Micah Rodman is CEO and co-founder of Kojo, a procurement, warehouse management, and finance platform built for trade contractors. In this episode, Micah shares how Kojo went from buying donuts and visiting job sites to understand how contractors actually worked to building a broader procure-to-pay platform used across tens of thousands of construction projects. We discuss why seemingly unique contractors eventually reveal “patterns of snowflakes,” why successful software adoption is really about organizational change, and how AI changes what construction software can do when systems can understand operational data and take action. We also explore build vs. buy, whether AI will lead to consolidation in construction software, the potential for a more unified construction operating platform, and why robotics may reach the industry through prefab and industrialized construction before transforming the job site itself.
Micah Rodman is the CEO and co-founder of Kojo, a procurement, warehouse management, and finance platform built for trade contractors.
Kojo started with a simple observation: trade contractors were still spending enormous amounts of time moving information manually between the field, purchasing teams, and accounting systems. The founders spent months visiting job sites, talking with contractors, and watching how materials actually moved through their businesses before building their first product.
In this episode, Micah and I talk about how that initial wedge grew into a broader procure-to-pay platform, why contractors that initially appear completely unique eventually reveal what he calls “patterns of snowflakes,” and why he says Kojo isn’t really selling software—it’s selling organizational change.
We also get into what AI changes when software can understand operational data and take action, how contractors should think about building versus buying technology, whether AI will lead to fewer construction software vendors, and why robotics may reach construction through prefab and industrialized construction before it transforms the job site.
Episode highlights:
00:00 — Introduction and a timely Kojo implementation
03:25 — What Kojo does and the “operational debt” inside construction
05:35 — Why the founders chose construction and the trades
09:25 — Buying donuts, visiting job sites, and finding the initial wedge
11:25 — The manual purchase-order workflow that helped inspire Kojo
15:40 — From $30–100M contractors to billion-dollar customers
17:00 — Why contractors are “patterns of snowflakes”
19:00 — The seven steps of the procure-to-pay process
24:00 — Why contractors tolerate operational pain for so long
26:30 — “We’re not selling a product. We’re selling organizational change.”
29:00 — Meeting contractors where they are vs. changing inefficient workflows
32:00 — How AI changes what construction software can actually do
35:30 — Build vs. buy in the age of AI
40:00 — Does venture capital fit construction tech?
43:20 — Services as software and the next generation of construction technology
48:20 — Will contractors have more software vendors or fewer?
50:20 — The “holy grail” of a unified construction operating platform
55:35 — Robotics, prefab, and industrialized construction
58:15 — What construction can learn from automotive manufacturing
1:00:00 — Why Micah believes this is construction technology’s most exciting moment
Jason Jacobs: [00:00:00] Welcome to BuiltForward, the podcast exploring where construction is heading over the next decade, and how AI and other emerging technologies will and won't transform the industry. I'm Jason Jacobs, a longtime startup founder, investor, and the host. Let's get into it
Today's guest is Micah Rodman, CEO and co-founder of Kojo, a procurement, warehouse management, and finance platform built for trade contractors. The timing of this conversation was perfect. Last week, I spent two days shadowing a mechanical contractor, one in the office and one in the field.
While I was there, they happened to be having a Kojo kickoff call as a new customer that I got to sit in on. It was a great kickoff call, by the way. At any rate, Kojo's story is a useful window into how construction technology actually gets built [00:01:00] and adopted. The founders didn't begin with a sweeping platform vision.
They bought donuts, visited job sites, watched how trade contractors handled materials, and started with painfully specific problems like manually retyping purchase orders into an ERP. In this discussion, we talk about how that initial wedge became a broader procure-to-pay platform, why contractors that appear completely unique eventually reveal what Micah calls patterns of snowflakes, and why he says Kojo isn't really selling software, it's selling organizational change.
We also get into what AI changes when software can understand operational data and take action, where humans need to remain in the loop, how contractors should think about building versus buying technology, and why robotics may reach construction through pre- prefab and industrialized construction before it transforms the job site.
This conversation connects a lot of the themes I've been [00:02:00] exploring with BuiltForward, and I hope you enjoy it.
Okay, Micah Rodman, welcome to the show
Micah Rodman: Hey, Jason. How's it going?
Jason Jacobs: Yeah. Yeah, and as I told you before we started recording, I was out, uh, seeing a mechanical contractor last week and kind of shadowing their, uh, office operations one day and their, um, project, uh, like, actually out in the field, the projects one day.
And the day I was in the office they were doing a Kojo kickoff call with a new client- ... so it was just really timely given this discussion.
Micah Rodman: Yeah, crazy, crazy that that happened. Um, yeah, how'd we do?
Jason Jacobs: You did great. Yeah, yeah. Good. Um, uh, I mean, v- v- very, uh, organized, buttoned up, serious, but personable. Uh, you know, kind of on the ball, like, instilled confidence in the team that, uh, that they were in good hands.
So, um, I'm not just saying that. I thought it was a good, uh, a good new customer kickoff, so. Great. Well, glad to hear it. Hey, you know, how it gets adopted in the field I'll be interested to [00:03:00] see, um, as we- Yeah, of course ... were talking about before we started recording. But, um, uh, but, you know, control what you can control, right?
Micah Rodman: Yeah, and s- and, and, and s- and set up our, our partners, um, here for success as best we can. I mean, it's crazy. A lot of companies would pay big dollars to have, you know, a consultant go out to, um, observe their onboarding process and come back with feedback. So, uh, you know, the, the stars aligned and, uh, it's crazy.
It's crazy. Crazy timing.
Jason Jacobs: Uh, well, well, to kick things off, Micah, um, maybe just give a quick overview on Kojo.
Micah Rodman: Yeah, for sure. So, um, Kojo is the leading, um, procurement, warehouse management, and, um, finance platform built for trade contractors. Um, so we primarily work with MEP contractors, focus on what we would, what we describe as the procure to pay process, um, along with, um, just warehouse management, so keeping track of warehouses, keeping track of tool management, and, um, also [00:04:00] prefab workflows.
Um, we started the business in 2018, but really it came to market in 2020 at the beginning of the pandemic. Um, and what we saw really at that time was an industry... You know, we were, we were fearful, right? We were, we were just starting out and it was COVID, and all of a sudden, um, the world was changing very quickly, and we didn't know how that would affect our very early stage product and very early stage customer base, and, um, how does this sort of...
how will this impact the future of, of, of our business? And what we saw really early on was actually there was no better time that this, that the construction industry, and, and trade contractors in particular, had this built up, what I would describe as, like, operational debt of just kind of, like, running things a certain way, um, for, for, for years and years, in some cases decades, without any real impetus to go out and, and think about change.
