When Pressure Hits Which Project Manager Are You

A project is melting down, everyone blames the timeline, the budget, or the tool stack, and somehow nothing gets better. We take a different angle: what if the real reason projects succeed or fail is the tiny behavioral choices people make when stress is high? Google’s Project Aristotle points to psychological safety and dependability, and that sends us straight to the on the ground microdecisions that shape team culture.

We walk through research on seven project manager archetypes and what each one sounds like in the real world. The Enforcer makes deadlines real but can create a fear based culture unless they learn trade off menus. The Builder breaks stalemates with speed but leaves chaos behind without lightweight governance and a decision log. We also unpack the Business Developer chasing ROI and opportunities, plus the risks of overpromising and scope drift when the goalposts keep moving.

Then we shift to the “brakes” that protect the work: the Accountant defending margin on fixed bid projects, the Attorney reducing legal and compliance risk without turning every email into a deposition, and the Communicator who brings clarity but can accidentally stall progress by chasing consensus. We close with the Leader archetype, the one that builds resilience and psychological safety, and the hard truth that empathy still needs clear ownership and escalation triggers.

If you want better stakeholder management, clearer requirements, and fewer late stage surprises, start by learning your default question under pressure and building a bench of complementary styles around you. Subscribe for more practical project management and leadership insights, share this with your team, and leave a review: which archetype shows up most at your workplace?

Transcript

Project Aristotle And The Real Drivers

SPEAKER_00 0:00

So Google spent, I mean, literally, millions of dollars and years of research trying to figure out what makes a perfect team.

SPEAKER_01 0:06

Right. The famous Project Aristotle.

SPEAKER_00 0:09

Yeah, exactly. And they analyzed software stacks, they looked at budgets, they even cross-referenced the educational backgrounds on everyone's resumes.

SPEAKER_01 0:17

Hoping to find a formula.

SPEAKER_00 0:18

Right. But the answer they found had absolutely nothing to do with any of those things. It came down almost entirely to human behavior.

SPEAKER_01 0:26

Which is pretty surprising to a lot of people.

SPEAKER_00 0:28

It really is. So welcome to this deep dive. As someone who, you know, loves to figure out how things actually tick, you've probably sat in a project kickoff meeting and thought, okay, this is either going to be a miraculous success or is going to spectacularly crash and burn.

SPEAKER_01 0:45

Aaron Powell Oh, we've all been in that exact meeting.

SPEAKER_00 0:47

Definitely. And when the dust settles, whether it's a win or a total failure, you're left wondering why. Like you had the exact same resources, the same timelines. So why does one project succeed while another just completely falls apart?

SPEAKER_01 0:59

Well, we naturally want to blame the circumstances. You know, we point the finger at the budget or the timeline or the client who kept changing their mind at the 11th hour.

SPEAKER_00 1:08

Oh, yeah, the classic scapegoats.

SPEAKER_01 1:10

Exactly. But if you look closely at the architecture of a team under pressure, the root cause usually boils down to something much more fundamental. Project management isn't actually about the tools or the gaunt charts at all. Right. It is fundamentally a behavioral science discipline, just kind of disguised as an administrative one.

SPEAKER_00 1:30

Aaron Ross Powell Okay, let's unpack this. Our mission today is to uncover those hidden behavioral drivers. And we are pulling our insights from a really fascinating piece of research by Stella Pop titled Seven Project Management Archetypes.

SPEAKER_01 1:42

It's a great piece.

SPEAKER_00 1:44

It really is. And before we even get into the specific personalities like the doers, the dreamers, the protectors, we need to establish the overarching mechanism here. Because I think a lot of people assume that if a team is failing, the obvious solution is to just, you know, buy a better software platform.

SPEAKER_01 1:59

Aaron Powell Yeah. Organizations fall for that trap constantly. I mean, they spend millions on new platforms thinking it will somehow just magically fix their culture.

SPEAKER_00 2:07

Aaron Powell Just install an update for better teamwork.

SPEAKER_01 2:10

Right. But team culture isn't a poster on the wall or a slick software dashboard. According to the Stellipop Research, culture is built through actual on-the-ground behaviors. Specifically, it's the sum of repeated micro decisions.

Microdecisions And Stress Factory Settings

SPEAKER_00 2:25

Break that down for us. Like what does a micro decision actually look like in the wild?

