The concept of “innovation battalions” that Raska proposes represents a fundamental reimagining of military organization and could have profound implications for how future warfare is conducted. Let me analyze this in depth:

Structural Revolution in Military Units

Traditional military units are built around standardized equipment, procedures, and hierarchical command structures optimized for predictable scenarios. Innovation battalions would flip this model by creating hybrid military-civilian teams where software developers work alongside infantry soldiers, and engineers collaborate directly with combat operators in the field.

This structural change could create several battlefield advantages:

Real-time adaptation: Unlike conventional units that rely on equipment developed years in advance, these battalions could modify tactics, reprogram systems, and even physically alter equipment during active operations. In Ukraine, we’ve seen how units like Magyar’s Birds constantly iterate their drone payloads and software between missions.

Compressed innovation cycles: Traditional military procurement can take decades from concept to deployment. Innovation battalions could potentially field new capabilities in weeks or months, similar to how Ukrainian units went from basic commercial drones to sophisticated fiber-optic FPV systems.

Impact on Command and Control

This approach fundamentally challenges traditional military command structures. Innovation battalions would need:

Decentralized authority: Ground-level operators would need permission to experiment with tactics and modify equipment without lengthy approval chains. This mirrors how Ukrainian drone units operate with significant autonomy.

Tolerance for failure: Military culture traditionally punishes failure severely, but innovation requires accepting that many experiments will fail. Units would need “safe-to-fail” environments where unsuccessful innovations don’t end careers.

Bottom-up intelligence: Rather than top-down planning, these units would generate tactical intelligence and solutions from the operational edge, potentially making strategic decisions more responsive to battlefield realities.

Technological Force Multiplication

The cross-functional nature could create multiplicative effects:

Cognitive warfare capabilities: Having psychologists and behavioral scientists embedded in military units could enable real-time psychological operations and counter-intelligence work. They could analyze enemy decision patterns and design deception operations during active engagements.

AI-human teaming: Software developers working directly with combat operators could create AI systems that actually understand battlefield needs rather than theoretical requirements, potentially leading to more effective human-machine collaboration.

Sensor fusion: Engineers working alongside intelligence specialists could rapidly combine data from multiple drone feeds, cyber operations, and traditional reconnaissance into actionable intelligence.

Strategic Implications for Small States

For a country like Singapore, this model offers unique advantages:

Asymmetric capabilities: Small nations cannot match large powers in raw firepower or numbers, but they could potentially achieve technological superiority through superior innovation speed. A single highly innovative battalion might neutralize much larger conventional forces.

Economic-military integration: Rotating personnel between civilian tech companies and military units could accelerate both sectors, creating a virtuous cycle of innovation that strengthens both national defense and economic competitiveness.

Deterrence through unpredictability: Adversaries struggle to plan against forces whose capabilities are constantly evolving. The uncertainty created by rapidly innovating units could serve as a strategic deterrent.

Potential Battlefield Scenarios

Consider how such units might perform in actual combat:

Swarm coordination: Instead of pre-programmed drone swarms, operators and developers could coordinate hundreds of autonomous systems in real-time, adapting to enemy countermeasures as they emerge.

Adaptive camouflage: Engineers could rapidly develop new signature management techniques based on immediate enemy sensor capabilities, making traditional reconnaissance and targeting much more difficult.

Information warfare: Embedded social scientists and data analysts could conduct real-time propaganda operations, potentially causing enemy units to receive contradictory orders or lose situational awareness.

Critical Vulnerabilities and Limitations

However, this approach also creates significant risks:

Security concerns: Having civilian developers with access to sensitive military systems creates new vectors for espionage or sabotage. The integration of personnel could compromise operational security.

Coordination complexity: Highly innovative, autonomous units might become difficult to coordinate at the strategic level. Their rapid adaptation could make them incompatible with conventional forces or overall battle plans.

Technological dependence: These units would be extremely vulnerable to cyber attacks, electronic warfare, or simple equipment failure. Their sophistication could become a liability in degraded communication environments.

Training and retention: Creating personnel who are both competent soldiers and skilled technologists is extremely difficult. The military might struggle to recruit and retain such individuals, especially competing against lucrative civilian tech careers.