And COVID hit, and now we were working from home, but our customers now are also working from [00:05:00] home, and the same processes that, you know, they would run the business by, the sort of operational processes that- Or must-do things, but you don't necessarily think about them always as being a strategic asset, right?
A lever to pull to make your company more money on every project. And that started to change, right? The, the tolerance for these kinds of things and the need to digitize just became clearer than ever, and the rest is sort of history for us, right? The, the growth for us has been, over time, exponential to the point where now, um, you know, we're, we're, we're used on, every year, tens of thousands of construction projects all across the United States.
Jason Jacobs: Uh, so did the founding team come from construction? Or how did the idea come about, and, and how did you make the decision to, to do something in construction tech to begin with?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. So, um, our founding team, um, did come from construction, but also from, um, uh, building companies and building so- building out software products.
Um, so we all kind of came together. One, one of, one of our co-founders had a family in electrical distribution and [00:06:00] electrical construction. Um, another co-founder had a background in, um, building... working out of, working in VC, building out new businesses and investing in new businesses. Um, and my own background came from, I was working in, in, you know, at a, at a hedge fund called, uh, Bridgewater Associates, um, specifically working on their, um, internal management systems, um, and s- and internal software that they built out there.
We all came together because we all cared deeply, deeply, deeply about, um, the, basically, um, the cost of living. And at the same time as we were concerned deeply about the cost of living, we were concerned about, um, and this at the time felt like we were a little bit on the edge of, of saying these kinds of things, but, um, now it's certainly become much more mainstream.
We cared a lot about the national competitiveness, right? Um, the United States versus the rest of the world, and how we were going to continue to compete in the 21st century. And we had this [00:07:00] thesis that, um, we needed to build out the energy infrastructure, um, to support the technologies of the future. Um, at the time, we weren't thinking so much about data centers, but we were thinking about, um, AI and, um, at the time, 5G was really sort of a hot, a hot topic in terms of the infrastructure needed to support that technological shift that, um, um, was ongoing then.
And so these were thoughts that we were talking about and that really were sort of, um, encapsulated in... We were working from one of our co-founder's apartments, and across the street, there was a stop on the BART train that was being built, and it was, like, billions of dollars and, like, years delayed.
Billion dollars over budget and years delayed. And wow, this was sort of, um, the nexus of all of these things that we had been thinking and talking and learning about, um, and I've been really passionate and, and about and, and motivating to us. And we said, "Hey, this is wild. Let's dig in here." Um, and so what we saw then [00:08:00] was, hey, we, we, we started to learn about, okay, what are the processes that are leading to this inefficiency?
Well, part of it was government and, um, permitting. And we thought, okay, well, these are real issues, but probably issues that are best left to politicians, um, to sort out. I don't know if there's a great technology company that can be built in that space. And maybe now that's actually changed, um, with, with, uh, you know, with LLMs.
But, um, at the time, that was certainly the case. And then, um, we said, "Oh my God, but the other, the other piece of this is construction, and how much it actually costs to deliver these projects and how these projects are run. Let's, let's better understand those." And so what we saw very early on was not only was that there was this opportunity there, but that in particular for general contractors, um, engineers and architects, there was actually a far more sophisticated set of solutions out there on the market to help solve their problems.
But what there wasn't really was a focus on the trades and how they do [00:09:00] business and how they run things. And, you know, what are trades responsible for? Materials, labor, equipment All of that comes together. If you're thinking from first principles, those are the sort of core inputs. You need to coordinate those inputs to build a project.
Um, but really when you think about each of those inputs, right? The labor, the materials, and the equipment, there wasn't any real focus from folks like us who were thinking about building technology companies on those specific processes. And so that was the sort of aha moment. Um, but then we realized, hey, we don't really know many trade contractors.
We're somewhat limited here. And so this kicked off a, uh, a marathon, what felt like at the time was this sort of, um, um, um, marathon endeavor which proved to be, um, this underlying DNA that we were establishing in the very early stages of the company of going out and meeting first, um, hand with our customers.
I mean, we, we've [00:10:00] s- spent a lot of time buying donuts and taking them out to job sites to get folks to talk to us. Did that for, for months and months and months to really learn and have empathy-- learn these processes and have empathy for our users. And then build things and get feedback, and build things and get feedback, which landed us to our first customers, um, um, and led us to, you know, those early days in 2020 when we finally brought the product to market, and the rest is sort of, sort of history.
So that's how we got going. Um, I will say a crazy thing for me in general as I'm reflecting back on things is that initial insight in 2018 that, hey, um, how we build things leads to, uh, uh, cost of living being higher than it could be, and, um, um, the country to be more or less competitive in the economy of the future, um, w-- felt to us at the time [00:11:00] like important to us but not the front page...
Not even, you know, the way I describe it is it was on f-- these issues were on page three of the business section. Now they're on the front page of the newspaper of the entire thing. Um, and so these issues have become more and more and more important over time, and we feel really, really well po-positioned to help our, um, our customers and to partner with the industry to do something about them
Jason Jacobs: Uh, when you, when you look at the, um, initial pain that you first, um, grabbed onto in terms of feeling acute and, and where you would start, what was that and how consistent, um, is that with the pain that you're addressing today?
Micah Rodman: Yeah, that's great. So the initial pain that we were, um, going after, and really just that we saw from the very, very early stage, was how hard it w- how hard it is to interact with an accounting system, right? An accounting system or ERP is a core store of data, and it does a really good job of keeping your records straight for the purposes of accounting and billing.
But if you wanna do something outside of that, um, [00:12:00] like if you're... If you care about the process by which data gets into those systems and how, um, that touches different personas across the organization, that's gonna be a challenge. So for instance, getting a purchase order into an accounting system was one of the first problems that we looked at and said, "Wow, this is a manual data entry problem."
Literally, we shadowed users in the office, and we saw a PDF of the PO pulled up on one side of the screen and the, um, ERP interface, um, on the other side of, of the screen, and they were literally manually typing, um, from the PDF into... 'Cause you couldn't copy-paste into the data table in the ERP. They were liter- which is a wild thing, but it led them to literally typing into, um, um, into that ERP.
So that was, like, an initial version of the problem. That and then, um, you know, getting, getting a, um, um, a form onto a mobile app to submit a requisition, um, onto a mobile device for materials. These were, like, really [00:13:00] basic problems at first of, um, of form completion, right? And, um, and, and, and of simple integrations that, that led Kojo to, to start, right?
