(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to theCUBE's continuing coverage of Snowflake Summit 22 live from Caesars Forum in Las Vegas. I'm Lisa Martin with Dave Vellante. We've got a couple of guests joining us now. We're going to be talking about financial services. Rinesh Patel joins us, the Global Head of Financial Services for Snowflake, and Jack Berkowitz, Chief Data Officer at ADP. Guys, welcome to the program. >> Thanks, thanks for having us. >> Thanks for having us. >> Talk to us about what's going on in the financial services industry as a whole. Obviously, we've seen so much change in the last couple of years. What does the data experience look like for internal folks and of course, for those end user consumers and clients? >> So, one of the big things happening inside of the financial services industry is overcoming the COVID wait, right? A lot of banks, a lot of institutions like ours had a lot of stuff on-prem. And then the move to the Cloud allows us to have that flexibility to deal with it. And out of that is also all these new capabilities. So the machine learning revolution has really hit the services industry, right? And so it's affecting how our IT teams or our data teams are building applications. Also really affecting what the end consumers get out of them. And so there's all sorts of consumerization of the experience over the past couple of years much faster than we ever expected it to happen. >> Right, we have these expectations as consumers that bleed into our business lives that I can do transactions. It's going to be on the swipe in terms of checking authenticity, fraud detection, et cetera. And of course we don't want things to go back in terms of how brands are serving us. Talk about some of the things that you guys have put in place with Snowflake in the last couple of years, particularly at ADP. >> Yeah, so one of the big things that we've done, is, one of the things that we provide is compensation data. So we issue a thing called the National Employment Report that informs the world as to what's happening in the U.S. economy in terms of workers. And then we have compensation data on top of that. So the thing that we've been able to do with Snowflake is to lower the time that it takes us to process that and get that information out into the fingertips of people. And so people can use it to see what's changed in terms of with the worker changes, how much people are making. And they can get it very, very quickly. And we're able to do that with Snowflake now. Used to take us weeks, now it's in a matter of moments we can get that updated information out to people. >> Interesting. It helps with the talent war and- >> Helps in the talent war, helps people adjust, even where they're going to put supply chain in reaction to where people are migrating. We can have all of that inside of the Snowflake system and available almost instantaneously. >> You guys announced the Financial Data Cloud last year. What was that like? 'Cause I know we had Frank on early, he clearly was driving the verticalization of Snowflake if you will, which is kind of rare for a relatively new software company but what's that been like? Give us the update on where you're at and biggest vertical, right? >> Absolutely, it's been an exciting 12 months. We're a platform, but the journey and the vision is more. We're trying to bring together a fragmented ecosystem across financial services. The aim is really to bring together key customers, key data providers, key solution providers all across the different Clouds that exist to allow them to collaborate with data in a seamless way. To solve industry problems. To solve industry problems like ESG, to solve industry problems like quantitative research. And we're seeing a massive groundswell of customers coming to Snowflake, looking at the Financial Services Data Cloud now to actually solve business problems, business critical problems. That's really driving a lot of change in terms of how they operate, in terms of how they win customers, mitigate risk and so forth. >> Jack, I think, I feel like the only industry that's sometimes more complicated than security, is data. Maybe not, security's still maybe more fragmented- >> Well really the intersection of the two is a nightmare. >> And so as you look out on this ecosystem, how do you as the chief data officer, how do you and your organization, what process do you use to decide, okay, which of the, like a chef, which of these ingredients am I going to put together for my business. >> It's a great question, right? There's been explosion of companies. We kind of look at it in two ways. One is we want to make sure that the software and the data can interoperate because we don't want to be in the business of writing bridge code. So first thing is, is having the ecosystem so that the things are tested and can work together. The other area is, and it's important to us is understanding the risk profile of that company. We process about 20% of the U.S. payroll, another 25% of the taxes. And so there's a risk to us that we have an imperative to protect. So we're looking at those companies are they financed, what's their management team. What's the sales experience like, that's important to us. And so technology and the experience of the company coming together are super important to us. >> What's your purview as a chief data officer, I mean, a lot of CDOs that I know came out of the back office and it was a compliance or data quality. You come out of industry from a technology company. So you're sort of the modern... You're like the modern