Hassan Nobeeboccus

Content Framework, 2026

The Conversation-to-Content Map.

Fourteen questions that practitioners in academy and coaching education keep asking. For each one: the conventional answer, where it runs out and a specific position to publish from.

For

Academy directors and coaching education founders who already have the knowledge. This gives you a frame to turn it into content you can publish.

How to use this document

Five-stage framework: worked example

→

How to use this

→

Academy Directors: Entries 1–7

1 'How do I make my sessions more player-centred without losing structure?'

→

2 'When should I deselect a player and how do I handle it well?'

→

3 'How do I measure player development beyond just football performance?'

→

4 'How do I build a development culture, not just a results culture?'

→

5 'How do I retain good coaches when bigger clubs can always outpay us?'

→

6 'How do I get buy-in from the first team when they don't trust what the academy produces?'

→

7 'How do I know if my selection process is producing the results I think it is?'

→

Coaching Education Founders: Entries 8–14

8 'How do I build a waitlist rather than chasing enrolments?'

→

9 'How do I differentiate my course from the UEFA licence pathway?'

→

10 'How do I get coaches to actually change their practice after the course, not just pass the assessment?'

→

11 'How do I price my programme against the official pathway?'

→

12 'How do I build a course that works for coaches at different experience levels?'

→

13 'How do I get coaches who've been on my course to become advocates?'

→

14 'How do I know when my methodology is ready to publish?'

→

How to use the five-stage framework

A worked example

The five stages below are the thinking process that sits underneath the writing. Work through them in sequence to extract and sharpen the material. The finished post beneath them reorganises that material around the reader's experience. The stages won't appear in what you publish, but the specificity they produce will.

Stage 1: Identify the recurring question

The question you've been asked most often, in the most rooms, by the most different people: how do I make my sessions more player-centred without losing structure?

Stage 2: Articulate the conventional answer

The coaching course presents player-centredness and structure as opposite ends of a spectrum (guided discovery on one side, direct instruction on the other) with the advice to find a position somewhere along it.

Stage 3: State the tension

Research from Frontiers in Sports and Active Living (2023) on Swedish FA coach education found that coaches who were introduced to player-centred approaches on their UEFA B course still reduced unpredictability in their sessions when they returned to their clubs. The philosophy arrived; the sequenced handover that makes it work under real conditions did not. System inertia (the pressure of familiar contexts, familiar players, familiar expectations) absorbed the course content and left the practice unchanged.

Stage 4: Name your position

The obstacle is a missing transition sequence: coaches who've run direct sessions for eight years can't move to player-centred environments by deciding to. They need a specific bridge, which is to constrain the environment first and then constrain it less. That sequence is teachable, observable and specific enough to apply on Tuesday morning.

Stage 5: Give one example

A coach with eight years of structured session delivery introduced environmental constraints progressively over six weeks: reducing the playing area first, then removing positional instructions, then removing verbal coaching during play entirely. In week five he observed players making decisions under pressure without waiting for instruction. The structure was still there, having moved from the coach's voice into the environment itself.

The finished post

There's a question I hear more often than any other from coaches trying to implement player-centred approaches.

'How do I do it without losing all structure?'

The coaching course answer is to move along a spectrum: from direct instruction toward guided discovery, somewhere in the middle. The destination is right; the route is absent.

Research from the Swedish Football Association's coach education programme found that even coaches who completed UEFA B training and adopted game-based tasks in their sessions still reduced unpredictability when they returned to their clubs. The player-centred philosophy survived the course; back in their clubs, under familiar pressures, coaches defaulted to what they knew. The reason, consistently, is the same: there was no transition sequence. The coach knew where they were trying to go. Nobody told them what to change first.

Here's what the transition looks like.

You don't move from direct instruction to guided discovery in one session. You constrain the environment first and then you constrain it less.

Week one: reduce the playing area. Force decisions by compressing space. Keep your instructions exactly as they are. Don't change your coaching style yet. Change the conditions.

Week two: remove one positional instruction. Let one decision become the player's. Watch what happens.

Week three: remove verbal coaching during play. For one ten-minute block. Observe what players do when the coaching voice goes silent.

By week five or six, something shifts. Players start making decisions under pressure without waiting for instruction. The structure is still there, living in the environment now, in the conditions you built and the constraints you set.