Um- These were sort of acute, acute problems. How those reflected itself was, wow, the field was spending too much time dealing with materials, and so was the office team, right? There's, like, big overhead associated with just running, running the everyday processes of procurement. And if you could bring that overhead down with simple digital tools, um, that would be valuable.
And so that was the sort of initial-- what led us to build the initial versions of our product. And by the way, that is still true today, right? Like, um, um, what we saw as we built and, and, and, and, and worked with more and more customers is that, wow, their, you know, materials being this primary input into what trade contractors do means that there are so many different personas that touch materials at [00:14:00] different points in the process.
Um, and they all have a need to coordinate, and they have overhead associated with what they do. And so if you can bring that overhead down from... On average, we find it's like, um, it's around seven percent of the value of an order is spent on the actual process of doing the order. And if you can bring that seven percent down by ninety-five percent with a better and better solution that's more and more fine-grained for more and more personas, that's still very, very worthwhile for contractors, right?
You can solve that same problem better than ever. Um, and then over time, what we've sort of learned about and got better at too was the actual savings, right? These are things that we started to, to learn and see more opportunities to do. As you got into the workflow when you were reducing overhead, "Hey, how can we now start to help you actually save time, but not only save time on running your process and spend less time with every order and every invoice, but how can we help you now save money on across the thirty to forty percent that you-- a project spend [00:15:00] that is going to be on procurement, on buying materials?
Um, how can we help limit that?" And there is an area where over time, you know, we've gone from one percent savings to two percent savings to three to four to five and so on of, of, of just helping spot opportunities for a redundancy in procurement, um, to use things that you have already to do more bulk ordering, to do more quotes.
These are all real opportunities for savings that we unlock for, um, for our customers. And that over time has been, um, you know, there's more and more value as you solve some of the core workflow challenges. Now you have the data in your workflow or in your system to be able to now provide more and more leverage to your user to save actual dollars on every, on every, on every order.
Jason Jacobs: So was there a sweet spot in terms of size and/or profile when you, um, first started serving customers? And then how has your customer base profile evolved over the years?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. So in the beginning, we were working mostly with what we would now describe [00:16:00] as mid-market, so contractors who are in the thirty to one hundred million revenue range.
We felt like solved this... or our solution really solved their key pain points. But over time, we've seen that really shift and, uh, really shift upmarket. So now we're working with contractors that are, that are billion, one, two, three, four plus billion, um, dollar contractors every year, 'cause what we see is that they have the same problems just at, just blown up, just at bigger scale.
And there's more complexity going on with the larger contractors too, as far as s- other systems that they may be using to solve other pieces of this problem. So there's a higher integration requirement as a result. But at, at its core, it's the same issue that the, you know, ten billion dollar contractors have as the, um, fifty million dollar contractors just, you know, at a different scale.
Jason Jacobs: And d- do you find that, um, uh, that it's the same, you know, kind of two, three, four areas where the fruit's the ripest in terms of, um, uh, [00:17:00] in terms of addressing issues from shop to shop? Or, um, is it wildly different, uh, across shots ... uh, in shops? And, and how does that manifest, um, in terms of building as you think about, um, off the shelf versus custom from client to client?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. So construction's funny. I mean, every, every trade contractor a- l- um, thinks that they are unique in some ess- in some sense. And they are. They really, really are, and they have unique processes for them that work for them over time because there's no correct, one correct way to do things. There, there are multiple valid, um, um, approaches to solving the same common problems that trade contractors experience, no doubt.
What we do see, though, by w- working across hundreds and hundreds, is that there are patterns of snowflakes out there in the world, um, that you can easi- that you can more easily, with that perspective of time and, and volume, place contractors. So at [00:18:00] this point, we've seen it all. We've seen every way of ordering materials, and, um, have incorporated that into our product.
We do learn about, you know, there are needs for customizations here or there. Um, but that is now in the more sort of, um, um, narrow and refined series, uh, um, um, um, um, number of contractors that are, that we're working with. There was a time when it felt like everyone was unique. Um, but that has since gone away, and you sort of accumulate the, uh, the, uh, the ways, you know, the ways to, to go out and solve that same problem over time, and you learn to support it better and better as time goes on.
But there was a time for sure when it felt like, wow, there's very little that our customers have in common across one another. Um, but that ultimately was just a matter of perspective at that time.
Jason Jacobs: And, and just to bring to life the Kojo solution, can you maybe talk about, um, a client? And, and feel free to scrub any names or, or sensitive information, but just, like, like, what they looked like, uh, pre-Kojo and then, [00:19:00] and then what they look like once you guys are in, fully integrated and productive.
Micah Rodman: For sure, yeah. So, um, our average customer is, um... So, um, I'll start this sentence. So, um- In general, across the procurement process, you heard me mention earlier there's this procure-to-ca-pay process. We really break that down into seven steps, really. Um, um, so to start, it's a plan for the materials on a project.
Then it's, um, you are sourcing those materials Across different distributors and getting quotes and, um, and so on. Then you are requesting the materials and actually like, "Hey, I need this by this date, um, these, these items by this date." Then you're creating a purchase order, step four. Step five is you are receiving the items from your distributor.
Step six is [00:20:00] you are, um, receiving an invoice from your distributor. And step seven, ultimately, is you're paying for those items. And so that is a process that every contractor, whether they use Kojo or not, runs. Right? You have to sort of know what you're buying. At some point you have to... or what you might need to buy.
You need to probably request the items. You need to create a purchase order. You need to have an invoice. You need to pay it. You need to have a, a, a check an item in, and so on. Like, these are all just aspects of, of, of enterprise procurement. But you can't, um... But the question is, what system are you actually using to, um, to, to satisfy each of those steps?
Or do you have a process or not, and do you have a system? And, um, um, and to-- for our average customer, they probably have, like, a solution or two for any number of those seven steps. Um, but it [00:21:00] isn't a cohesive system that ties all of the pieces together. And so you maybe are, um, doing a bill of materials, ordering from a bill of materials, um, but you're not having your field team, um, make requests for parts that they need in a way that's integrated into that bill of materials, as an example.
Or maybe, um, your field team is making requests over texts and email and spreadsheets that are being sent, um, back and forth, but they're not actually doing that in the same system that the procurement team is using to create POs. Or maybe you're creating POs, um, and you're doing what I was describing before.