SPEAKER_01 2:29

Aaron Powell Well, it's the small split-second choices a project manager makes every single day. Think about how they run a morning check-in. Do they ask the team, what did you do yesterday? Or do they ask, What is blocking you today?

SPEAKER_00 2:42

Oh, that's a subtle but huge difference.

SPEAKER_01 2:44

Exactly. Or think about how they handle a client who inevitably asks for, you know, just one more small feature. Do they flag that scope creep immediately?

SPEAKER_00 2:54

Or do they just silently absorb the risk and push the team to work through the weekend?

SPEAKER_01 2:58

Right. Do they make you stay late to get it done?

SPEAKER_00 3:00

Aaron Powell So it's those tiny moments of friction that actually set the tone for the entire project.

SPEAKER_01 3:05

Aaron Powell Yeah. And the defining variable in all of this is stress. When cognitive load is high, people stop operating from their training and they default to their most natural instinctual style.

SPEAKER_00 3:16

Aaron Ross Powell They just revert to factory settings.

SPEAKER_01 3:18

Aaron Powell That's a perfect way to put it. When a project manager defaults to their natural style, they're essentially setting the invisible rules of engagement for the whole team. They dictate what is acceptable and what isn't without ever actually writing it down in a manual.

SPEAKER_00 3:31

Which brings us back to that Google data, right? Their Project Aristotle. They found that the top drivers of effectiveness were psychological safety and dependability.

SPEAKER_01 3:40

Neither of which comes from a software tool.

SPEAKER_00 3:42

Right.

SPEAKER_01 3:43

They are direct outputs of human behavior. If a project manager behaves in a way that makes it safe to admit a mistake early on, well, then you have psychological safety.

SPEAKER_00 3:52

Makes total sense.

SPEAKER_01 3:53

And the PMI Pulse of the Profession Report backs this up too. They consistently find that the top causes of project failure are poor communication and unclear requirements.

SPEAKER_00 4:03

You know, the Stellapop article has this one line that I found incredibly clarifying. It says, missed deadlines are almost always the result of missed decisions first.

SPEAKER_01 4:11

Aaron Powell That is such a crucial insight.

SPEAKER_00 4:13

Yeah. A slip deadline isn't a sudden out-of-the-blue event. It's a lagging indicator of a conversation that someone was simply too afraid or too disorganized to have three weeks ago.

SPEAKER_01 4:27

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 4:28

It's like thinking that buying a $10,000 high-end professional oven is automatically going to make you a master chef when the real issue is that you just keep forgetting to set the timer.

SPEAKER_01 4:37

The oven can't fix your underlying behavior.

SPEAKER_00 4:40

Right. But I

Tools Amplify Behavior

SPEAKER_00 4:41

do have to push back just a little bit here. Go for it. Doesn't a good software platform at least force a team to communicate better? Like if you have to click a button to move a task forward, doesn't that create some baseline of organization?

SPEAKER_01 4:53

Aaron Powell What's fascinating here is that tools don't actually change behavior, they simply amplify it. Yeah. If you have a project manager who naturally defaults to a chaotic or toxic behavior under stress, they will just use a highly sophisticated tool to micromanage people faster or to confuse them with more complex charts.

SPEAKER_00 5:12

Aaron Powell That sounds like a nightmare.

SPEAKER_01 5:13

It is. If your default instinct is to avoid conflict, a new software tool is just going to give you a very organized, highly visible way to continue avoiding conflict.

SPEAKER_00 5:24

So the tool just gives you a megaphone for your existing personality.

SPEAKER_01 5:27

That's a great way to look at it.

Doers: Enforcer And Builder Patterns

SPEAKER_01 5:29

So in this deep dive, we are going to explore the seven distinct archetypes that dictate how work gets done.

SPEAKER_00 5:35

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 5:36

We'll look at their unique superpowers, their highly predictable shadow sides, which is what happens when those superpowers go a little rogue under pressure, and crucially, how to coach each of these personalities.

SPEAKER_00 5:48

Let's start with a group whose micro decisions are entirely geared toward aggressively pushing the work forward, the doers and the dreamers. Right. Who is the first archetype we encounter here?

SPEAKER_01 5:59

First is the enforcer. This is a very distinct personality type. Their superpower is cadence, accountability, and fast escalation.