CDO. >> Thanks. Thanks. >> Dave: What's your role? >> I appreciate that. >> You know what I'm saying though? >> And for a while it was like, oh yeah, compliance. >> So I actually- >> And then all of a sudden, boom, big deal. >> Yeah, I really have two jobs. So I have that job with data governance but a lot of data security. But I also have a product development unit, a massive business in monetization of data or people analytics or these compensation benchmarks or helping people get mortgages. So providing that information, so that people can get their mortgage, or their bank loans, or all this other type of transactional data. *So it's both sides of that equation is my reading inside. >> You're responsible for building data products? >> That's right. >> Directly. >> That's right. I've got a massive team that builds data products. >> Okay. That's somewhat unique in your... >> I think it's where CDOs need to be. So we build data products. We build, and we assist as a hub to allow other business units to build analytics that help them either optimize their cost or increase their sales. And then we help with all that governance and communication, we don't want to divide it up. There's a continuum to it. >> And you're a peer of the CIO and the CISO? >> Yeah, exactly. They're my peers. I actually talk to them almost every day. So I've got the CIO as a peer. >> It's a team. >> I've got the security as a peer and we get things done together. >> Talk about the alignment with business. We've been talking a lot about alignment with the data folks, the business folks, the technical folks to identify the right solutions, to be able to govern data, to monetize it, to create data products. What does that... You mentioned a couple of your cohorts, but on the business side, who are some of those key folks? >> So we're like any other big, big organization. We have lots of different business units. So we work directly with either the operational team or the heads of those business units to divine analytic missions that they'll actually execute. And at the same time, we actually have a business unit that's all around data monetization. And so I work with them every single day. And so these business units will come together. I think the big thing for us is to define value and measure that value as we go. As long as we're measuring that value as we go, then we can continue to see improvements. And so, like I said, sometimes it's bottom line, sometimes it's top line, but we're involved. Data is actually a substrate of the company. It's not a side thing to the company. >> Yeah, you are. >> ADP. >> Yeah but if they say data first but you really are data first. >> Yeah. I mean, our CEO says- >> Data's your product. >> Data's our middle name. And it literally is. >> Well, so what do you do in the Snowflake financial services data Cloud? Are you monetizing? >> Yeah. >> What's the plan? >> Yeah, so we have clients. So part of our data monetization is actually providing aggregate and anonymized information that helps other clients make business decisions. So they'll take it into their analytics. So, supply chain optimization, where should we actually put the warehouses based on the population shifts? And so we're actually using the file distribution capabilities or the information distribution, no longer files, where we use Snowflake to actually be that data cloud for those clients. So the data just pops up for our other clients. >> I think the industry's existed a lot with the physical movement of data. When you physically move data, you also physically move the data management challenges. Where do you store it? How do you map it? How do you concord it? And ultimately data sharing is taking away that friction that exists. So it's easier to be able to make informed decisions with the data at hand across two counterparties. >> Yeah, and there's a benefit to us 'cause it lowers our friction. We can have a conversation and somebody can be... Obviously the contracts have to be signed, but once they get done, somebody's up and running on it within minutes. And where it used to be, as you were saying, the movement of data and loss of control, we never actually lose control of it. We know where it is. >> Or yeah, contracts signed, now you got to go through this long process of making sure everything's cool, or a lot of times it could slow down the sale. >> That's right. >> Let's see how that's going to... Let's do a little advanced work. Now you're working without a contract. Here, you can say, "Hey, we're in the Snowflake data cloud. It's governed, you're a part of the ecosystem." >> Yeah, and the ecosystem we announced, oh gee, I think it's probably almost a year and a half ago, a relationship with ICE, Intercontinental Exchange, where they're actually taking our information and their information and creating a new data product that they in turn sell. So you get this sort of combination. >> Absolutely. The ability to form partnerships and monetize data with your partners vastly increases as a consequence. >> Talk to us about the adoption of the financial services data cloud in the last what, maybe nine months or so, since it was announced? And also in terms of the its value proposition, how does the ADP use case articulate that? >> So, very much so. So in terms of momentum, we're a global organization, as you mentioned, we are verticalized. So we have increasingly more expertise and expertise experience now within financial services that allows us to really engage and accelerate our momentum with the top banks, with the biggest asset managers by