You're creating that in a separate system and then manually entering it into, um, um, the ERP for the purposes of accounting and job costing and tracking. And so, um, what we find is that the integration of all of this, all of those seven pieces, which each, you know, there's a different persona that's involved basically with each of those seven steps.
And if you create one system [00:22:00] for, um, um, digitization and ultimately automation of that process, um, you are, uh, uh, going from what is before Kojo, highly manual, um, you know, pen and paper oftentimes involved, texting, calls, emails- Which leads to uncertainty and data spread across multiple systems and, um, mistakes and, um, and all the rest of it.
And you're creating one system that's going to ultimately help cut the overhead of all of the people doing their jo- tasks across those seven steps, while also creating this opportunity, as I mentioned before, for real savings across the procurement that you're doing on a project and across the organization
Jason Jacobs: So your customers, do they tend to be out seeking a solution, um, or does it tend to be an education process about why they should be considering something like this?
Micah Rodman: It's [00:23:00] a-- it, it runs the gamut of all potential... You know, sometimes it's a, um... there's an RFP, and there's a formal process that then we're just responding to. That means that there's been some coordinated, centralized effort to say, "This is a problem we need to solve. Let's go out to market." And then sometimes we, um, give someone a call, and they have one of the problems that I just mentioned.
Solving might be a particular issue about the field, or a particular issue about materials budgets, or about ordering the wrong items or something that, um, something like that. And that is the sort of wedge through which we start having the conversation and uncovering, you know, the layers of t- peeling back the layers of the onion to see, um, what is the, the, the best sol- you know, the, the full scope of the problem and cutting in.
And it's more of an educational sale in that case. So it really, it really varies, and our sales team is well-trained to, to listen, um, and understand who we're speaking to and, um, tailor the message and tailor the approach of, [00:24:00] of our, of our sales process and... which is really this discovery process to hone in on, um, um, what is going to be most effective for that particular contractor.
Jason Jacobs: Uh, this is not a Kojo-specific question, but I'm just curious from your time spent building Kojo and spending so much time with customers. I mean, my observation so far is that, um, customers can be-- you know, contractors can be in some pretty significant pain and maybe, um, uh, easier to complain about it than it is to actually stop the treadmill and act on it.
So w- what do you think distinguishes, um, pain that can kind of stay below the threshold of ig- o- of ignoring to, um, pain that becomes time to take acute action?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. I mean, this is a great question. Um, our customers are incredibly tough and resilient, and they get the job done, and that leads them, I [00:25:00] think, to power through, um, um, these kinds of operational pains that stand in the way of getting the job done in a way where, um, um, there's a, there's a, there's a big tolerance there for pain.
Um, um, it's-- And I think that's great. I think that's a great res- I think that leads to resilience in any organization, um, and it can be like, you know, a superpower of an organization to, like, just get the job done, um, focus on the goal, not how you get there. Um, at the same time, though, when you show someone a solution that's, like, a genuine solution, right?
They look at it, and they're like, "Wow, this is a better way of solving this thing," um, that is when a light bulb can go off, and all of a sudden the priorities can shift very quickly. They say, "Actually, actually, we need this." So the, the solution and the results and, and the, um, um, and the value propositions should be the sort of light bulb aha moment that sort of hopefully, um, um, inspire this change, um, um, or the need to make it.
Because, [00:26:00] again, our, our customers, they can push through, right? Like, they're still... You know, you can still be fairly profitable, um, in ordering off pen and paper in that way. Now, I think there's a better way you can be more effective and more profitable and, and, and better at what you do by shifting to Kojo, obviously, and that's, that's what we're in business to do.
But, um, um, our customers will figure out a way to get the job done. You just need to prove that you are, um, a more effective tool, and if you can do that, then, then, um, then you'll have your way in.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh. And, um, with the benefit of hindsight, when there's times that, um, implementations have stuck versus times that, um, you know, adoption maybe hasn't been what you want them to be, have you put your finger on, um, consistent criteria about what distinguishes which way it's going to go?
Or, or is there a long tail and it's different in every case?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. The, the most important criteria is a consensus within the organization that a change needs to [00:27:00] happen. Um, I over... You know, when we were first starting out, I said, "Oh, wow, what, what Kojo is doing is we create a product," and that's the way we sort of thought about things.
And as time's gone on, what I've sort of realized and what the company's realized is that, um, we're not selling a product, we're selling an organizational change, and that change comes from partnership. So we are, we are selling change. We're selling a new way to run, um, these important operational processes that really are essential to getting a job done.
Okay? So that's-- So we are a part... So we are, um, um, selling that change, and ultimately to f- actually make that change happen, you can't just give someone a product and say, "Here you go." Well, that's gonna lock them... They're-- Now they're thinking about things in the same way. They're running things the same way.
They just have a new- Tool in the, in the, in the toolbox as it were, to be able to go about solving it. But that doesn't necessarily lead to, um, um, the kind of change that they expect to see. So as time's gone on, what [00:28:00] we've found is, hey, we really need a partner. We really need to understand deeply how they do things now.
We need to, um, get aligned with how they're, how a customer is going to need to do things differently in the future. And the most important thing, the most important indicator of success early on that we've sort of seen over time is how involved is our multiple teams in the sales process? Are they really bought in, right?
Are they ex- Is the field team bought in? Is the AP team bought in? Is the purchasing team bought in? Are project managers bought in? If you have that buy-in from the very beginning, it's going to be more of a glide path to creating the change 'cause everyone is now gonna need to do, each of those teams is gonna need to do something differently than they did before with the new tool that, that we are providing for them.
We're there to help them figure that out, but if the intent isn't to change from the very beginning and, um, we need to continue to, uh, win over hearts and minds even after a deal is closed, it's gonna make things just a lot harder
Jason Jacobs: Uh, one tension that I've observed is that it, it seems like people's consistent advice is if you wanna get [00:29:00] anything adopted, you need to meet people where they are and don't make them change a thing.
Um, but the flip side is that, um, actually, the way they are might be pretty inefficient in some cases, whereas if you were to start from zero, you know, in designing workflows for, you know, for t- for, for today's version of that shop, it, you know, it, you know, there, there might be a bunch of redundancy, for example, that doesn't need to exist.
How do you think about that tension of, um- Yeah ... of kind of tuning what's there versus, you know, kind of shaping, um, uh, you know, how, um, you know, how they might like it to be without, um, all the, all the baggage of change?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. And so- Yeah ... that's a great question. I think, you know, when I think about change in this way, um, you both wanna make it as easy as...