SPEAKER_00 6:07

They sound intense.

SPEAKER_01 6:09

Very. If you have a deadline, the enforcer makes that deadline feel very, very real to everyone involved. When the pressure turns up, their instinctive question is always who owns this and when is it done?

SPEAKER_00 6:21

Aaron Powell Wait, are they just glorified bullies? Because if someone is just walking around barking, when is this done at everyone? That sounds like a miserable environment to work in.

SPEAKER_01 6:31

Well, that is the shadow side of the enforcer. When they are uncoached and under extreme stress, the team culture shifts strictly to compliance.

SPEAKER_00 6:39

Just doing what you're told so you don't get yelled at.

SPEAKER_01 6:41

Exactly. People stop focusing on doing great innovative work and start focusing entirely on avoiding the enforcer's wrath. Worse, people will actively hide problems.

SPEAKER_00 6:52

Like what kind of problems?

SPEAKER_01 6:53

Imagine a developer who hits a massive roadblock in the code. If raising a red flag feels like they're going to get yelled at, they just sweep it under the rug. They ship broken code just to meet the deadline, which is catastrophic later on.

SPEAKER_00 7:05

Right. Better to just pretend everything is fine until it explodes. But the article says they are the best fit for certain situations, like slipping timelines or chronic scope creeping.

SPEAKER_01 7:16

They are.

SPEAKER_00 7:17

You need that aggressive momentum sometimes. So how do you fix the bully aspect without leasing the drive?

SPEAKER_01 7:24

Aaron Powell, you don't fire an enforcer, you coach them. And the specific coaching move here is to replace their ultimatums with agreements.

SPEAKER_00 7:32

Okay, how does that work?

SPEAKER_01 7:33

You teach them to use what the article calls trade-off menus. Instead of them screaming at a stakeholder that new feature is out of scope, they are coached to say, we can absolutely add this new feature if we drop that other feature to maintain the timeline. Which do you prefer?

SPEAKER_00 7:50

Aaron Powell Oh, that makes total sense. You're giving control back to the stakeholder.

SPEAKER_01 7:53

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 7:54

It shifts the dynamic from a threat to a collaborative business decision. So if the enforcer is bullying the timeline into submission, what happens when the project is just completely stuck in the mud? Like you can't enforce a deadline on something that hasn't even been started.

SPEAKER_01 8:07

Aaron Powell That's where you bring in the builder.

SPEAKER_00 8:09

The book order.

SPEAKER_01 8:10

Yeah, their superpower is pragmatism, momentum, and rapid problem solving. While others are stuck debating the theory, the builder just ships it. Their instinctive question is can we just try something and see what breaks?

SPEAKER_00 8:23

They sound exactly like the person who rips open the IKEA box, throws the instruction manual straight into the trash, and just starts hammering pieces together to see what looks like a table.

SPEAKER_01 8:34

That is incredibly accurate. The builder is fantastic when a project is completely stalled, or in very early stage work where you just need speed and a proof of concept.

SPEAKER_00 8:44

But I'm guessing there's a catch.

SPEAKER_01 8:46

Oh, big time. Sticking with your IKEA analogy, there is a massive shadow side to that approach. In project management, we call it skipped alignment and undocumented decisions.

SPEAKER_00 8:56

Because there's no manual.

SPEAKER_01 8:57

Right. The builder goes into hero mode, they solve all the problems themselves incredibly quickly, but they leave zero trail behind them.

SPEAKER_00 9:03

So if the builder leaves the company six months later, and suddenly nobody knows how the database is structured or why certain critical decisions were made.

SPEAKER_01 9:11

And then the entire team has to spend a month reverse engineering the work. To coach a builder, you implement lightweight governance. You don't drown them in forms because builders hate feeling slowed down by permission. Instead, you ask for just 20 minutes a week to maintain a simple decision log.

SPEAKER_00 9:29

Got it. You let them move as fast as they want as long as they leave breadcrumbs for the rest of the team to follow.

SPEAKER_01 9:35

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 9:35

Now what if the project isn't stuck, but the goalposts just keep moving?

SPEAKER_01 9:40

That

Business Developer And Goalpost Drift

SPEAKER_01 9:41

points to our third archetype, the business developer. Their superpower is all about ROI. They are hyper-focused on outcomes and spotting new opportunities.