AUM, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds on Snowflake. And obviously those data providers and solution providers that we engage with. So the momentum's really there. We're really moving very, very fast in a great market because we've got great opportunity with the capabilities that we have. I mean, ADP is just one of many use cases that we're working with and collaborations that we're taking to market. So yeah, the opportunity to monetize data and help our partners monetize the data has vastly increased within this space. >> When you think about... Oh go ahead, please. >> Yeah I was just going to say, and from our perspective, as we were getting into this, Snowflake was with us on the journey. And that's been a big deal. >> So when you think about data privacy, governance, et cetera, and public policy, it seems like you have, obviously you got things going on in Europe, and you got California, you have other states, there's increasing in complexity. You guys probably love that. (Dave laughs) More data warehouses, but where are we at with that whole? >> It's a great question. Privacy is... We hold some of the most critical information about people because that's our job to help people get paid. And we respect that as sort of our prime agenda. Part of it deals with the technology. How do you monitor, how do you see, make sure that you comply with all these regulations, but a lot of it has to do with the basic ethics of why you're doing and what you're doing. So we have a data and AI ethics board that meets and reviews our use cases. Make sure not only are we doing things properly to the regulation, but are these the types of products, are these the types of opportunities that we as a company want to stand behind on behalf of the consumers? Our company's been around 75 years. We talk about ourselves as a national asset. We have a trust relationship. We want to ensure that that trust relationship is never violated. >> Are you in a position where you can influence public policy and create more standards or framework. >> We actually are, right. We issue something every month called the National Employment Report. It actually tells you what's happening in the U.S. economy. We also issue it in some overseas countries like France. Because of that, we work a lot with various groups. And we can help shape, either data policy, we're involved in understanding although we don't necessarily want to be out in the front, but we want to learn about what's happening with federal trade commission, EOC, because at the end of the day we serve people, I always joke ADP, it's my grandfather's ADP. Well, it was actually my grandfather's ADP. (Dave laughs) He was a small businessman, and he used a ADP all those years ago. So we want to be part of that conversation because we want to continue to earn that trust every day. >> Well, plus your observation space is pretty wide. >> And you've got context and perspective on that that you can bring. >> We move somewhere between two, two and a half trillion dollars a year through our systems. And so we understand what's happening in the economy. >> What are some of the, oh sorry. >> Can your National Employment Report combined with a little Snowflake magic tell us what the hell's going to happen with this economy? >> It's really interesting you say that. Yeah, we actually can. >> Okay. (panelists laugh) >> I think when you think about the amount of data that we are working with, the types of partners that we're working with, the opportunities are infinite. They really, really are. >> So it's either a magic eight ball or it's a crystal ball, but you have it. >> We think- >> We've just uncovered that here on theCUBE. >> We think we have great partners. We have great data. We have a set of industry problems out there that we're working, collaboration with the community to be able to solve. >> What are some of the upcoming use cases Rinesh, that excite you, that are coming up in financial services- >> Great question. >> That snowflake is just going to knock out of the park. >> So look, I think there's a set of here and now problems that the industry faces, ESG's a good one. If you think about ESG, it means many different things from business ethics, to diversity, to your carbon footprint and every asset manager has to make sure they have now some form of green strategy that reflects the values of their investors. And every bank is looking to put in place sustainable lending to help their corporate customers transition. That's a big data problem. And so we're very much at the center of helping those organizations support those informed investors and help those corporates transition to a more sustainable landscape. >> Let me give you an example on Snowflake, we launched capabilities about diversity benchmarks. The first time in the industry companies can understand for their industry, their size, their location what their diversity profile looks like and their org chart profile looks like to differentiate or at least to understand are they doing the right things inside the business. The ability for banks to understand that and everything else, it's a big deal. And that was built on Snowflake. >> I think it's massive, especially in the context of the question around regulation 'cause we're seeing more and more disclosure agreements come out where regulators are making sure that there's no greenwashing taking place. So when you have really strong sources of data that are standardized, that allow that investment process to ingest that data, it does allow for a better outcome for investors. >> Real data, I mean, that diversity example