Like, the reality is that people will need to probably do things differently if you're providing them with a new solution than they did before, right? There's gonna be... And so when that happens, what you wanna do is basically make it so that, A, it's as frictionless as possible, [00:30:00] and B, um, that they see the value in it for them.
So if... So the frictionless is a good example. You know, for a long time, um, we had deliveries in-- we have deliveries as part of our product. You can manage delivery, you can upload a picture, and check in that delivery, and that's a much better way than most contractors who don't track deliveries at all or have a, um, um, a paper packing slip that they put into a, a, a manila, manila envelope or folder that they sort of keep track of on that project and then bring into an office, um, which is all fine and well.
Our solution is allows for, or n-- at first, the first version of that allowed for digitization of that process. Um, there's still friction involved. There's still three or four steps to doing that. Um, you may say, "Oh, well, it's not that much," but still there is, there are steps there. This is where AI steps in, where if you can just take a picture of that packing slip and, um, our AI understands the packing slip and can check in the delivery.
We call this Parkdoor [00:31:00] Delivery Agent Um, where now you've reduced something that was three or four steps before to just one, that makes it so that, um, um, the change that you're asking someone to do, which is keep track of packing slips, is as frictionless and easy as possible. And if they see now the value, oh my God, my deliveries are tracked and it's, um, um, um, there's more transparency flowing back to my distributor and to the office team around what has and hasn't arrived to the job site, um, that is a very...
That is a far more effective way to actually lead to the change in behavior that organizations are looking for. And so, um, those are the general principles, and then I think AI is making it way easier to cr- to create solutions with less and less friction, um, than the more traditional or the older, um, um, um, digital solutions that, uh, or digitization solutions that, um, were available to us, um, as a, as a provider.
So this is a very, very exciting time to build software as a result, as y- as you might imagine
Jason Jacobs: [00:32:00] Yeah. So, um, I mean, I, I was gonna say, you know, you guys were founded pre-AI. I mean, that's certainly not true. But, but certainly, um, I would say before the latest generation of AI where it is starting to kind of break through with, with, um, uh, at least the beginnings of more mainstream adoption and, and more profound implications, um, you know, in, in industry.
Um, how, how would you have built Kojo different if you started today versus, um- Good question ... back in, in, in, in 2018? And also how have you evolved it as the, um- Yes ... landscape has been evolving under your feet?
Micah Rodman: Yeah, great question. Um, and again, I, I genuinely believe that there's no better time to be doing what we're doing than now.
Um, because what AI allows for is a new tool set for builders to apply to solve real problems out there in the world. So the same problem-- So with AI, the same [00:33:00] problem set that's relevant, that was relevant in 2018 when we started, which was, okay, there's this overhead for the field and office team that's required to actually get the materials onto the job site, and there's overspending on materials that, and potential savings opportunities that aren't being taken advantage of, um, you know, in the realm of three to five percent of total material spend.
That, those pr- um, problems exist in 2018, they exist in 2026. Um, the difference is, is that, um, the tool set that you have as a builder at your disposal now to actually solve those problems is way more effective to like solve the problem to the fullest extent possible now than they were in 2018. And I think that same example of, of, of, of delivery check-in, um, that I just mentioned is, is a perfect one.
Before, um, you would just take a picture of, um, of the delivery slip, but the system could not [00:34:00] understand the data on the, um, on, on the delivery slip. Now, the system, this is the sort of fundamental shift of AI, is that the system can now understand the data running through it and act accordingly. So, um, if you take a picture of, and capture the data on the packing slip, the system can understand that, A, that's a packing slip that, um, that matches to a certain PO, that there are, um, um, some items, that there are these statuses on each individual line item.
And you can do the full delivery check-in and take the associate next, associated next actions on behalf of the user, thus saving all of the time of, of a person needing to go in and interpreting the line items, each of the line items on that delivery slip. Great-- It was great to have a, a, a digital record of that before, but now the entire process can be automated 'cause the system can actually understand the data flowing through it.
And if you apply that same principle, not just to packing slips and deliveries, which is a fairly simple example, but more broadly across That seven-step process that I just described earlier, um, the [00:35:00] implications are actually profound. Like, you can go from saving seventy-five percent of the overhead to ninety-five percent plus of the overhead that goes into, uh, managing a procurement team.
Um, and, um, the same goes for savings, right? You can start thinking about over five percent of potential savings in, in certain categories of spend, um, um, and not just sort of, you know, the, the, the one to three, three to five percent range where, where, um, um, that was very possible to do before. So again, with AI, we can s- we have a toolkit to solve the same problems, um, that contractors experience every day, um, better than ever before in a way that is really exciting for us.
It's really, really exciting for us and hopefully, um, exciting for the industry as well.
Jason Jacobs: Um, this is broader than, than Kojo specific, but if you were a contractor, how do you think about, um, you know, if you look across the different workflows that make your organization run, um, when to build, [00:36:00] when to buy, when to go with an incumbent, and when to go with an upstart?
Like, there's so much noise, and I know that they're having a hard time sorting through it. Yeah. So what advice do you have for, for them?
Micah Rodman: So the, the market, it's definitely in a confusing, it's definitely a confusing moment for, for, for our customers out there who... There are just a lot of solutions across the board from design and estimating on through to, um, you know, even ERPs or there are upstarts there.
Um, the way I would think about it is, yes, the cost of building is lower than ever in terms of the buy versus build decision. The cost of building is lower than ever. Um, that is true for you but is also true for, um, um, the vendors that you work with. And so I personally still think that, like, there are some problems that probably didn't make sense for you to solve, um, on your own before.
Um, and it probably has to do with the, um, you know, simplicity of that problem, and it will be easier to solve [00:37:00] those problems now than ever. But if, if a problem like interfaced with accounting and your ERP and required integrations or, um, has just like a high volume of data running through it and there are approvals and there are, um, um-
Permissions and, um, other kinds of security requirements, um, and just real complexity in the workflow with, you know, a lot of steps that each need to go well and so on and so forth. Um, um, it's also easier than ever to build a very bad and, um, um, software product, um, um, that, that teams get very frustrated with and so on and so forth.
So, um, it still remains to be the case that, like, the rule of, um, you know, competitive advantage, what are you uniquely good at, um, and focus there is, is, is true now, but it was also true, you know, before, uh, um, coding agents got really good. So, um, that's how I would generally think about that. [00:38:00] Um, if, if you were at all thinking about, um, doing something yourself, it's probably like, you know, it's a good time to try.