Long-term Warfare Evolution

If successful, this model could reshape warfare itself:

Speed of conflict: Wars might be decided by which side can innovate faster rather than which has better initial equipment or larger forces. This could make conflicts shorter but more unpredictable.

Continuous arms races: The constant innovation could create perpetual technological competition even during peacetime, as adversaries try to stay ahead of rapidly evolving capabilities.

Blurred civilian-military boundaries: As civilian technologists become integral to military operations, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants could become more complex, with implications for international law and targeting.

The Ukrainian experience suggests this approach can work, but scaling it to a formal military structure while maintaining operational security and strategic coherence remains an unprecedented challenge. For Singapore, success would likely depend on carefully managing the balance between innovation and military discipline, while leveraging the nation’s technological sophistication and compact geography to maximum advantage.

The ultimate test would be whether such units could maintain their innovative edge under the stress and chaos of actual combat, where the consequences of failed experiments are measured in lives rather than just failed prototypes.

Singapore Military Innovation: Strategic Scenarios Analysis

Core Challenge: Scaling Ukrainian Innovation Model to Formal Military Structure

The Ukrainian drone units operate in a wartime environment with relaxed peacetime constraints, high tolerance for risk, and existential motivation. Singapore must adapt these lessons to a peacetime military with strict operational security, formal command structures, and different strategic objectives.

---

Scenario 1: “The Sandbox Approach” – Controlled Innovation Within Traditional Structure

Implementation Model

• Create dedicated “Innovation Companies” within existing SAF battalions
• 50-person hybrid units: 30 traditional soldiers + 20 civilian-military rotational personnel
• Operate under special rules of engagement for experimentation
• Report directly to battalion commanders but with innovation autonomy

Specific Singapore Application

Location: Utilize Pulau Tekong’s training areas as innovation testbeds Personnel: Draw from NS-liable tech workers doing their service obligation Integration: Innovation companies embedded within 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Singapore Infantry Divisions

Operational Example – Maritime Scenario

Setting: Potential blockade of Singapore Strait by hostile forces using sea mines and submarine drones

Traditional Response: Deploy Republic of Singapore Navy mine countermeasure vessels, conduct systematic sweeping operations

Innovation Battalion Response:

• Civilian game developers rapidly program autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) swarms using commercial gaming engines
• Military engineers modify commercial fishing sonar into distributed detection networks
• Data scientists create real-time threat assessment AI using crowd-sourced maritime traffic data
• Within 72 hours: Deploy 200+ small AUVs that can identify, classify, and neutralize threats faster than traditional methods

Outcome: Strait cleared in days rather than weeks, with minimal risk to personnel

Challenges in This Scenario

• Security Risk: Civilian developers have access to classified naval capabilities
• Command Friction: Innovation company moves faster than traditional naval units can coordinate
• Resource Allocation: Success creates pressure to expand program, potentially undermining existing military effectiveness

---

Scenario 2: “The Hybrid Reserve Model” – Civilian-Military Integration During Crisis

Implementation Model

• Create “Digital Defense Volunteers” program similar to Israel’s Unit 8200 reserves
• 500-person pool of tech professionals with military training
• Activated during heightened alert states
• Embedded across all SAF services during crisis periods

Specific Singapore Application

Recruitment: Target employees from Grab, Sea Group, Shopee, local fintech companies Training: Monthly weekend military exercises + annual 2-week intensive Activation: Deployed within 48 hours of DEFCON escalation

Operational Example – Cyber-Physical Attack Scenario

Setting: Sophisticated adversary launches coordinated cyber attacks on Singapore’s critical infrastructure while positioning military forces nearby

Day 1: Power grid fluctuations, airport systems disrupted, port operations slowed Day 2: Digital Defense Volunteers activated, embedded in:

• RSAF squadrons (software engineers debug flight control systems)
• RSN vessels (cybersecurity experts harden shipboard networks)
• Army air defense units (AI specialists enhance radar pattern recognition)

Innovation Response:

• Fintech fraud detection algorithms rapidly adapted for cyber intrusion identification
• Ride-sharing optimization algorithms repurposed for military logistics coordination
• E-commerce recommendation systems modified for threat prediction
• Gaming engine physics used to simulate optimal drone interception trajectories

Day 5: Singapore not only repels the attack but demonstrates capabilities that deter further escalation