A coach I worked with who'd run structured sessions for eight years ran this sequence over six weeks. He described week five as the first time he'd watched his players make decisions without waiting for a prompt. The sessions looked more chaotic from the outside; the decision-making quality had gone up.

If you've been trying to make this shift and stalling: what specifically did you change first?

Guide

How to use this

Each entry has three parts, structured to take you from the received wisdom to a specific position you can publish from.

The question

How practitioners phrase it in conversation.
The words people use when they're not in a conference room.

The conventional answer

What the coaching course teaches, what the standard advice says and what most practitioners already know. The received wisdom in the room.

What happens in practice / Your position

Where the conventional answer breaks down in practice, grounded in evidence and direct experience. A specific, publishable take:
a more precise description of what's happening on the ground.

The position is a starting point. Your specific environment, the players or coaches you work with and the context you've built your thinking inside: that is what makes it yours.

Find the question closest to your own experience. Read the position. Adapt it to your specific context and publish it. You already have the evidence; this gives you the frame.

Section One

Academy Directors

Seven recurring questions from the rooms where player development decisions are made. Each entry maps the conventional answer, the research that complicates it and a specific position to publish from.

1. Academy Directors

'How do I make my sessions more player-centred without losing structure?'

Player development · Coaching methodology

The conventional answer

The coaching course presents player-centredness and structure as opposite ends of a spectrum, asking coaches to position themselves somewhere along it. Guided discovery on one side.
Direct instruction on the other. Move toward the middle.

What happens in practice

Research from Frontiers in Sports and Active Living (2023) examined coach education across the Swedish Football Association and found that even game-based task designs promoted on UEFA B courses prolonged inherited coaching beliefs. Coaches implementing player-centred approaches still reduced unpredictability in practice, which runs counter to what skill acquisition research recommends. The philosophy landed; the sequenced handover that makes it work in practice was absent from the course entirely.

A 2025 study in Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy on a nationwide talent development programme confirmed the mechanism: research-informed coach education produces better practice transfer, but only when the intervention is designed around practitioners' specific contexts.
Generic delivery of player-centred principles does not change what coaches do on Tuesday morning.

The position

The obstacle is the absence of a sequenced handover. Coaches who've run direct sessions for a decade need a named transition sequence. The bridge is: constrain the environment first, then constrain less. That sequence is teachable, observable and transferable.

Practitioners who can describe it specifically (what they changed first, what they changed next, what they observed) are producing material that coaches cannot find anywhere else in the literature or on the licence pathway.

2. Academy Directors

'When should I deselect a player and how do I handle it well?'

Player welfare · Release process

The conventional answer

Deselect at the right developmental checkpoint. Communicate clearly and kindly.
Give the player honest feedback. Wish them well. Follow the club's process.

What happens in practice

A 2025 systematic review in the Journal of Sport Sciences on psychosocial aspects of release found that psychological impact is significant and consistent across studies: loss of identity, anxiety and depression are reported repeatedly, with younger athletes at greatest risk because they have the least developed coping strategies.

The mechanism for that harm was identified in a 2022 qualitative study published in Frontiers in Sports and Active Living: all four players interviewed reported being marginalised before their formal release (left out of starting line-ups, left out of squad communications, while still training with the club). Players didn't disclose this to their parents because they felt they'd let them down. The formal deselection conversation was the moment on record; the two-to-four weeks before it were where the damage was done.

A 2025 study in the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology found that parents described feedback as generic and non-individualised. A 2024 qualitative study in Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, drawing on players' own reflections on being released, found they described the club environment in terms that evoke a production system: their sense of self had become contingent on their academy status.

The position

The deselection process starts long before the conversation. Academy directors who've built a structured communication protocol for the weeks preceding a release decision (what gets said, when, by whom and how it's framed) are working in territory that four separate peer-reviewed studies now confirm is almost entirely absent from public coaching discourse.

The specific, practical detail of how to manage that period is publishable material. Almost no one is writing it.

3. Academy Directors

'How do I measure player development beyond just football performance?'

Player assessment · Four Corner Model

The conventional answer

Use the FA Four Corner Model. Track technical and tactical development, physical development, psychological development and social development. Assess across all four at each phase.

