Sarah welcomes back to the podcast Dr. Andreas Schroeder, Digital Lead of the Advanced Services Group, for a discussion around how Servitization and sustainability are inextricably linked and what that means for the future of businesses differentiating through service.

Note: As referenced in this discussion, you can view the agenda and register for Servitization Live at https://www.servitizationlive.com/.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I’m your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today we’re going to be talking about the intersection between servitization and sustainability. I’m thrilled to welcome back to the podcast today, Dr. Andreas Schroeder, who is the digital lead of the Advanced Services Group at Aston Business School. Dr. Andreas Schroeder has allowed me to call him Andy, so I will do that from now on.

Sarah Nicastro: Andy, welcome back to the Future of Field Service podcast.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah. Thank you very much, Sarah, for having me back.

Sarah Nicastro: Thank you for being here. I’m excited to chat with you again. Andy was on a previous episode of the podcast, episode 100. We had a really good conversation about how we need to leverage data, and how we need to think about data related to driving servitization. Today, we’re going to talk about a completely different topic, but one that is top of mind for a lot of folks right now, which is sustainability. We’re going to be talking about how servitization really fuels sustainability, and vice versa, in some different ways.

Sarah Nicastro: So Andy, the Advanced Services Group is gearing up for Servitization Live, which is an event that you all are hosting at the beginning of October. Sustainability, or climate change, is one of the three mega-trends that you all have defined, that you will be talking about at the event. Before we dig into our conversation for today, why don’t you tell our listeners just a little bit about those mega-trends are, was Servitization Live is about, and how they can check that out of they’re interested in getting some good insights.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah, of course. The three mega-trends that we’re looking at in the context of servitization, and we’ll talk about servitization itself in a minute, we see servitization as a very innovative business model that had dire implications, not just for the companies engaging with it, but wider societal implications. The specific ones that we’ve been looking at is its contributions to topics like aging population. There’s just no going away, as a population we are aging, and there are technologies and ways of interaction that can help to manage this situation. Servitization plays a role in this.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: There’s food and food security, is another mega-trend. As the population grows, food is an important resource, more important than ever. Again, servitization has a role to play in bringing in technologies and different partners of food-supply chain. Making sure that food security and efficiency of food can be managed.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: The one that we will be talking about today, and looking at the intersection, is sustainability in the wider context. So, we’re looking at climate change, resource utilization, and so on, and so on. These are the three trends, so sustainability is the one that we’re focusing on in the podcast here.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: The event that we’re gearing up, and thank you for pointing this out, there is a big executive conference that we are mounting. You find this under the title Servitization Live. It is a mixture, it is a hybrid event. It is from the fourth to the sixth of October, including, and taking place physically in Birmingham, UK, but will be streamed worldwide in real-time, of course. We will have a number of very interesting guest speakers coming from industry. The names that will be represented, and will be presenting, is Goodyear, Schneider Electric, Baxi Boilers, and Emuron Technologies. These are some of the names. They will be discussing, from their point of view, how servitization activities already help their business, what their future plans are, and what their contribution for their companies are to their sustainability goals through this business model.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: It’s an event, please visit the website. If it’s of interest, please register. It will be a very good event. We are expecting around 600 people to attend. We did this last year, and I hope we exceed this this year.

Sarah Nicastro: Excellent.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Thank you.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, absolutely. Those of you that have been listening to the podcast, or following the content on Future of Field Service, you know that I’m a big fan of what the Advanced Services Group does. I participated in the event they held last fall, and I’ll be participating in Servitization Live as well. Certainly don’t come because of me, there are many wonderful guests that will be speaking and sharing, and talking about how these mega-trends are in their minds and in their strategies, and how that trickles down into their individual businesses. We’ll make sure to put the link to check out the event in the show notes.

Sarah Nicastro: For now, let’s dive into our chat for today. As Andy mentioned, the trend or theme that we’re focusing on today is sustainability. I think that what I like about how you all have planned Servitization Live is to really urge people to think about these mega-trends. I think it’s very natural for business leaders to get very focused on their day-to-day, their views, and their world. It’s important to do that, but it’s also important to take a look at the bigger picture of what’s happening, and how that all plays in.