they don't have to rely on a survey. >> It's not a survey. >> Anecdotes. >> It's coming right out of the transactional systems and it's updated, whenever those paychecks are run, whether it's weekly, whether it's biweekly or monthly, all that information gets updated and it's available. >> So it sounds like ADP is a facilitator of a lot of companies ESG initiatives, at least in part? >> Well, we partner with companies all the time. We have over 900,000 clients and all of them are... We've never spoken to a client who's not concerned about their people. And that's just good business. And so, yeah we're involved in that and we'll see where it goes over time now. >> I think there's tremendous opportunity if you think about the data that the ADP have in terms of diversity, in terms of gender pay gap. Huge, huge opportunity to incorporate that, as I said into the ESG principles and criteria. >> Good, 'cause that definitely is what needs to be addressed. (Lisa laughs) Guys thank you so much for joining Dave and me on the program, talking about Snowflake ADP, what you're doing together, and the massive potential that you're helping unlock with the value of data. We appreciate your insights and your time. >> Thank you for having us. >> Dave: Thanks guys. >> Thank you so much. >> For our guests, and Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE, live in Las Vegas at Snowflake Summit 22. Dave and I will be right back with our next guest. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Announcer: From the cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, it's the cube! Covering IBM Think. Brought to you by IBM. >> Hi everybody, this is Dave Vellante of theCUBE, and you're watching our coverage of the IBM digital event experience. A multi-day program, tons of content, and it's our pleasure to be able to bring in experts, practitioners, customers, and partners. Sriram Raghavan is here. He's the Vice President of IBM Research in AI. Sriram, thanks so much for coming on thecUBE. >> Thank you, pleasure to be here. >> I love this title, I love the role. It's great work if you're qualified for it.(laughs) So, tell us a little bit about your role and your background. You came out of Stanford, you had the pleasure, I'm sure, of hanging out in South San Jose at the Almaden labs. Beautiful place to create. But give us a little background. >> Absolutely, yeah. So, let me start, maybe go backwards in time. What do I do now? My role's responsible for AI strategy, planning, and execution in IBM Research across our global footprint, all our labs worldwide and their working area. I also work closely with the commercial parts. The parts of IBM, our Software and Services business that take the innovation, AI innovation, from IBM Research to market. That's the second part of what I do. And where did I begin life in IBM? As you said, I began life at our Almaden Research Center up in San Jose, up in the hills. Beautiful, I had in a view. I still think it's the best view I had. I spent many years there doing work at the intersection of AI and large-scale data management, NLP. Went back to India, I was running the India lab there for a few years, and now I'm back here in New York running AI strategy. >> That's awesome. Let's talk a little bit about AI, the landscape of AI. IBM has always made it clear that you're not doing consumer AI. You're really tying to help businesses. But how do you look at the landscape? >> So, it's a great question. It's one of those things that, you know, we constantly measure ourselves and our partners tell us. I think we, you've probably heard us talk about the cloud journey . But look barely 20% of the workloads are in the cloud, 80% still waiting. AI, at that number is even less. But, of course, it varies. Depending on who you ask, you would say AI adoption is anywhere from 4% to 30% depending on who you ask in this case. But I think it's more important to look at where is this, directionally? And it's very, very clear. Adoption is rising. The value is more, it's getting better appreciated. But I think more important, I think is, there is broader recognition, awareness and investment, knowing that to get value out of AI, you start with where AI begins, which is data. So, the story around having a solid enterprise information architecture as the base on which to drive AI, is starting to happen. So, as the investments in data platform, becoming making your data ready for AI, starts to come through. We're definitely seeing that adoption. And I think, you know, the second imperative that businesses look for obviously is the skills. The tools and the skills to scale AI. It can't take me months and months and hours to go build an AI model, I got to accelerate it, and then comes operationalizing. But this is happening, and the upward trajectory is very, very clear. >> We've been talking a lot on theCUBE over the last couple of years, it's not the innovation engine of our industry is no longer Moore's Law, it's a combination of data. You just talked about data. Applying machine technology to that data, being able to scale it, across clouds, on-prem, wherever the data lives. So. >> Right. >> Having said that, you know, you've had a journey. You know, you started out kind of playing "Jeopardy!", if you will. It was a very narrow use case, and you're expanding that use case. I wonder if you could talk about that journey, specifically in the context of your vision. >> Yeah. So, let me step back and say for IBM Research AI, when I think about how we, what's our strategy and vision, we think of it as in two parts. One part is the evolution