Challenges in This Scenario

• Dual Loyalty: Civilians maintaining private sector jobs while serving military roles
• Scalability: Limited pool of qualified personnel in small nation
• Legal Framework: Unclear status of civilian-military hybrids under international law

---

Scenario 3: “The Startup Battalion Model” – Formal Military Units Operating Like Tech Companies

Implementation Model

• Transform entire existing battalions into innovation-focused units
• Adopt Silicon Valley operational practices within military framework
• Create competition between battalions using performance metrics
• Implement venture capital-style funding for successful innovations

Specific Singapore Application

Unit Selection: Convert 1st Battalion, Singapore Guards into pilot program Structure:

• 30% traditional combat soldiers
• 40% engineer-soldiers (dual-trained military personnel with technical degrees)
• 30% rotating civilian contractors on 2-year assignments

Operational Example – Urban Warfare Scenario

Setting: Hostile forces establish positions in Singapore’s urban environment, using civilian infrastructure as cover

Traditional Approach: Door-to-door clearing operations with significant collateral damage risk

Startup Battalion Approach: Week 1 – Rapid Prototyping Phase:

• Soldiers and engineers develop micro-drones capable of mapping building interiors
• Software developers create augmented reality systems for real-time threat identification
• Behavioral psychologists design non-lethal crowd control algorithms

Week 2 – Beta Testing:

• Deploy prototype systems in controlled urban training environments
• Iterate based on performance data
• Scale successful innovations across multiple teams

Week 3 – Deployment:

• 1000+ micro-drones create comprehensive 3D maps of hostile positions
• AR-equipped soldiers operate with perfect situational awareness
• AI systems predict civilian movement patterns to minimize casualties
• Psychological operations precisely target hostile forces while protecting civilians

Result: Urban areas secured with 90% fewer casualties and minimal infrastructure damage

Challenges in This Scenario

• Military Culture Clash: Traditional military hierarchy conflicts with startup flat structure
• Mission Critical Reliability: Prototype systems may fail during actual combat
• Strategic Coordination: Individual battalion innovation may not align with overall military strategy

---

Scenario 4: “The Distributed Network Model” – Singapore as Military Innovation Hub

Implementation Model

• Transform entire Singapore military into distributed innovation network
• Every SAF unit becomes node in larger innovation ecosystem
• Create real-time information sharing across all services
• Establish Singapore as regional military technology development center

Specific Singapore Application

Geographic Advantage: Use Singapore’s compact size for rapid technology diffusion Regional Integration: Partner with ASEAN militaries as innovation testbeds Private Sector: Integrate with Singapore’s existing tech ecosystem

Operational Example – Regional Security Crisis

Setting: Regional conflict threatens shipping lanes, refugee flows, and economic stability across Southeast Asia

Singapore’s Response: Distributed Intelligence: Every SAF unit contributes data to regional threat assessment AI Rapid Deployment: Innovations developed by any unit instantly available to all others Coalition Enhancement: Singapore technology upgrades allied forces in real-time

Specific Innovations:

• Navy develops autonomous convoy protection drones, immediately shared with Malaysian and Indonesian forces
• Army creates refugee processing AI systems, deployed to support humanitarian operations
• Air Force develops weather modification techniques, used to enhance regional agricultural security

Strategic Outcome: Singapore becomes indispensable regional security partner, ensuring long-term stability through technological leadership

Challenges in This Scenario

• Technology Transfer Risks: Sharing innovations with allies risks technology proliferation to adversaries
• Resource Overstretch: Supporting regional innovation network may exceed Singapore’s capacity
• Dependency Creation: Allied forces become dependent on Singapore technology, creating new vulnerabilities

---

Critical Success Factors Across All Scenarios

1. Operational Security Balance

Challenge: Innovation requires openness; military operations require secrecy Solution: Implement “security by design” – embed cybersecurity experts in innovation teams from day one

2. Cultural Integration

Challenge: Military discipline vs. civilian creativity Solution: Create hybrid career paths that reward both military service and technical innovation

3. Strategic Coherence

Challenge: Rapid innovation may outpace strategic planning Solution: Establish “Innovation Command” to ensure tactical innovations align with national defense strategy

4. Sustainability

Challenge: Maintaining innovation pace over years, not just during crisis Solution: Create competitive funding mechanisms and career advancement tied to innovation metrics