Sarah Nicastro: Today we’re going to talk about this intersection between servitization and sustainability. The first thing I want to talk about, Andy, is the differences in perception of products, between traditional product delivery or production models, and servitized models. Can we talk a little bit about what the difference is, and how that relates to this intersection between servitization and sustainability?

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Okay. Yeah, I think this is a good starting point. Maybe before we go into the detail, the way I understand sustainability, there are societal obligations towards sustainability, and then, of course, companies have their own strategies, and so on. What I argue is that these are not contradictive to each other. A good-run business, or specifically a business that tries to move into the Advanced Services space, naturally needs, and I will show this in my explanation, naturally needs and contributes to sustainability objectives. These are not two diverging interests that need to be balanced out. The interesting thing is that these are very well, and very nicely, aligned. The speakers at the conference will map this out for us as well.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: When we talk about Advanced Services, for us this is a move away. Largely we focus on manufactures, and we support around 300 manufacturers in their move from only focusing on their products, designing, developing, and manufacturing the products, and then selling it on to the customer, to a situation where a manufacturer designs, produces, the product, but instead of selling it on to the customer, the manufacturer retains ownership and responsibility for the product. It often becomes a pay-per-use scenario. The classic example is the Rolls-Royce-era engine example, where Rolls-Royce bought a large number of engines, still stays responsible for the functioning and performance of the engines, and the airlines are paying by the amount of thrust they take out of these engines. This is a significant shift for manufacturers, from being producer of products to provider of services on the basis of their product.

Sarah Nicastro: Services, and, in a lot of cases, outcomes. They’re really selling that outcome in a lot of instances, so kind of a step beyond selling it as pay-per-use or pay-per-service and selling it as pay-for-an-outcome. Maybe not in every situation, but in many. That makes sense. In the conversation related to sustainability, let’s talk about then how the difference in model, of produce to sell and offload versus produce to own, maintain, and deliver outcomes on, contributes to the topic of sustainability.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah, yeah. I think this is the angle to understand this. In a traditional business model, and we generalize here, of course there are differences in companies so we look at generic business models of produce to sell, the objective is to make a profit margin, of course. The objective for design is not necessarily to look at the full life-cycle of the product. The objective of design and production of the product is to make it attractive for purchase. There will be a lot of innovations that companies would have in their drawers that would not meet the price point that they’ve identified for their customers, so these will not be developed. Or, they make the product a bit more expensive, probably a bit less attractive for an initial capital investment, but maybe there’s a long-term benefit to it that they failed to communicate, or they’re unsure that they can communicate in a sale of a product situation.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: A traditional business model, that limits a company. How much innovation they can introduce in their product, and also what is the cost of product they are prepared to invest in and sell. When we look at a change of business model, from a product to a servitization context, a lot of these changes… We are in a situation where the objective is not to sell for an immediate price point, or to design for an immediate price point and sell, but to be able to deliver services on the back of a product for a longer period of time. The contracts we’re looking at are 10-year contracts, servitization contract. This is a company that designs a product, and knows that they are responsible for it, for the use, and service, and outcome, and possibly efficiency of the product for a ten-year period, will naturally design the product in a different way. We see this with companies like Rolls-Royce. When they design an aero-engine for service, that is a very different aero-engine, there are very different design principles, than if they would design an engine just for the immediate sell and not for continuous ownership.

Sarah Nicastro: Just to clarify a couple of points for my mind, and for listeners, this is not to say that manufacturers in a traditional business model are producing garbage, or intentionally producing products that are not good. But, by the nature of staying in business, they are producing products that the market will bear. They are producing products to the degree that the market will bear in the sense of selling that product under a traditional, capital-based sales model. So in that, when you mentioned innovation, there are certain restrictions on innovation. Some of the things that could potentially be done to, let’s say, maybe put higher quality materials into that product, or to design it and produce it with the ultimate duration of life in mind, versus having to stay at a certain price point. That’s where we’re talking about there’s differences in how these things could be produced if the goal was not to produce what the market can bare for a capital expenditure.

Sarah Nicastro: If you look at it now moving to the servitization model, the manufacturer is retaining ownership of the product, and they’re responsible for delivering the outcome, so then it makes sense to invest more in the production of the product to extend that life cycle, because ultimately, they are benefiting from that longer-term view. That will help them in terms of their ultimate profits by innovating in the way that the market won’t bare on a capital-expenditure model.