of the science and techniques behind AI. And you said it, right? From narrow, bespoke AI that all it can do is this one thing that it's really trained for, it takes a large amount of data, a lot of computing power. Two, how do you have the techniques and the innovation for AI to learn from one use case to the other? Be less data hungry, less resource hungry. Be more trustworthy and explainable. So, we call that the journey from narrow to broad AI. And one part of our strategy, as scientists and technologists, is the innovation to make that happen. So that's sort of one part. But, as you said, as people involved in making AI work in the enterprise, and IBM Research AI vision would be incomplete without the second part, which is, what are the challenges in scaling and operationalizing AI? It isn't sufficient that I can tell you AI can do this, how do I make AI do this so that you get the right ROI, the investment relative to the return makes sense and you can scale and operationalize. So, we took both of these imperatives. The AI narrow-to-broad journey, and the need to scale and operationalize. And what of the things that are making it hard? The things that make scaling and operationalizing harder: data challenges, we talked about that, skills challenges, and the fact that in enterprises, you have to govern and manage AI. And we took that together and we think of our AI agenda in three pieces: Advancing, trusting, and scaling AI. Advancing is the piece of pushing the boundary, making AI narrow to broad. Trusting is building AI which is trustworthy, is explainable, you can control and understand its behavior, make sense of it and all of the technology that goes with it. And scaling AI is when we address the problem of, how do I, you know, reduce the time and cost for data prep? How do I reduce the time for model tweaking and engineering? How do I make sure that a model that you build today, when something changes in the data, I can quickly allow for you to close the loop and improve the model? All of the things, think of day-two operations of AI. All of that is part of our scaling AI strategy. So advancing, trusting, scaling is sort of the three big mantras around which the way we think about our AI. >> Yeah, so I've been doing a little work in this around this notion of DataOps. Essentially, you know, DevOps applied to the data and the data pipeline, and I had a great conversation recently with Inderpal Bhandari, IBM's Global Chief Data Officer, and he explained to me how, first of all, customers will tell you, it's very hard to operationalize AIs. He and his team took that challenge on themselves and have had some great success. And, you know, we all know the problem. It's that, you know AI has to wait for the data. It has to wait for the data to be cleansed and wrangled. Can AI actually help with that part of the problem, compressing that? >> 100%. In fact, the way we think of the automation and scaling story is what we call the "AI For AI" story. So, AI in service of helping you build the AI that helps you make this with speed, right? So, and I think of it really in three parts. It's AI for data automation, our DataOps. AI used in better discovery, better cleansing, better configuration, faster linking, quality assessment, all of that. Using AI to do all of those data problems that you had to do. And I called it AI for data automation. The second part is using AI to automatically figure out the best model. And that's AI for data science automation, which is, feature engineering, hyperparameter optimization, having them all do work, why should a data scientist take weeks and months experimenting? If the AI can accelerate that from weeks to a matter of hours? That's data science automation. And then comes the important part, also, which is operations automation. Okay, I've put a data model into an application. How do I monitor its behavior? If the data that it's seeing is different from the data it was trained on, how do I quickly detect it? And a lot of the work from Research that was part of that Watson OpenScale offering is really addressing the operational side. So AI for data, AI for data science automation, and AI to help automate production of AI, is the way we break that problem up. >> So, I always like to ask folks that are deep into R&D, how they are ultimately are translating into commercial products and offerings? Because ultimately, you got to make money to fund more R&D. So, can you talk a little bit about how you do that, what your focus is there? >> Yeah, so that's a great question, and I'm going to use a few examples as well. But let me say at the outset, this is a very, very closed partnership. So when we, the Research part of AI and our portfolio, it's a closed partnership where we're constantly both drawing problem as well as building technology that goes into the offering. So, a lot of our work, much of our work in AI automation that we were talking about, is part of our Watson Studio, Watson Machine Learning, Watson OpenScale. In fact, OpenScale came out of Research working Trusted AI, and is now a centerpiece of our Watson project. Let me give a very different example. We have a very, very strong portfolio and focus in NLP, Natural Language Processing. And this directly goes into capabilities out of Watson Assistant, which is our system for conversational support and customer support, and Watson Discovery, which is about making enterprise understand unstructurally. And a great example of that is the Working Project Debater that you might have heard, which is a grand challenge in Research about building a