---

Probability Assessment and Risk Analysis

Most Likely Success: Scenario 1 (Sandbox Approach)

• Probability: 70%
• Risk Level: Medium
• Rationale: Builds on existing structures while allowing controlled experimentation

Highest Impact: Scenario 4 (Distributed Network)

• Probability: 30%
• Risk Level: High
• Rationale: Could transform Singapore into regional military superpower but requires unprecedented coordination

Safest Option: Scenario 2 (Hybrid Reserve)

• Probability: 60%
• Risk Level: Low
• Rationale: Leverages existing National Service framework with minimal structural changes

Most Disruptive: Scenario 3 (Startup Battalion)

• Probability: 40%
• Risk Level: Very High
• Rationale: Could create breakthrough capabilities but risks undermining military effectiveness during transition

---

Recommendation: Phased Implementation Strategy

Phase 1 (Years 1-2): Implement Scenario 2 (Hybrid Reserve) to test civilian-military integration Phase 2 (Years 3-5): Scale successful elements from Phase 1 into Scenario 1 (Sandbox Approach) Phase 3 (Years 6-10): Gradually transition toward Scenario 4 (Distributed Network) based on lessons learned

This phased approach allows Singapore to capture the benefits of military innovation while managing the inherent risks of organizational transformation in a security-critical domain.

The Digital Guards: A Singapore Defense Innovation Story

Chapter 1: The Algorithm Soldier (2025 – Phase 1)

The notification pinged on Chen Wei Ming’s phone at 3:47 AM on a Tuesday. Twenty-four hours ago, he had been debugging payment fraud algorithms for GrabPay. Now, his screen displayed a single message: “Digital Defense Volunteers – Activation Level 2. Report to Paya Lebar Air Base, Hangar 7, within 6 hours.”

Wei Ming had signed up for the program eighteen months earlier, partly for the NSman points, mostly out of curiosity. The monthly weekend exercises had been interesting enough – learning to integrate his machine learning expertise with military communications systems. But this was the first real activation.

By dawn, 127 tech professionals from across Singapore had assembled in the hangar. Software engineers from Sea Group, data scientists from DBS, cybersecurity experts from government agencies, and game developers from Garena. All civilian clothes, all carrying military identification cards that had never been used in earnest.

Lieutenant Colonel Sarah Lim briefed them with characteristic SAF efficiency. “Hostile actors have penetrated our port management systems. Traditional cybersecurity protocols are being bypassed faster than we can implement them. We need you to think like attackers, not defenders.”

Wei Ming found himself assigned to RSN Formidable-class frigate RSS Stalwart, working alongside the ship’s Electronic Warfare Officer, Captain Marcus Tan. Within hours, he was adapting Grab’s ride-matching algorithms to predict and intercept cyber intrusion patterns across the ship’s network.

“This is insane,” Captain Tan muttered, watching Wei Ming’s code block the seventeenth intrusion attempt in two hours. “We’ve been thinking about cybersecurity like building walls. You’re treating it like managing traffic flow.”

Three days later, Singapore’s ports were secure, and Wei Ming was back at his day job. But something fundamental had shifted. The lines between civilian innovation and military necessity had blurred in ways no traditional training could have achieved.

---

Chapter 2: The Innovation Company (2028 – Phase 2)

Captain Jennifer Yeo had commanded traditional infantry companies for six years, but nothing had prepared her for the 30-person hybrid unit now under her command at Pulau Tekong. Half were regular SAF soldiers. The other half rotated every two years from Singapore’s tech sector, carrying both military rank and civilian expertise.

“Today we’re solving the drone swarm problem,” she announced to her Innovation Company during morning briefing. Intelligence suggested that potential adversaries could deploy thousands of small attack drones simultaneously – far more than traditional air defense could handle.

Her unit had been given unprecedented freedom to experiment. No lengthy procurement processes. No months of approval chains. Just a mandate: develop a working solution within four weeks.

Sergeant First Class Ahmad Rahman, a former Shopee logistics optimizer, raised his hand. “Ma’am, what if we don’t try to shoot them all down? What if we hack their coordination algorithms instead?”

Private Melissa Wong, a National University of Singapore computer science graduate doing her service obligation, added, “We could create false swarm leaders. Make them attack each other.”