But the same reasons why something would be hard to build before, um, are still going to exist today. And you may be-- uh, there might be a bit of a, of a mirage that you can solve the problem on your own, but the same, um, factors that make it difficult to do yourself, um, are going to continue to be challenges, um, um, for you even if you're trying to build something yourself.
So that would be the, like, how I would think about that, that, that general problem space. And then as far as like incumbents versus upstarts, well, um Um, you gotta make sure your incumbents are behaving like upstarts. Like, that's the best of both worlds. If you have the advantage of thinking about the problem and solving the problem for many, many years, but are also applying the latest and greatest of what is now possible, um, that is going to be-- that is the best solution.
It's when upstarts aren't doing that, um, and aren't moving fast [00:39:00] enough, um, um, where I would recommend going with that, like, you know, the, the startup. Um, um, sorry, when incumbents aren't doing that, that's when I would in-say like, "Okay, maybe you, maybe you investigate that, um, um, particular startup and, and, and see what they have on offer."
So it's on incumbents right now, and I think Salesforce is doing this really well and sort of leading the industry, um, as far as, you know, as far as SaaS providers go, in terms of adapting what their solution looks like into an AI world, um, where that is going to be, I think, a sort of, um, um, a success for, for, for Salesforce.
It's a bet that they're taking, but I think it's gonna work. But I think it also is going to... It-it's sort of a model of the kinds of changes that, um, um, providers should be, should be making in order to keep their solution, um, um, current to, to the needs of, of the now and next
Jason Jacobs: Uh, so I had, um, Ben Price from, uh, WND Ventures, the venture arm of, um, DPR Construction, on the show recently.
And one of the things that he said was that, um, it's hard to come in [00:40:00] as a new vendor and, um, you know, need the whole keys to the kingdom in t- in order to show value. And from a bandwidth standpoint, it's not realistic to expect a customer... You know, they're getting approached by too many vendors to be opening the kimono to that many different vendors just to explore who they might wanna w-wanna work with.
And so his advice was start with a narrow wedge. Um, he also said that, um, he expects there's gonna be consolidation and that a bunch of these, you know, wedges are gonna become, uh, you know, modules for the systems of, of, of record. And, um, when Kevin Halter came on the show recently, he talked about this, you know, this kind of ten million ceiling that's hard to break through when you're scaling revenues as an upstart.
So all that is just context to ask, um, h-how, how well do you think venture capital fits construction tech, and where is it a fit and where is it not a fit?[00:41:00]
Micah Rodman: Well, uh, it's a great question. I mean, I think, I think it's a g- I think in many ways it's a great fit. You just have to... It's what are the problems that you're looking to solve and, and, and, uh, how big are those problems to go out and solve, and what are, what, what is solving with, you know, wedge A, how does that position you to solve, like, the further problems into the future?
Um, and these are the kinds of, um, you know, the, the, the experienced good venture capitalists will answer those questions before they make any investment, you know, on an in- investment into a vertical like construction. Obviously, there's a huge TAM, there's a huge market opportunity in construction. It's just, um, the question is, for the, um, um, uh, the business model and for the, um, um, you know, the unlock as, as time, as, as product progresses and unlocks next, the next product opportunities, um, is there a real story and narrative there to support a very large, a very large business for venture capital to get their return?
[00:42:00] Um, I don't think that venture capital, it makes sense for all-- I don't think all venture capitalists are thinking in that way, I think, you know, necessarily or with that level of rigor. Um, but I think that there are, there, there are ones who do, um, and they back, you know, some of the real winners in the space.
Kevin's not wrong. Um, I know Kevin. Kevin's great. Um, he- and he's-- and I agree with him. There are very few examples of, um, um, of construction startups that make it past the ten million mark. But I would also say that, like, that's true in all vertical industries. There are j- just very few, um, um... When you look at the percentage of companies that start up and the percentage of them that even receive venture funding, the percentage of them that get to beyond a ten million dollar, um, annual recurring revenue point is, is very little.
Um, and so it's, it's, it is the way of, of the market, so to speak. Um, you would hope that VCs know that and are, and are making good bets based on, based on that input. So I think it can work, and I think it has worked. There are great [00:43:00] examples of it working. Um, um, it just requires a, a level, I think, of, like, rigor, um, that if applied, generally speaking, would probably lead to fewer investments being made.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh. And I mean, there's a lot of buzzwords getting thrown around in terms of, um, you know, death of SaaS and, um, AI native services and services as software and, you know, business model evolution and, and stuff. H- how do you think about that at KOJO? What are you seeing, um, across the landscape and, and, uh, um, and to the extent that you have some, you know, some, some criteria for how to think about it as, uh, you know, as you assess different workflows and, and modules within construction tech, like what's the best fit in what spots and, and, and how do you know?
Micah Rodman: Yep 100%. So, um, the best way of thinking about this, I think, um, comes from this Andreessen-Horowitz article that I read, maybe it was like 18 months ago. And it was just like very basic [00:44:00] framework. I think it was like services as a software framework, which essentially like outlined these three stages of essentially information technology.
The first being a physical, like where all data is physical and exists, like a contract on a project would exist in a physical file, drawing would exist in a physical file. You would have a way of a library of those, and you would go and find what you need, and you would do the research as a user. You'd find the particular, you know, article of the contract, you'd pull it up, you'd analyze it, and you would take, you would call or email based on your analysis.
So that's like First paradigm. Um, second paradigm is, is digitization, where it's like all of those documents that are now ph-- were physical before are now PDFs at very least. Um, there may be, you know, di-- other kinds of digital documents, but the, um, the solutions that spring up are, like, unique for that industry maybe in the way that they do business and the kinds of files that they use.
So instead of opening up a physical filing cabinet, you go into the [00:45:00] cloud, um, you pull in the document that you need, you do your analysis, and maybe you take action directly in that system. So like, you know, I can send an email through or a message to my GC through Procore, or I can run a, um, submittals process through these kinds of systems.
Um, they don't necessarily understand the systems natively, the information that's flowing through them, but it is a specialized digital interface that's built for managing the workflow. And so that is time savings, but ultimately it still is the end user who needs to, um, review the document and determine what to do with the information that's in that document.
Um, what the new paradigm allows for is the system itself to understand the data that's flowing through. And as a result, it can, um, have an idea of which next action to take, what to do based on its analysis of that data. So if you're reviewing a change order, you're rev-you're reviewing a submittal, um, you're reviewing a, a purchase request or a quote, you can have an [00:46:00] opinion about the actual data that's...
opinion about what to do with that particular document based on the data that's flowing through it. And so that is actually a profound shift in IT, and my thesis is that it allows technology companies to be more helpful to their partners than ever before. Um, now is it like you're end align-- because it aligns you to deliver the intended outcome that, um, or more of that outcome that you were relying before on a person to do, right?