Sarah Nicastro: Let’s talk about this just a little bit, to make sure folks are understanding. When you are going to build a product to be longer lasting, there’s more expense to that. This is where looking at servitization or the shift to a pay-per-use, or as-a-service model, comes into play. Let’s talk about why and how that is.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Longer lasting is one aspect, but, for example, serviceability. A lot of products are not designed to be easy to service, in the sense of easy to exchange parts that deteriorate in order to be able to maintain that entire product and give it a longer life. We know this. Again, thank you for pointing this out, this is not talking down companies and their design objective. If you are competing on price, and a lot of companies it doesn’t matter in which price point they are there is a price element in the way they can position themselves in the market, there are restrictions of what they can innovate and what prices they can ask for. That limits it. The beauty of the change of the business model is that it takes away some of these limitations, and allow companies that are innovative to actually use their innovation to develop products that they would otherwise not be able to.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: What we have is longer lasting. When we look at developing products in a servitized context, or as a part of Advanced Services, we have products that are longer lasting. There is no interest in companies having to replace products repeatedly, selling another one, just preparing for the next sale. There is no interest in that. The interest there is efficiently, in an optimized way, maintaining this product in use, because they benefit from products in use, not products in sale. The other part is, again, every service, every repair, is to the detriment of the manufacturer. It’s a cost to the manufacturer, so they will design in a way that things naturally are easier to service, if it has to be replaced, then it would otherwise be. A lot of these Advances Services contacts also have efficiency clause in there. It is up to the manufacturer who provides the service to ensure a certain energy efficiency, or even cost-down commitments. Sometimes there are clauses in there that requires a manufacturer to ensure that there’s, I don’t know, a 3% energy efficiency benefit every year as part of the service, so cost-down commitments from the side of the manufacturer.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: These very much change how a product is being designed, that’s the design and production phase, but also it changes how the product is being in the use phase. When the product is being managed by somebody who has designed the product for longer lasting, who has penalties around inefficiencies, there will a lot of focus on maintaining, making sure, that the product runs on maximum efficiency. That’s where the digital part comes in, a lot of monitoring along the side to ensure that this is in place.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Also, there is significant opportunities to look at the end of life of a product. Again, traditionally when we have a product-for-sale model, these products are being sold off after a while. There’s a primary use, and then a pump or a machine is sold out over to a secondary-use, and possibly internationally gets distributed. There is very little chance for a manufacturer to be systematic about remanufacturing some of the products that are being taken out of use. They disappear somewhere and reduce efficiency, and cannot be traced back. When we have a situation like we’re describing in a servitized context, where the manufacturer retains ownership of the products, has to monitor these products, be responsible for them, for them it’s a natural, easy process to actually remanufacture these products, and take these products back and put them into a remanufacturing, recycling context.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: This is some of sustainability benefits of Advanced Services that are part of the business model. They are not an extra, kind of an ethical or moral obligation, this is to optimize the business of the manufacturers in Advanced Services context.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes, that makes sense. We’re talking about the difference between products being optimized for sale versus being optimized for use. I want to emphasize the point you just made, because this is a conversation you and I had when we first talked about this topic, which is there are people for whom sustainability is a very, very important topic when it comes to their personal beliefs, and objectives, and how they want to contribute to the environment in a positive way, and all of those things. We see that reflected in a lot of, like you said at the very beginning, there’s the personal obligation side of this, and there’s the corporate obligation side of this. You see some correlation there, but I want to go back to the point you just made, which is nothing we’ve talked about so far is something that is important simply to benefit the environment. It does, and that intersection is fantastic in the sense that these servitization objectives and journeys have that impact, but what we’re talking about here is really just good business. That’s all we’ve talked about so far, is if you are on a servitization journey it benefits you from an efficiency standpoint, a financial standpoint, to put these measures in place that also improve sustainability.

