time, but I’m curious, do you
have any advice for folks looking to embark on this journey of improving their content
management?

Scott: Well, I do have a few things here. One for a manufacturer that is looking to differentiate
themselves. We know that executives every year they have initiatives to grow the
business, grow profitability, things like that. Oftentimes they’re looking at ways that
they can create new products or change existing products and market them in different
ways. And I would like to suggest that those companies consider looking at the digital
thread process and their service and parts information and instructions downstream
focus on service could certainly result in new business from product sales. Because
customers are just so happy with the products that they have. And I’d suggest they may
be able to increase their aftermarket business as well. It’s not all about marketing here,
it’s just having a more effective digital thread process that involves service and parts and
all the goodness of being connected to upstream engineering processes.

Scott: Following that advice for anyone that’s getting on this, understand how the technicians
and end users consume the information. They want to accomplish their tasks, do it very
well, and have high fives at the end of the day saying, “Look what I did.” People just love
to talk about what they’ve done well. Work together with the upstream folks in
engineering with third party business systems that you might need information from for
a service so that you can create accurate and up to date information that goes out to
the field and just never forget who’s using that product and service information out
there.

Patrick: That’s great advice. In fact, I’m writing it down for myself.

Scott: Great. Good. Pass it on please.

Patrick: Oh, I’m trying, I’m trying. That’s why I have to record it. Well, Scott, I really want to
thank you for taking the time in sharing all of the great advice and the stories and the
experiences and the value that you provide in the market. I’ve really learned a lot and
have enjoyed talking with you. I guess there’s one thing worth mentioning, you had
talked about, I know that you’re an avid podcast listener as well as of today officially all
of Archer Gray’s PLM Quick 30s are now on Apple Podcasts. So you can subscribe there
and download them and catch up on everything that we’ve discussed for not only today
but in the last year and a half.

Patrick: So thanks for the additional inspiration. We’ve had it on the to do list for a while, but
after hearing your feedback we prioritized it a bit more.

Scott: Fantastic. I’ll be adding to that subscription list as soon as we finish.

Patrick: Well, Scott, any parting words?

Scott: Well, I’m sure that I’m the recipient of a lot of great products and services from our
listeners out there. And I just want to tell you keep inventing, keep improving those
designs and then help keep those products and service for a long time with great parts
and service information. Your customers and your company are going to benefit from it
and I will too.

Patrick: Ditto on that comment. So Scott, just one last thing, how can people find you if they
want to reach out and contact you?

Scott: Well, for anyone who wants to learn more, I’d ask them to please navigate to gpsl.co.
That’s gpso.co not.com. Or you can connect with me directly and that is at
sallshouse@gpsl.co. And I’ll spell that out, sallshouse@gpsl.co.

Scott: Hey Patrick, I really appreciate you having me on today. You can guess I’m excited about
the topic and I hope we can talk more about this in the future.

Patrick: I look forward to it. Thanks so much for taking the time and I really enjoyed the
conversation, Scott.

Scott: Thanks Patrick.

Patrick: Thank you.

 

Join our email list to receive updates