SPEAKER_00 9:51

Okay. What's their instinctive question?

SPEAKER_01 9:53

Under pressure, they ask, are we solving the right problem for the right outcome? They are excellent for ambiguous scopes or projects focused on aggressive growth.

SPEAKER_00 10:02

But I'm guessing the constant search for the next big opportunity can be pretty disruptive.

SPEAKER_01 10:07

Highly disruptive. Because they are always looking for growth, they are prone to overpromising and gold plating.

SPEAKER_00 10:13

And gold plating.

SPEAKER_01 10:13

Yeah, adding unnecessary features just to wow a client. They constantly move the goalpost because the next opportunity always looks so much more exciting than finishing the current boring tasks.

SPEAKER_00 10:24

Aaron Powell They are essentially the project management equivalent of a dog spotting a squirrel.

SPEAKER_01 10:29

Yes. And the coaching move here is actually a staffing move. You have to pair them with an opposing force.

SPEAKER_00 10:36

It's funny because pairing them with someone who acts as an opposing force naturally introduces a whole new class of project manager.

SPEAKER_01 10:44

Right.

SPEAKER_00 10:44

Like we've been talking entirely about the gas pedal pushing the work forward, but eventually someone has to act as the brakes.

Protectors: Budget Risk And Clarity

SPEAKER_01 10:51

Which leads us perfectly to the protectors and aligners. These are the archetypes who pump the brakes to protect the project, which comes with its own unique set of risks.

SPEAKER_00 10:59

Aaron Powell Let's start with a natural counterweight to the business developer.

SPEAKER_01 11:02

Trevor Burrus Right. That would be the accountant.

SPEAKER_00 11:04

Let's hear about the accountant.

SPEAKER_01 11:06

Their superpower is forecasting, burn trekking, meaning they know exactly how fast the team is burning through the budget and airtight change control.

SPEAKER_00 11:14

Aaron Powell Which is just a fancy way of saying what?

SPEAKER_01 11:16

Aaron Powell It's just a formal way of saying they don't let anyone add work to the project without paying for it. When the pressure hits, their instinctive question is what does this cost? And what is the risk if we're wrong?

SPEAKER_00 11:27

The article mentions they are vital for fixed bid contracts. Just to make sure we're on the same page, that's a project where the client pays a set price regardless of how many hours it takes you.

SPEAKER_01 11:37

That's right.

SPEAKER_00 11:38

So if you go over the allotted hours, the company just loses money.

SPEAKER_01 11:41

That's it. The accountant protects that margin. But the shadow side is rigidity. Morale takes a massive dive when the team feels like they are just a cost center being squeezed for every penny.

SPEAKER_00 11:53

Oh, I've been on those teams.

SPEAKER_01 11:54

It's tough. The team stops innovating because every new idea is immediately shut down with we don't have the budget for that.

SPEAKER_00 12:01

So how do you coach the accountant to keep the budget safe without making everyone feel like a line item on a spreadsheet?

SPEAKER_01 12:08

You coach them to tie every single constraint back to customer value. Instead of saying, we are over budget, stop spending, they should say, we need to protect this specific time buffer because if we delay the launch, it costs the client a million dollars.

SPEAKER_00 12:24

Oh wow, that reframes it beautifully. You change the narrative from internal penny pinching to external value protection. It's so much more motivating.

SPEAKER_01 12:33

It completely changes the energy.

SPEAKER_00 12:34

Okay, so the accountant protects the wallet. Who protects the team from liability?

SPEAKER_01 12:38

Aaron Powell That would be the attorney. Their superpower is precision, audit trail discipline, and extreme risk management.

SPEAKER_00 12:45

Aaron Powell What's their default question?

SPEAKER_01 12:47

They always ask: is this documented and are we protected if it goes sideways? The attorney is your best friend on procurement-heavy engagements.

SPEAKER_00 12:54

Like situations with lots of vendors.

SPEAKER_01 12:56

Yeah, situations where you are dealing with a maze of third-party vendors, strict compliance laws, and intense security protocols, they ensure you don't end up in a lawsuit.

SPEAKER_00 13:06

But if they are constantly focused on legal protection, the shadow side must be absolute bureaucracy.