And so the extent to which it comes down to, hey, is this now something that we rely on fully to our solution and we don't have to do manually anymore? Um, I think in construction that's gonna be really hard to, to land on that because there's just so much risk involved and, um, and risk that's assumed with, you know, for, for a trade contractor, right, like in general, let alone like delegating off all of that risk to, um, um, um, an AI system is something that I just-- I, [00:47:00] I struggle to see that.
What I do see is, um, a lot of the heavy lift, a lot of the time that's still involved, um, with, you know, in our case, procurement and AP and warehouse management, um, can be minimized to put the people that are experts working On those workflows today, but really, really, you know, running the, the process will have a perspective of sitting above the process, um, and, and, and making choices much in the same way as our engineering team is doing today, um, and they're working with, with, with AI agents.
So that's what makes sense for us in our particular space and, um, what we care about. Like I, I don't see a world in which all procurement is fully automated. I think that there's gonna be a human role, um, in reviewing and, um, um, in checking the work and so on and so forth. I imagine in construction that that will be more so the paradigm than like full on autonomous project managements, uh, project managers running around doing that.
But, um, um, you know, I, I, I just because of the risk involved and the dynamic nature of what's [00:48:00] being built, but I do think that these systems are gonna be real leverage to push, um, organizations onto a higher level of operating, right? They can, they can be, um... Now they don't, they're not bogged down in the, um, um, the tedious nature of just the day-to-day running, um, um, the company.
Um, it's far easier to be, to work on the business, so to word. And as a result, I think you're gonna see, um, contractors become a lot more profitable and efficient, um, than they ever were before.
Jason Jacobs: So if you had to predict in, in five years, will these shops have more software vendors, um, uh, that they buy from or less?
Micah Rodman: Great question. Um
It's a really good question. I, I would f- probably predict, uh, fewer because I think that incumbents, the, the rate at which inc- if incumbents are doing their jobs well, they're increasing their ability [00:49:00] to build, and they're pulling their roadmaps forward, and they're, and they're solving more problems for their end users.
Um, and they know how to create change within those organizations. Um, they have the underlying frameworks for success that need to be true of any system. So for instance, permissioning and security and integrations and all of that is kind of the same, um, as it applies to... At least from our perspective, it's a lot of the same core ingredients to a solution that you would need to have to solve other problems for a contractor, um, and for that same end user.
And so if the cost to build goes down, I would expect, uh, those incumbents to, to chew off more and more problems and therefore fewer point solutions out there in the world, um, um, that solve just a narrow problem and more dynamic, multifaceted, multi-product platforms that, um, it's easier to do that than it was before.
So that would be like my general thesis. Um, I don't know. Would you see that differently or, um, um, how have others thought about this particular question that, that you've spoken with?
Jason Jacobs: [00:50:00] Uh, I don't know. I mean, um, I mean, on the one hand, um, I mean, there's gotta be consolidation because there's just vendor fatigue.
But on the other, um, uh, you know, there's so many distinct problems to solve and so many of them are unsolved and, and, uh, and, you know, is it better to solve all of them- Okay, or, or to solve each of them great, right? Um, yeah. Which- Yeah ... which, which actually leads me to another question, which is, um, you know, how important is it for all these, all these point tools to get stitched together?
And to the extent that it's important, how is that gonna occur? Will there be-- Is it a system of record? Do agents change that dynamic? Like, what does the future look like?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. I think it's really interesting. I think there's-- the holy grail is, um, um, really this one, uh, operational platform that, um, understands budgets and estimates and designs, and can pull all of that [00:51:00] through to construction operations, right?
Like, what are you purchasing? Where are your la- where's your labor? Like the projections, all of that. And to pull all of that information from, um, planning to, um, um, operations and execution into one essentially like pane of glass that gives you insight into how you're performing now and allows you to apply learnings from current projects into how you model and set expectations for the future.
So that I think is like this really the, the holy grail of construction software, in my opinion. Um, now will, will AI allow us to get there faster than before? I do believe that. Um, and I think it's a, it's a really interesting competitive space to think about who, you know, marching towards that end vision of like what might be possible here, which, which I think has always been the thing that everyone's want-- And it-- and historically you've, you've, you've expected that from your ERP potentially, or other industries, you know, be unable to unlock that kind of value from their ERPs.
In construction, it's, it's hard for a variety of [00:52:00] reasons to go out and do that. Um, it becomes a task that, um, you can do, but you, you will pay for. You'll pay for it. It'll cost you millions of dollars of, of IT consultants to pull all the data together and, and have those systems all talk to each other the way you need to, and it won't be as automated as you ultimately want it to be.
And so I think that is really the, um, the big unlock is that the cost of building that one consolidated, consistent and coherent system from planning to implementation across labor, um, equipment and, um, um, materials procurement is like this, um, and then also estimating and, and design systems and so on, and pulling all that together, um, is the sort of holy grail.
I, I don't know if, uh, you know-- I think it'll be easier to do now with AI, you know, to stitch those things together and, and automate them, um, than before, but I, I, uh, at least that's what I would hope. But I think that's really what the industry wants. Um, they're willing right now to tie a lot of solutions together in, in attempt to get there, and I, and I just think that [00:53:00] the future will look different.
Like it'll-- it should be easier to get to that end result and, um, the power of that end result can be unlocked and, and it's exciting time for the industry as a result.
Jason Jacobs: And so tying that back around, what does, uh, what does the future of KOJO look like? If you guys are successful beyond your wildest dreams, what have you built?
Micah Rodman: Yeah, I mean, we've, we've built a product and a platform that, um, makes-- takes construction operations and makes it not just like the cost of doing business, but a strategic advantage for you and your company. That's the, that's the thesis here is taking these, these processes that never... Rather the, the-- again, the cost of doing business.
We just needed to do it. We needed to get it done, um, and we didn't necessarily have the time or, or, or, or focus or bandwidth to be able to invest deeply into how we do procurement and what the opportunities for savings are. Um, but now we can. [00:54:00] And now that's just like-- And actually by doing that, we make the business better.
Um, and so doing that, um, I think across construction operations, um, um, where procurement and warehouse management play a really important part in that already, um, to sort of stretch that out and to go further, um, is the vision, and the question is how quickly and which next moves do we make and so on and so forth.