By week two, they had converted commercial 5G broadcasting equipment into a swarm coordination disruptor. By week three, they were field-testing against simulated drone attacks. By week four, they had successfully turned a 500-drone hostile swarm against itself, using algorithms derived from ant colony optimization and multiplayer game design.

The innovation worked so well that within months, similar units were established across all three services. Each company competed for resources and recognition, creating an internal innovation economy that drove rapid capability development.

Captain Yeo watched her soldiers-engineers celebrate their latest breakthrough – an AI system that could predict enemy drone behaviors three moves ahead, like a military chess engine. For the first time in her career, she felt like they might actually be preparing for future wars rather than fighting the last one.

---

Chapter 3: The Network Effect (2032 – Phase 3)

Defense Minister Chen watched the holographic display in the Singapore Armed Forces’ new Innovation Command Center with a mixture of pride and trepidation. Seven years of gradual transformation had created something unprecedented: a military that operated more like a distributed tech company than a traditional armed force.

Every SAF unit, from infantry squads to naval vessels to air defense batteries, now contributed to a real-time innovation network. Successful tactical solutions developed by any unit automatically propagated across the entire force within hours.

Today’s challenge was complex: a regional security crisis involving territorial disputes, cyber warfare, and coordinated information operations across Southeast Asia. Traditional military planning would have taken weeks to coordinate an effective response.

Instead, the Innovation Network had responded in real-time:

At 0600 hours, an Army unit in Mandai had detected unusual electromagnetic signatures using modified WiFi routers. Within minutes, the pattern recognition algorithms developed by a Navy cyber unit in Changi had identified the signatures as hostile jamming systems.

By 0800 hours, the Air Force’s distributed sensor network – originally designed for weather monitoring by a civilian meteorologist doing reserve duty – had precisely located seventeen jamming sites across the region.

At 1000 hours, a joint innovation team of soldiers, engineers, and behavioral psychologists had developed a coordinated response: simultaneously disable the jamming systems while launching a targeted disinformation campaign that would make the attackers believe their operation had succeeded.

The Minister watched as the plan executed flawlessly. Singapore’s military had become something new – not just a fighting force, but a learning organism that adapted faster than its opponents could react.

“Sir,” reported Colonel David Ng, the Innovation Command’s director, “we’re receiving requests from Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. They want access to our tactical innovations for their own operations.”

The Minister nodded. This was the ultimate validation of the transformation strategy. Singapore had become indispensable not through military size or economic power, but through innovation speed. They had created a military that other nations needed, ensuring security through technological interdependence.

But as he watched the network’s algorithms automatically improve based on the day’s operations, learning and evolving without human intervention, he wondered if they had created something beyond their ability to control.

---

Chapter 4: The Price of Innovation (2034)

The emergency began at 2:17 AM Singapore time with a single anomaly in the Innovation Network’s pattern recognition systems. Within minutes, it cascaded across the entire military structure.

Major Lisa Chen, now commanding Singapore’s first fully autonomous defense sector, watched in horror as her AI systems began reporting thousands of phantom threats. The network that had made Singapore’s military the most adaptive in the world was now paralyzed by its own sophistication.

“Someone’s poisoned our learning algorithms,” reported her chief technical officer, a former Facebook AI researcher. “They’ve introduced false data that’s causing cascading failures across all systems.”

The irony was devastating. Singapore’s greatest military strength – the rapid sharing of innovations across all units – had become its critical vulnerability. A sophisticated adversary had infiltrated their innovation network not with traditional weapons, but with malicious machine learning models that corrupted the system’s ability to distinguish between real and fake threats.

Traditional military units might have fallen back on standard operating procedures. But Singapore’s military had evolved beyond such fixed doctrines. Every decision, every response, every tactical choice now depended on AI systems that were hallucinating enemies and allies with equal confidence.

Major Chen activated emergency protocols that hadn’t been tested since the early phases of the transformation program. She began manually calling commanders across the network, asking them to ignore their digital systems and rely on human judgment alone.

“This is exactly what we trained for in the sandbox scenarios,” she told her staff. “We knew over-dependence on innovation could become a weakness. Time to prove that soldiers can still think without machines.”

Over the next 72 hours, Singapore’s military demonstrated something perhaps more impressive than technological superiority: the ability to rapidly scale back from high-tech warfare to fundamental military principles when their innovations failed.