SPEAKER_01 13:12

Crippling bureaucracy. They slow everything down to ensure it's documented. And worse, they adopt an adversarial posture. Clients start to feel like they are being aggressively managed rather than acting as partners.

SPEAKER_00 13:26

Every conversation starts to feel like a legal deposition. Well, per my last email.

SPEAKER_01 13:31

Ugh. The dreaded per my last email. To coach the attorney, you have to shift their vocabulary to shared protection language.

SPEAKER_00 13:40

Give me an example of that.

SPEAKER_01 13:41

Sure. Instead of them saying that feature wasn't in the contract, you teach them to say, let's do a change order for this new feature so that both of our teams are fully protected.

SPEAKER_00 13:50

Nice. It aligns their natural need for risk management with a sense of mutual partnership.

SPEAKER_01 13:55

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 13:56

We've covered the budget and the liability. What about the people who just want everyone to get along and be on the same page?

SPEAKER_01 14:02

That is the communicator. Their superpower is narrative, transparency, and expectation setting. They make sure every single stakeholder is living in the exact same story.

SPEAKER_00 14:12

And their question.

SPEAKER_01 14:12

Their question is: does everyone understand what is happening and why?

SPEAKER_00 14:16

Now, here's where it gets really interesting. Looking at the shadow side in the article, it says the danger is too many updates and slow decisions.

SPEAKER_01 14:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 14:25

But I have to push back as a learner here. Is it actually possible to have too much communication? Because personally, I love getting updates. I want to know everything that's going on.

SPEAKER_01 14:35

I get that. But if we connect this to the bigger picture, we have to recognize a difference between clarity and consensus. Yes, people love to be informed, but the shadow side of the communicator is that they confuse sharing information with making a decision. Oh, I see. Because they want everyone to be happy and informed, they seek consensus on everything. This leads to those endless soul-crushing reply-all email threads that completely paralyze a team's momentum.

SPEAKER_00 15:00

Oh, that makes so much sense. Consensus feels incredibly safe to the communicator, but it is the ultimate enemy of speed. You end up waiting two weeks for 14 people to agree on a button color.

SPEAKER_01 15:10

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 15:11

So how do you coach a communicator out of that habit?

SPEAKER_01 15:14

You don't stop them from communicating, you just put boundaries on it. You time box their consensus windows.

SPEAKER_00 15:19

Time boxing.

SPEAKER_01 15:20

Right. You coach them to say, here is the proposed decision. If I don't hear any major objections by 3.00 p.m. on Thursday, we are moving forward. It forces a decision without waiting for unanimous passive approval.

SPEAKER_00 15:35

So we've seen what happens when people push for speed, and we've seen what happens when people pump the brakes for risk. But what happens when a project isn't just about the work, but is actually about the people themselves?

The Leader Archetype And Accountability

SPEAKER_01 15:47

That leads us to our final archetype, the leader.

SPEAKER_00 15:50

The leader.

SPEAKER_01 15:51

Their superpower is coaching, conflict navigation, and pure resilience. Under pressure, they don't ask about the budget or the timeline. They ask, is the team okay and do they know what good looks like?

SPEAKER_00 16:02

That's refreshing.

SPEAKER_01 16:03

They are essential for new teams, post-reorganization environments, or situations where burnout risk is critically high.

SPEAKER_00 16:10

They sound like the ultimate safety net, but I'm assuming the shadow side is that everyone is so comfortable and emotionally supported that nothing actually gets done.

SPEAKER_01 16:17

Blurry accountability is the defining shadow side here. Because the leader spends so much time making sure everyone feels heard, they often fail to assign strict responsibility.

SPEAKER_00 16:28

Aaron Powell Give me a scenario.

SPEAKER_01 16:29

So imagine a major deadline is missed. The team has a meeting, everyone feels great about the team dynamic and how supportive everyone is, but no one is actually clearly responsible for the failure.

SPEAKER_00 16:40

Aaron Powell We failed, but we failed as a family.

SPEAKER_01 16:43

Exactly. Which does not deliver a successful project.

SPEAKER_00 16:46

Right.

SPEAKER_01 16:46

The coaching move for the leader is to force them to set explicit decision rates early on. They need to document exactly who decides what, and they need to define the escalation triggers long before they are actually needed.