What happens in practice

Research published in the Journal of Sports Sciences (Harper et al., 2024) studied academy managers across the English Premier League and EFL. Managers identified psychosocial skills and characteristics as key drivers of player progression but found a significant lack of agreement on which specific skills mattered and how to develop them systematically. Clubs knew the corners existed; they hadn't agreed what went inside them.

A 2025 study in the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology evaluated a structured individualised psychosocial skills programme inside an English male professional soccer academy and found that an individualised approach, designed around the specific player and built into a personal development plan, produced measurable development outcomes where group-delivered curricula had not. The Four Corner Model names the areas, but what observable behaviours belong in the psychological corner, what conversations belong in the social corner and how progress in either is assessed remains unanswered across most of the professional game.

The position

Academy directors who've spent years working out what belongs in those corners (specific indicators, specific conversations and specific transfer conditions) are carrying knowledge that most coaches never see written down.

The Harper finding documents the problem across Premier League and EFL clubs. The 2025 implementation study shows an individualised approach producing outcomes where group delivery had not.

4. Academy Directors

'How do I build a development culture, not just a results culture?'

Academy culture · Structural alignment

The conventional answer

Create psychological safety. Give players permission to fail. Reduce emphasis on winning at junior levels. Shift the language toward development.

What happens in practice

A 2025 study in Sport in Society examined children's well-being inside a Category One academy through an 18-month ethnographic study. Three structural patterns were identified: the academy's prioritisation of future market potential over present well-being, the normalisation of accelerated adulthood and the burden placed on children to cope with pressures far ahead of their developmental stage. The language of development was present at the club; the structure rewarded something different.

A 2025 study in the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology on cultural sensitivities in elite male English academy multidisciplinary teams found that staff alignment around culture is fragile: coaches, sports scientists, psychologists and education staff bring different professional values to the same working environment and those disciplinary tensions shape what the culture produces, regardless of what the director communicates.

The position

Culture is downstream of structure. If selection criteria, team-sheet decisions and staff performance metrics reward results, the psychological safety messaging is decorative. The 2025 research documents the structural misalignment at Category One level and the staff-level tensions that reproduce it are almost never named publicly.

Academy directors who've redesigned the structural incentives (what they measure and reward at the team-sheet level) have a specific and rare story to tell. What did you change structurally and what did it produce?

5. Academy Directors

'How do I retain good coaches when bigger clubs can always outpay us?'

Staff retention · Development continuity

The conventional answer

Create a positive working environment. Offer development opportunities. Build loyalty and a sense of belonging. Make the culture one people want to stay for.

What happens in practice

Full-time coaches in Premier League and EFL academies grew from 250 at the Elite Player Performance Plan's (EPPP) launch in 2012 to over 800 by 2024, according to Premier League data.
The market for capable academy coaches is competitive and clubs relying on goodwill and
development conversations alone lose them.

A 2024 study by Galdino and Wicker in the International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching examined how head coach turnovers in professional football create club-wide spillover effects.
The finding: coaching replacements disrupt development continuity at first-team level and through the entire backroom staff structure. Clubs that retain backroom staff across head coach changes preserve development continuity; continuity breaks down where they don't. Retention is a development quality issue with direct consequences for player outcomes.

The position

Directors who can articulate specifically what a coach learns in year two at their programme that they couldn't learn at a Category One (the access, the accountability and the complexity of problems they get to solve) have a recruiting and retention story that salary alone doesn't compete with.

The Galdino and Wicker finding gives that story a structural frame: staff continuity is a development output with measurable consequences for player progression. Most directors have the story; almost none have written it down.

6. Academy Directors

'How do I get buy-in from the first team when they don't trust what the academy produces?'

First-team relations · Governance · PSR

The conventional answer

Build relationships with the first-team manager. Present data on graduates.
Demonstrate value through first-team appearances. Play the long game.

What happens in practice

Premier League data shows the share of minutes allocated to academy graduates fell from 11.2% in 2021-22 to 6.2% in 2024-25, despite £22 million in annual workforce investment across professional academies. Analysis by The ESK (2025) covering Premier League academy productivity and profitability from 2015 to 2025 found that academies now generate £2.87 billion in transfer revenue across the league. That makes them the single most effective mechanism for navigating the Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) introduced from July 2025.