Sarah Nicastro: Let’s talk about that a little bit more, because I think that there is a, again we’re generalizing for the sake of a podcast discussion, but there is a group of people that care deeply about the topic of sustainability and want to altruistically take measure to have a positive impact there. There are people that maybe care less. Not to sound negative, but there are people for whom it isn’t as big of a personal objective. The point is, whichever side of that lens you’re looking at this from, the benefit is the same. If you’re looking at it from the sustainability lens, there’s benefit. If you’re just looking at it from the value of servitization and how to maximize that value, there’s benefit. Can you talk about that a little bit?

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah, yeah. There’s another dimension that will come in. In the future, just as an example, in the UK we have now, a new legislation has come out, that by 2025 no gas boilers can be installed in new houses. For a manufacturer of gas boilers that means if they don’t change technology, they have no business. Forget about the moral obligation and the environment constraints of gas boilers, from the legislative point of view they do not have a business within four years’ time. They need to innovate technologies in order to be in business, and customers need heat. They are now looking at technologies, for example heat pumps, which is more advanced technology than that traditional heating boilers. But, these technologies are more expensive, they are more difficult to manage. They require more collaboration, more looking after, than traditional gas boilers.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: They are now into the trap that we described where they have to innovate. The technologies are largely there, but they don’t match the traditional price point of a gas boiler, around, I don’t know, £4,000, £5,000. They are now working, and all of them do this, at saying, “Okay, the legislation doesn’t allow us to go for traditional technology.” The legislation is based on sustainability goals from the government, but even if the company doesn’t subscribe to them they will not have business if they do not meet these goals. They are now looking at finding new business models around Advanced Services to make sure that their higher-value technology, that is more expensive and probably out of reach for a couple of new homeowners, can still be put into market, they have a business, and that technology can be provided, and their expertise can be of use in providing heat.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: This is on our side of the pond. The Americans, you have similar sustainability goals that means 50% reduction by 2030. This is nine years’ time, 50% reduction of CO2 emissions. There will be, if there are yet, significant legislation coming out there, for private citizens, for companies. There will be a lot of new technologies coming on the market to meet these goals. It will happen. If the goals are met or not, but legislation will be there, incentives will be there, and the penalties will be there. Again, we are in the space where new technologies, as I described with the gas boilers, come onto market, possibly at a different price point, requiring new business models for these businesses to have a business, a viable business.

Sarah Nicastro: That’s a good point. What we’re really talking about is disruption, and where that’s coming from. You and I have known each other a while, and we both talk with companies regularly who are embracing the journey to servitization. Many of them have begun that journey because they saw the opportunity to do so. They saw the opportunity to differentiate their business, to provide different value to their customers, to embrace a business model that would really transform their value proposition and their company, and how they operate and everything. Those folks maybe have a bit of a head start, in the sense that if some of those companies are then impacted by this legislation, they kind of have a start toward that transition. However, even those that haven’t yet embraced the journey sheerly based on the opportunity they see, now they’re being nudged to do so because of this legislation. The disruption is coming in the terms of a threat, not an opportunity. Regardless of how that’s coming, it’s just the reality.

Sarah Nicastro: The opportunity to servitize, and the opportunity that exists to change the business model, so that they can develop the products they need to develop in the way the need to develop them to meet those legislative restrictions is really pretty awesome, that that opportunity exists. However you’re kind of coming into the journey, it’s a really exciting journey to be able to embark on. I think you make a really good point about the US, and it’s probably safer for me to say this than you, because I live in the US, but we do lag a bit in a lot of areas on this topic, related to some other countries and regions. You make a very good point, which is the objectives are there and the legislation comes next. It is going to come, so there’s an opportunity here for those organizations here to get ahead of that a bit. Rather than waiting for that to be looming, and to be trying to race through this, there’s an opportunity to look ahead a little bit and to sort of see what’s coming, and to get ahead of that. That’s a really interesting point.

Sarah Nicastro: I think we talked a bit about, for you all and the organizations you work with, what have you seen related to the catalyst? Is there differences in the catalyst for why companies are embarking on this journey? Have you seen that reflected in when companies come to you and they say, “Hey, we want to servitize, and here’s why”? Are those stories different today than they were a few years ago? Or, how do you see that evolving?