They identified the source of the attack – a hostile nation-state that had spent three years studying Singapore’s published research on military innovation networks. The same openness that had made Singapore’s military so adaptive had also given their enemies a blueprint for attack.

But in solving the crisis, they discovered something crucial. The human networks they had built alongside the technological ones – the relationships between soldiers and engineers, the trust between commanders and tech specialists, the culture of rapid experimentation – proved more resilient than any algorithm.

---

Epilogue: The Balanced Force (2035)

Ten years after the first Digital Defense Volunteer activation, Singapore’s military had achieved something unique: a force that could operate at the highest levels of technological sophistication while remaining fundamentally human-centered.

The Innovation Network still existed, but with built-in circuit breakers and human oversight at every critical decision point. Every AI system could be bypassed. Every automated response could be overridden. Every innovation was designed to enhance human judgment rather than replace it.

Wei Ming, now a lieutenant colonel in the reserves and still debugging algorithms for civilian companies, reflected on the transformation as he briefed a new cohort of Digital Defense Volunteers.

“We learned that innovation isn’t just about having the newest technology,” he told them. “It’s about building systems that can adapt when technology fails. The Ukrainians taught us that creativity matters more than equipment. But we learned something they didn’t have time to discover: sustainable innovation requires knowing when not to innovate.”

Singapore’s military had become something unprecedented – a force that could rapidly adopt new capabilities while maintaining the discipline and reliability that military operations demanded. They had solved the fundamental tension between innovation and military effectiveness not by choosing one over the other, but by creating systems that could dynamically balance both depending on circumstances.

As threats evolved, so did Singapore’s responses. But they never again forgot that the most sophisticated algorithm was worthless without soldiers capable of independent thinking, and the most advanced technology was merely a tool in service of fundamentally human objectives.

The experiment had succeeded, but success itself had taught them the most important lesson: true military innovation lay not in replacing human judgment with artificial intelligence, but in amplifying human capability through thoughtful technology integration.

In the end, Singapore’s military transformation had created something more valuable than the world’s most advanced fighting force. They had built a model for how small nations could maintain security in an age of rapid technological change – not by trying to match larger powers in scale, but by outpacing them in adaptability while never losing sight of the human element that remained at the heart of all military effectiveness.

Maxthon

In an age where the digital world is in constant flux, and our interactions online are ever-evolving, the importance of prioritizing individuals as they navigate the expansive internet cannot be overstated. The myriad of elements that shape our online experiences calls for a thoughtful approach to selecting web browsers—one that places a premium on security and user privacy. Amidst the multitude of browsers vying for users’ loyalty, Maxthon emerges as a standout choice, providing a trustworthy solution to these pressing concerns, all without any cost to the user.

Maxthon, with its advanced features, boasts a comprehensive suite of built-in tools designed to enhance your online privacy. Among these tools are a highly effective ad blocker and a range of anti-tracking mechanisms, each meticulously crafted to fortify your digital sanctuary. This browser has carved out a niche for itself, particularly with its seamless compatibility with Windows 11, further solidifying its reputation in an increasingly competitive market.

In a crowded landscape of web browsers, Maxthon has forged a distinct identity through its unwavering dedication to offering a secure and private browsing experience. Fully aware of the myriad threats lurking in the vast expanse of cyberspace, Maxthon works tirelessly to safeguard your personal information. Utilizing state-of-the-art encryption technology, it ensures that your sensitive data remains protected and confidential throughout your online adventures.

What truly sets Maxthon apart is its commitment to enhancing user privacy during every moment spent online. Each feature of this browser has been meticulously designed with the user’s privacy in mind. Its powerful ad-blocking capabilities work diligently to eliminate unwanted advertisements, while its comprehensive anti-tracking measures effectively reduce the presence of invasive scripts that could disrupt your browsing enjoyment. As a result, users can traverse the web with newfound confidence and safety.

Moreover, Maxthon’s incognito mode provides an extra layer of security, granting users enhanced anonymity while engaging in their online pursuits. This specialized mode not only conceals your browsing habits but also ensures that your digital footprint remains minimal, allowing for an unobtrusive and liberating internet experience. With Maxthon as your ally in the digital realm, you can explore the vastness of the internet with peace of mind, knowing that your privacy is being prioritized every step of the way.