Um, but ultimately that is the sort of one single cohesive vision, but really being excellent at, um, of course, procurement and, uh, warehouse management and finance are the pillars of, of construction operations anyway. So continuing to, to really push and, and, and just be the excellent, um, solutions provider, you know, solving the problems to the furthest degree that's possible with the tools that we have at our disposal, um, will continue to be our, our, our, our immediate roadmap.
Jason Jacobs: Uh, and if you had to narrow it down to one thing, what keeps you up at night the most professionally?
Micah Rodman: But, [00:55:00] um, moving faster. So are we keeping up with the, the rate, you know, on the, on the frontier, on the cutting edge of what is now possible to do? Um, um, are we at Kojo keeping up with that? And are we sort of, um, disrupting ourselves internally fast enough, um, to keep up with that rate of change?
That is a more sort of higher order perspective about what concerns me, because if you're not doing that, as I mentioned before, like there won't be a place for you in the market of the future. If you are doing that, there will be a place for you, I believe. So, um, that is like the primary concern is maintaining the s- execution speed, um, um, and, and, um, relative to what's now possible with, with a lot of the innovation that, that is happening at a very, very fast pace out there, out there in the, in the world of, in the world of AI models.
Jason Jacobs: And what's your most non-consensus view on the future of construction?
Micah Rodman: Let's see. Non-consensus view. Um
The contrarian takes on conservation- I've ne-
Jason Jacobs: I've never asked that before ...
Micah Rodman: super interesting. Yeah, it's good.
Uh, this is one where we're gonna have to edit down to make me see- seem far more, more insightful. Uh, but I think-- I don't know. I think this is by and large a consensus. New, um... So
I think, well, I think [00:56:00] robots have the potential to solve a lot of the labor shortage in construction, um, within the next, within the next decade. Um, I'm, like, genuinely very bullish on, um
just the power, uh, and, and, um, the rate of change that's happening in the robotic space, and in general, contractors' ability to change their business models to be more like manufacturing than they've ever looked for. Because I think the impact of robotics, um, will be on job sites and felt on job sites.
But I don't think that that's-- it will be inefficient to build or, um, or rather inefficient isn't quite the right word, but it will be difficult to build with robots on a job site for the same reasons it will be dif- it is difficult today to build on a job site versus in a fabrication setting, um, um, um, or, or in a shop setting.
And so as contractors are moving more and more into fabrication workflows, [00:57:00] that will make it probably, um... that is an easier point of departure to start to integrate robotics, um, um, into how things are built than if you were just sort of saying, "Okay, let's just take the job site and make that, um, um, space for robotics."
So anyways, I think that that in- that change that's happening now to what we're calling industrialized construction, um, is going to lead to a faster uptick in robotics, and I think you're gonna start to see that in the next ten years in a way that's really exciting. Um, and, um, um Yeah, I think we'll, I think we'll be kind of shocked at the rate of change, um, um, as, as you sort of think about it just because the potential advantages are just so tremendous to, to, to doing these things too.
Um, so anyways, that's, that's an area where, where I get-- I don't know, I don't know the extent to which this is in consensus or, or not consensus or, um, or what, but I think that this is an area that is really exciting, and I think that they will lead to [00:58:00] business model changes as a result. Like, um, what does the future of a GC look like?
What does the future of a trade contractor look like? Um, with robotics, is, is multi-trade coordination far more important now to really leverage the benefits of success, and, and what do the business models look like as a result of that? I think it's gonna be a, a really interesting decade to, to, to watch and see how that plays
Jason Jacobs: out.
Uh, so now you've got me inspired. If I wanted to go and, you know, do a dive on, on, you know, what, what construction could learn from the manufacturing world, what areas of manufacturing or companies or, um, philosophies do you think would be most relevant to, um, you know, to borrow from?
Micah Rodman: Yeah. Um, that's a great question.
I think, you know, going deep on-- This is something that we think a lot about because automotive procurement, as an example or, or, um, is, you know, it's a complicated supply chain. The key differences are you're building the same car over and over again. Um, construction is there's no two buildings, there's no two pieces of earth that are exactly the same.
There's just gonna be these differences. Um, [00:59:00] and but the more you can think about buildings being the same, um, I think the, the more you can see things that way, the more efficiency is unlocked potentially, um, because you're now solving-- you have standard operating procedures. Maybe you're seeing that you buy the same things across different projects and, and these kinds of things.
So, um, I would look to automotive or other kinds of advanced, um, high-complexity manufacturing processes because I think that those are the areas that are starting to, um, construction, um... I think it's not a controversial take to say construction will look over the next ten years with the help of AI that helps see patterns between, um, seemingly on the surface different projects, um, is going to, um, um, push construction to look more like that than it does today.
Jason Jacobs: Awesome. Well, such a wide-ranging discussion. Uh, anything I didn't ask that you wish I did or any parting words for listeners? [01:00:00]
Micah Rodman: Um, and where I wanna leave that is that this is just the most exciting time for construction technology, um, probably ever. Um, there's just so much going on. It's so much more powerful than, um, the cloud and, um, and mobile platform shifts.
There's just so much to solve here. Um, and there now... now that the tools, you know, the, the hammer, when, when, when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail sort of expression. Now you have a new hammer in what is possible with AI, and there are problems to solve now that you never thought could be possible to solve with a different hammer, so to speak.
Um, the world looks different from this lens, and there's so much more now that, that is possible to go out and do, which is really, really exciting and, and motivating when you consider the size of the industry and how important it is to shaping, I think, what, what are the core issues of our time, [01:01:00] which are, um, the cost of living and, um, keeping the country competitive in the twenty-first century with the rest of the world.
And so this is a very, um, exciting time to be building in the industry. And, um, um, um, and there's just over the next decade, five, ten years, I think we're gonna see just these really exciting innovations and changes in the way that things work in a way that I'm very, very excited about. And it's ex-- it's a, it's a, it's a pleasure and honor to be a part of it.
So anyways, um, that's my sort of parting words here. Um, um, thanks so much, Jason, for, for the time and, and interest and, and attention, and, um, um, I wish you well on, on, on all that's next for you.
Jason Jacobs: Great. Well, thanks for coming on. That is a fantastic point to end on, and, uh, best of luck to you and the whole Kojo team.
Micah Rodman: Thank you so much.
Jason Jacobs: That's it for this episode of BuiltForward. I hope you enjoyed it. If you found it useful, share it with someone building in the industry and follow the show so you don't miss what's next. Thanks for listening, and see you next [01:02:00] week.