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah. There are different kinds of motivations, and they always show up in different ways in these companies. The buckets that I would put out there to group these, quite a number of them come from the digital angle. They’re saying, “Okay, we have now digitized our products, have a good understanding. What are the business models that help us to get more value out of our investment in digital?” We discussed it in the first podcast, Advanced Services is one of the business models, I would even argue the business model, for digitalized products.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: The other bucket is certainly companies that, and often quite successful company, that are saying, “Okay, the competition is creeping up. We believe that we have an edge in terms of product, innovation, and so on, and so on, but we are getting squeezed on price. Let’s look at a new business model where we can make use of our innovation and our expertise, and not have to compete on price with the competition.” Now, we see also, in the case of the boiler for example, or other companies we’re interacting with, where companies literally see the absolute need… the constraints that the traditional business models puts on the way they can interact with customers.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Just as another example, again in London, I’m not sure what year it kicks in, but it’s to become a low-pollution… entire London, city of London, not just the city, the environment, the metropolis of London, a low-pollution environment. Manufacturers producing, or even products being used… We talk about trucks, we talk about cranes, we talk about diggers, we talk about everything, will have to meet this requirement.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: All the alternative technologies are electronic-based, will be more expensive, more difficult to maintain, require different kinds of care, do not fit traditional models. Companies coming to us and saying, “We see how the market is being constrained for us”, for the right reasons, they don’t even blame legislators for it. They see that this is a game change for them, now we have to respond to this. Again, coming not from altruistic motives, but somebody as a leader of a business that needs to make sure that they have a business in 15 years’ time.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Also, sometimes it’s based on legislation, sometimes their customers. Their customers, if it’s a progressive company, their customers want to have certain commitments and certain energy efficiency benefits. Seeing from their supplier, because it becomes part of their own energy balance. If I run a production line, I’m responsible for all the energy emissions that are being created as part of the production line. If some of the machines are not owned by me, I’m still responsible, it still shows up on my balance sheet, so I want to make sure that my suppliers of products helps me to achieve these emission targets that might be there because of law, or because of strategy, or ambitions. There’s a cascading effect now also, where companies hold each other accountable, and enforce each other’s business model, therefore.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). This is probably a really unfair question, because I don’t think there’s any real way to answer it. I know that you’re going to want to give me a concrete answer, but when would you say that the traditional business model is just going to become largely obsolete?

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Yeah, I can give you a precise answer, and the precise answer is the innovative companies will start… We already see it, not will start, they are starting to change the business model. But even a company like Rolls-Royce, aero-engine, will still have a market for selling some of the products from the traditional way. I would hazard a guess that the more innovated companies will, of course, embark on it further, but even the most innovate companies will still have a business related to traditional products. What we see, and the benefit of having this Advanced Service in place is the innovations that come out of designing products differently, and looking after a product differently. They seep over into the design of the products that are for the for-sale market. Any kind efficiency, and kind of improvements, will not just be isolated to one part of the business.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: I don’t think there will be a world where traditional business model is totally phased out, but definitely the Advanced Services business model takes over. As always, there are some companies spearheading. Some regions are spearheading. Scandinavia is very much ahead of most of the rest of the world. Europe is catching up. The US is actually involved, and it will involve further, and further regions of the world. And, so it goes.

Sarah Nicastro: Like I said, that was unfair, and probably poorly stated. Maybe obsolete isn’t the right word, but you just think about… There’s a point at which the lag just becomes insurmountable. The companies that are innovating, and the companies that are not, I think there will reach a point where that gap is very hard to close. I do think that, while the traditional model won’t become entirely obsolete, the demand to embrace this reality is immense. I don’t think that a company can just say, “Oh, we’ll just keep doing it this way and we’ll continue to be successful.” It just seems that that is virtually impossible. Okay, I’m trying to think of-

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Let me just get to it with another… You’re saying it’s virtually impossible. We have examples of companies that… I don’t know what the proper word is, that didn’t pick up a trend. Polaroid, Kodak, Blockbuster. There are examples of companies who missed the trend, and some can catch up, some cannot. It depends on the set-up. Innovative companies miss trends, so it can always happen. Information is out there. So that’s one thing, the other interesting thing that we’ve seen over the years, I started with the example of Rolls-Royce, these are high-value, very high-value, items. I’m not sure the price point of an aero-engine, but let’s assume we’re talking about millions. The price point of products that are becoming attractive for Advanced Service models are now on the level of boilers, which are around a couple of thousand pounds. The change over the last 10 years, in what is possible and what is feasible, is dramatic. Largely related to building up expertise, opening up to the business model, but also the connectivity part.