First-team managers operate under direct pressure to retain league status. The structural incentive to play academy products runs against it.

The position

The buy-in problem is a governance problem. Squad cost ratios and PSR compliance have changed the commercial logic: academies are now a financial strategy. Player development remains the mechanism while financial sustainability is now the stated purpose.

Directors who've found operational solutions (specific data-sharing agreements, showcase formats built around what first-team staff need to see and conversations that connect academy outputs to the first team's own risk management and wage bill sustainability) are working at a different level.

The specific mechanisms are what to publish.

7. Academy Directors

'How do I know if my selection process is producing the results I think it is?'

Selection · Relative age effect · Bio-banding

The conventional answer

Assess across all four corners of the Four Corner Model. Use objective data alongside coach judgment. Review selections regularly. Build in multi-observer processes to reduce individual bias.

What happens in practice

The relative age effect (RAE) is one of the most consistently replicated findings in youth sport science. A study of 1,003 players across 23 UK professional football academies (PMC, 2022) found players born in the first quarter of the selection year were substantially over-represented across squads at every age group. A study of 951 players in the Swedish FA under-15 programme (Science and Medicine in Football, 2024) found a significant bias in favour of relatively older players, most pronounced between regional and national selection levels.

The consequences extend beyond the players being over-selected. Research published in the Journal of Sports Sciences (2024) found that players born late in the selection year achieve more professional career minutes on average than those born early: the late-born players who survive the selection filter tend to be exceptionally talented.

A Frontiers in Sports and Active Living study (2023) identified the psychological mechanism: coaches and scouts select relatively older players perceived as physically stronger, without consciously considering long-term potential. Multi-observer review processes don't correct for it because all observers share the same distorted baseline. Bio-banding research from the University of Bath, conducted across four Premier League academies, found that when players were grouped by biological maturity, early maturers found matches significantly more physically demanding and late maturers (the players the standard system was most likely to overlook) showed technical and psychological qualities the age-grouped format had kept invisible.

The position

Multi-observer processes and holistic assessment frameworks address individual bias; the cohort-level distortion requires a different intervention entirely. Academy directors who've introduced specific maturity-adjustment mechanisms (bio-banding tournaments, maturity assessment at selection points and cohort-level audits that flag relative age distribution) have evidence that the standard format is not showing them what they think it's showing them.

The practitioner-level account of what you changed in your selection process, what you subsequently saw and what it produced is the content that doesn't exist yet.

Section Two

Coaching Education Founders

Seven recurring questions from the people building independent programmes outside the official pathway. Each entry maps the conventional answer, the structural reality and a specific position to publish from.

8. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I build a waitlist rather than chasing enrolments?'

Intake architecture · Audience building

The conventional answer

Market consistently in the run-up to intake. Build a social media presence. Run targeted ads.
Offer early-bird pricing. Create urgency through limited places and a closing deadline.

What happens in practice

B2B buyer research by Bain and Google finds that 80–90% of buyers form a shortlist before making first contact with any provider and 90% choose from that shortlist. The enrolment conversation is largely decided before the founder sends the intake email. What determined the outcome was whether the founder's name was on the shortlist when the prospective coach started looking.

In a niche where fewer than 1% of practitioners publish consistently (the Nielsen participation rule applies across online communities regardless of sector), the field is structurally uncrowded.
A coaching education founder who publishes weekly on the specific problems their programme addresses for twelve months is not competing with other educators for attention during the enrolment window. They've accumulated it across the months when the field was quiet.

The position

The enrolment window is a lagging indicator that measures demand which was either built or not built in the six months before it opened. Founders who treat intake as a marketing problem (running campaigns and discounts when places open) are intervening at the point where the decision is already made.

The structural question is what the period between cohorts looks like: whether the founder was consistently visible on the specific problems the programme addresses, whether prospective coaches had accumulated enough exposure to the methodology to trust it before the link appeared. Founders who can describe specifically what they published, on what cadence, on which problems, in the period that produced a full intake, have a methodology their peers haven't seen written down.

9. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I differentiate my course from the UEFA licence pathway?'