Staffing The Right Bench

SPEAKER_00 16:59

So bringing this all together, we've gone through all seven: the enforcer, builder, business developer, accountant, attorney, communicator, and leader.

SPEAKER_01 17:08

That's the bench.

SPEAKER_00 17:09

So what does this all mean? If I'm a listener right now and I'm prepping to lead a massive, highly disorganized, potentially burnt-out new team tomorrow morning, which one of these archetypes should I consciously try to channel?

SPEAKER_01 17:21

In a disorganized, burnt out scenario, you definitely want to start by channeling the leader. You need to build that resilience and psychological safety first. Okay. However, as we just discussed, you have to be hyper-vigilant about that shadow side. Don't let empathy become an excuse for a lack of accountability.

SPEAKER_00 17:41

The source material makes a really strong point here about building the bench. It states that there is no single perfect project manager. You can't just hire an entire team of leaders and expect to succeed across the board.

SPEAKER_01 17:54

Strong companies hire for range. They look at their portfolio of projects and they staff based on the specific pressure that a particular project is going to create.

SPEAKER_00 18:02

Like matching the tool to the job.

SPEAKER_01 18:04

Exactly. If you have a highly regulated fixed bid contract, you put an accountant in charge. If you have a stalled internal initiative, you unleash a builder.

SPEAKER_00 18:13

And you pair them up to cover their blind spots. The article also mentions that sometimes, if a team is truly flailing and needs structure fast, bringing in an outsourced PM can instantly inject that momentum.

SPEAKER_01 18:25

Because an outsider doesn't have the baggage of the internal team dynamics. They can step in, identify the missing archetypes, and apply the right pressure immediately without worrying about office politics.

SPEAKER_00 18:37

That's a huge advantage.

SPEAKER_01 18:38

It is. The biggest takeaway here is that when you understand these personalities, you stop treating project setbacks as personal character flaws.

SPEAKER_00 18:48

That completely flips the script. You aren't managing a personality flaw, you're just fixing a predictable operational glitch.

SPEAKER_01 18:54

Yes, exactly.

SPEAKER_00 18:56

So to wrap this framework up for you listening, the core value here is self-discovery. Look at those seven instinctive questions we covered. Figure out which one you naturally shout in your head when the server crashes or a client yells.

SPEAKER_01 19:09

That is your default archetype.

SPEAKER_00 19:10

Once you know it, you can consciously harness your superpower and actively coach yourself away from your inevitable shadow side.

SPEAKER_01 19:17

It gives you a rapid framework for diagnosing team dysfunction. You'll never have to feel overwhelmed by office dynamics again because you'll be able to see the underlying code.

SPEAKER_00 19:26

It's like seeing the matrix.

SPEAKER_01 19:27

You'll recognize that your coworker isn't trying to ruin the project. They are just an uncoached attorney archetype operating under extreme stress.

SPEAKER_00 19:35

It demystifies the whole process.

When Organizations Default Under Stress

SPEAKER_00 19:38

But before we go, there is one final provocative thought we want to leave you with to chew on.

SPEAKER_01 19:43

Yeah, we've talked extensively about how individual project managers default to these archetypes under stress. But this raises an important question. What happens when an entire corporate organization is put under massive macroeconomic stress?

SPEAKER_00 19:57

Aaron Powell Does a whole company adopt an overarching corporate archetype?

SPEAKER_01 20:01

Right.

SPEAKER_00 20:01

Like if a recession hits, does the entire C-suite suddenly shift into a corporate-wide attorney mode where everything is entirely focused on risk mitigation and extreme documentation?

SPEAKER_01 20:12

Aaron Powell And if that happens, how does that macroculture clash with the individuals on the ground who are just trying to be builders and ship products?

SPEAKER_00 20:19

It's a fascinating dynamic to consider. When the microculture of the project manager collides with the macroculture of a stressed organization, the friction can be immense.

SPEAKER_01 20:28

It's definitely something to look out for.

SPEAKER_00 20:30

It really makes you look at your own company in a totally different light. The next time you're sitting in a kickoff meeting, wondering if the project is going to be a miracle or a crash, don't look at the software tools. Look at the people.

SPEAKER_01 20:43

And look at the microdecisions.

SPEAKER_00 20:45

Because that is where the real work happens.