Sarah Nicastro: You’re saying the two servitized, so the potential… Yeah, it’s almost like… I wrote an article, it was years ago, I don’t even remember the exact angle, but it was talking about the trickle-down effect. It’s the same concept. This originated as a business model that seemed feasible or a good opportunity for a company like Rolls-Royce that produces products that are millions of dollars, but it’s now becoming an opportunity that is equally viable to a company that produces boilers that are a couple of thousand pounds. There’s-

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Just one point to it. If we take the same mindset, as a service, and we wind back 10 years ago and we looked at software as a service coming around the corner. Of course, this started with very innovated companies, but now if you develop a piece of innovative software and you don’t have it as a service proposition, you probably don’t have a business. If you expect that everybody will host themselves any version of your software you don’t have a business. A lot of companies will still offer this. It is getting wound down. Sometimes you cannot host it yourself. Try to host Gmail yourself, it’s a tricky proposition. This is the way I see it with Advanced Services as well, that it starts with the innovative companies, it starts with the bigger companies with a high-value product, it trickles down into smaller-value products.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Just for our conversation, I looked up, just to close the loop, the energy efficiency of software as a service, or cloud services, versus hosting yourself is around 90%. If you would use the same software, hosting yourself as an SME, versus going into the cloud and using some of the cloud space available, you reduce your energy consumption by 90%, CO2 creation by 90%, by going into the cloud. Not the same numbers in our, as a service proposition, because we talk about products, physical products, that need to be shipped, that need to be produced, but we talk also about significant potential in energy and CO2 emission reduction based on the same principles.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. And product waste, in the sense of what we talked about initially, which is these products being intentionally developed and manufactured to last as long as they can. Yeah, it’s really-

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: And be recycled at the end. So lasting, and the recycling loop. Which again, is big chunk of what needs to be done by companies for their own efficiency’s sake, and which has the added benefit for sustainability aspects.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I love this topic. I think it’s so interesting. We have a podcast coming up with Tetra Pak, and it’s a whole sort of extension of this conversation, which is looking at the opportunity for… beyond their own products, but looking at the opportunity to offer sustainability efforts as a service, and to help other organizations improve their own sustainability efforts. It’s really interesting. I consider them a leader, and industry leader, and one of the more innovative companies, but those are the best to learn from in the sense of what we talked about with the trickle down. To listen those stories, and to think, “Hmm, how could that apply to my own business?”, I think is just really cool. There’s a ton of potential here. There’s so many layers to this topic. I really enjoyed talking with you today, and having this conversation. I’m sure you’ll come back. Is there any other comments, or words of wisdom, that you would like to close with? Any other thoughts?

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Everybody who’s interested in this topic should definitely attend, register and attend, our Servitization Live conference. Again, I outlined the speakers, but what you will hear is innovative companies, for example, who are in the heating or cooling business that, again, servitize. They will also map out their servitization journey, their strategy, their objective, their motivations, but also show how they are under significant scrutiny in terms of sustainability and climate change. Cooling and heating is one of the major sources. They use this new business model to make significant headway in standing up to the scrutiny, and innovate in the way that benefits their business, as well as meeting governmental targets. If anybody is interested, and you should be, then please join Servitization Live.

Sarah Nicastro: Awesome. Yes, I definitely urge you to do so. Just to reiterate what we talked about today, the two objectives are inextricably linked. That’s the really exciting thing there, is that this intersection is real, and as organizations embark on their servitization journeys they’re going to improve sustainability, and as companies focus more on sustainability their going to turn to servitization. That’s a really cool thing, and it’ll give us a lot more to talk about. We will be sure to put the link to the event in the show notes, so that you can all go and register. I urge you to do that.

Sarah Nicastro: Andy, that you so much for joining me again today. I appreciate it.

Dr. Andreas Schroeder: Thank you very much for having me. It was a pleasure.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes. You can find more by visiting us at FutureOfFieldService.com. You can also find us on LinkedIn, as well as Twitter @TheFutureOfFS. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more about IFS at IFS.com. As always, thank you for listening.