Positioning · Competence vs. adaptive expertise

The conventional answer

Emphasise practical application. Highlight smaller cohort sizes. Demonstrate your real-world focus. Talk about what's missing from the official pathway and how you fill it.

What happens in practice

Research from the Journal of Sports Sciences (Strudwick et al., 2024) found that practitioners believe formal coach education could better prepare them for the social, negotiated and contextual realities of delivering coaching in a real club environment. A 2025 study in Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy arguing for a situated approach to coach education found academic traction for the case that context-specific, practitioner-designed delivery produces better outcomes than pathway-based, decontextualised certification.

The position

A UEFA B programme is a competence certification: it assesses whether a coach can demonstrate prescribed behaviours in an assessment environment and the mandate extends no further than that. Adaptive expertise, contextual judgment and the social navigation of a multidisciplinary staff under pressure are outside its scope.

Independent educators who can name that structural constraint precisely and show how their programme addresses it are answering a different question from the one the official pathway poses.

10. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I get coaches to actually change their practice after the course, not just pass the assessment?'

Practice transfer · Post-course design

The conventional answer

Make sessions practical. Use reflective frameworks. Include follow-up mentoring.
Design for application as well as assessment.

What happens in practice

The Frontiers in Sports and Active Living study (2023) on Swedish FA coach education identified the mechanism behind transfer failure: socio-cultural influences created a system inertia that survived the course itself. Coaches returned to familiar contexts and familiar pressures and the reflection framework that landed in the course didn't travel back to the training pitch.

A 2025 study in Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy evaluating a research-informed coach education initiative in a nationwide talent development programme found that better transfer occurs when the post-course environment is deliberately designed, with structured support built in for the weeks after the course ends.

The position

The transfer problem is a context problem: an assessment environment is a contained space with a known evaluator, known criteria and no competitive stakes. A coach's Tuesday morning involves their own players, their own staff watching, parents on the touchline and a result by five o'clock.

Educators who've built specific first-use protocols for the weeks after the course (practical prompts, structured observation tasks and accountability check-ins that get coaches applying the methodology in real conditions) are solving a problem the official pathway hasn't touched. The design of the post-course period is the specific methodology to publish from.

11. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I price my programme against the official pathway?'

Pricing · Value framing

The conventional answer

Research the market. Calculate your delivery costs.
Set a premium that reflects your value. Position above commodity, below the licence.

What happens in practice

The full UEFA coaching pathway costs approximately £19,650 end to end for a coach in England, according to England Football Learning's official course fees. The figure anchors the conversation for independent educators in one of two ways: price lower and compete on cost or price higher and justify every pound against a credential most employers still require. Both strategies frame the comparison as a cost question. The more useful question is what the £19,650 buys and what it structurally cannot.

The position

A coach paying for the official pathway is buying access to a credential that opens doors; the education that changes practice is largely incidental to that transaction.

Independent programmes that can name what they substitute (the adaptive expertise the official pathway was never designed to develop, the practitioner judgment a competence assessment has no mechanism to assess, the career trajectory a licence alone cannot open) are answering a different question from the one the market rate poses.
Educators who can articulate that argument have a pricing story that stands on its own ground.

12. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I build a course that works for coaches at different experience levels?'

Programme design · Adaptive expertise

The conventional answer

Tier the content. Use differentiated tasks. Build in choice or streaming options so experienced and less experienced coaches aren't held back by the same material.

What happens in practice

Ashford et al. (2024, Frontiers in Sports and Active Living) documented a call from researchers for a reorientation in how coaching quality is measured: away from prescribed competency checklists and toward adaptive expertise: what effective coaching looks, sounds and feels like in specific contexts. A systematic review of coach developer professional learning (International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 2024) found that coach developers who design for contextual judgment produce different outcomes from those who design for competency demonstration.

A first-year UEFA B holder and a fifteen-year academy lead are separated by contextual judgment: the ability to read situations they haven't encountered before. Tiered content can accelerate knowledge acquisition, but contextual judgment develops through sustained practice under real conditions.

The position

The experienced coach in a mixed cohort carries contextual judgment that tiered streaming discards. Educators who've built their programmes around that judgment, designing tasks that require experienced coaches to narrate their decision-making to less experienced peers, produce better outcomes at every level.

The design question is specific: what do you build into the structure that makes the experienced coach's presence an asset? The answer is the methodology to publish from.

13. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I get coaches who've been on my course to become advocates?'

Alumni · Post-course advocacy

The conventional answer

Ask for testimonials. Build an alumni community. Stay in touch.
Create a network effect that keeps graduates connected to each other and to your programme.

What happens in practice

The alumni who advocate for a programme share one thing: they can name something their practice does differently now. Coaches who become genuine advocates can describe one concrete change in how they work because of the course, unprompted, to a colleague, in an ordinary conversation. Research on self-directed coach learning (PMC, 2024) found that post-course engagement drops sharply when coaches return to their club environment without a structured first-use prompt; the programme ends with the application stalling before it starts.

The position

Advocacy is a post-course design problem: the coaches who become advocates are the ones who used something from the programme in a real session within thirty days and it worked. Educators who've built specific first-use protocols (structured prompts that get coaches applying the methodology under real conditions in the first month back) produce testimonials as a byproduct of that design.

14. Coaching Education Founders

'How do I know when my methodology is ready to publish?'

Methodology · Publishing · Professional development

The conventional answer

When it's been tested across enough cohorts, when you have documented outcomes, when you feel confident enough in the results to stand behind them publicly and when the methodology is fully systematised and you can defend every design decision.

What happens in practice

A systematic review of coach developer professional learning published in the International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching (2024) found that coach developers are key actors in the coaching ecosystem because they shape how coaches learn, but that little is known about the processes through which they develop their own practice. The review identified that the field of coach development is underdeveloped as a professional discipline precisely because most of its practitioners are not making their thinking public. The methodology that stays inside the course room is invisible to the field, unexamined by peers and unrefined by the friction that public articulation produces.

Coaching education methodology is a living document: every cohort surfaces edge cases, resistance patterns and transfer failures the previous cohort had kept invisible. The readiness threshold (enough cohorts, enough data, enough confidence) moves each time it's approached. Founders who've been running programmes for five years and still haven't published have crossed from readiness into certainty-seeking, a threshold the work itself never reaches.

The position

Publishing is a methodology development tool. Founders who publish consistently on the specific problems their programme is designed to address (what they keep encountering, what they've worked out, what they're still figuring out) refine their thinking faster than those who wait. Writing a position down exposes its gaps more precisely than another cohort would.

The IJSSC review confirms the field develops in proportion to how much its practitioners articulate their practice publicly. The specific question to publish from is this: here is the coaching problem I keep seeing, here is what I've worked out about it across three cohorts and here is what I still don't have a clean answer to. A specific, honest account of a real problem and what working on it has taught you is more useful to the field than a polished case for a completed system.

The Football Ghostwriter

You already have the knowledge. Let's make it visible.

This map is a starting point. The recurring questions you hear, the positions you've developed and the evidence you've been sitting on: that is the content. What it needs is a consistent structure and someone to help you write it clearly enough to publish.

I ghostwrite educational email courses, LinkedIn content and thought leadership for leaders in academy and professional football development. The process starts with a conversation about what you know and who needs to hear it.

Get in touch

Email thefootballghostwriter@outlook.com

Website hassannobeeboccus.com

Book a call Schedule 30 minutes

Free email course Build Your Public Voice

The Conversation-to-Content Map.

Contents

A worked example

How to use this

Academy Directors

'How do I make my sessions more player-centred without losing structure?'

'When should I deselect a player and how do I handle it well?'

'How do I measure player development beyond just football performance?'

'How do I build a development culture, not just a results culture?'

'How do I retain good coaches when bigger clubs can always outpay us?'

'How do I get buy-in from the first team when they don't trust what the academy produces?'

'How do I know if my selection process is producing the results I think it is?'

Coaching Education Founders

'How do I build a waitlist rather than chasing enrolments?'

'How do I differentiate my course from the UEFA licence pathway?'

'How do I get coaches to actually change their practice after the course, not just pass the assessment?'

'How do I price my programme against the official pathway?'

'How do I build a course that works for coaches at different experience levels?'

'How do I get coaches who've been on my course to become advocates?'

'How do I know when my methodology is ready to publish?'

You already have the knowledge. Let's make it visible.