machine that can do debate. Now, look, we weren't looking to go sell you a debating machine. But what did we build as part of doing that, is advances in NLP that are all making their way into assistant and discovery. And we actually just talked about earlier this year, announced a set of capabilities around better clustering, advanced summarization, deeper sentiment analysis. These made their way into Assistant and Discovery but are born out of research innovation and solving a grand problem like building a debating machine. That's just an example of how that journey from research to product happens. >> Yeah, the Debater documentary, I've seen some of that. It's actually quite astounding. I don't know what you're doing there. It sounds like you're taking natural language and turning it into complex queries with data science and AI, but it's quite amazing. >> Yes, and I would encourage you, you will see that documentary, by the way, on Channel 7, in the Think Event. And I would encourage you, actually the documentary around how Debater happened, sort of featuring back of the you know, backdoor interviews with the scientist who created it was actually featured last minute at Copenhagen International Documentary Festival. I'll invite viewers to go to Channel 7 and Data and AI Tech On-Demand to go take a look at that documentary. >> Yeah, you should take a look at it. It's actually quite astounding and amazing. Sriram, what are you working on these days? What kind of exciting projects or what's your focus area today? >> Look, I think there are three imperatives that we're really focused on, and one is very, you know, just really the project you're talking about, NLP. NLP in the enterprise, look, text is a language of business, right? Text is the way business is communicated. Within each other, with their partners, with the entire world. So, helping machines understand language, but in an enterprise context, recognizing that data and the enterprises live in complex documents, unstructured documents, in e-mail, they live in conversations with the customers. So, really pushing the boundary on how all our customers and clients can make sense of this vast volume of unstructured data by pushing the advances of NLP, that's one focus area. Second focus area, we talked about trust and how important that is. And we've done amazing work in monitoring and explainability. And we're really focused now on this emerging area of causality. Using causality to explain, right? The model makes this because the model believes this is what it wants, it's a beautiful way. And the third big focus continues to be on automation. So, NLP, trust, automation. Those are, like, three big focus areas for us. >> sriram, how far do you think we can take AI? I know it's a topic of conversation, but from your perspective, deep into the research, how far can it go? And maybe how far should it go? >> Look, I think we are, let me answer it this way. I think the arc of the possible is enormous. But I think we are at this inflection point in which I think the next wave of AI, the AI that's going to help us this narrow-to-broad journey we talked about, look, the narrow-to-broad journey's not like a one-week, one-year. We're talking about a decade of innovation. But I think we are at a point where we're going to see a wave of AI that we like to call "neuro-symbolic AI," which is AI that brings together two sort of fundamentally different approaches to building intelligence systems. One approach of building intelligence system is what we call "knowledge driven." Understand data, understand concept, logically, reasonable. We human beings do that. That was really the way AI was born. The more recent last couple of decades of AI was data driven, Machine learning. Give me vast volumes of data, I'll use neural techniques, deep learning, to to get value. We're at a point where we're going to bring both of them together. Cause you can't build trustworthy, explainable systems using only one, you can't get away from not using all of the data that you have to make them. So, neuro-symbolic AI is, I think, going to be the linchpin of how we advance AI and make it more powerful and trustworthy. >> So, are you, like, living your childhood dream here or what? >> Look, for me I'm fascinated. I've always been fascinated. And any time you can't find a technology person who hasn't dreamt of building an intelligent machine. To have a job where I can work across our worldwide set of 3,000 plus researchers and think and brainstorm on strategy with AI. And then, most importantly, not to forget, right? That you talked about being able to move it into our portfolios so it actually makes a difference for our clients. I think it's a dream job and a whole lot of fun. >> Well, Sriram, it was great having you on theCUBE. A lot of fun, interviewing folks like you. I feel a little bit smarter just talking to you. So thanks so much for coming on. >> Fantastic. It's been a pleasure to be here. >> And thank you for watching, everybody. You're watching theCUBE's coverage of IBM Think 2020. This is Dave Vellante. We'll be right back right after this short break. (upbeat music)

>> From Cambridge, Massachusetts, it's theCUBE. Covering MIT Chief Data Officer and Information Quality Symposium 2019. Brought to you by SiliconANGLE Media. (futuristic music) >> Welcome back to Cambridge, Massachusetts everybody. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. We go out to the events and we extract the signal from the noise. This is day two, we're sort of wrapping up the Chief Data Officer event. It's MIT CDOIQ, it started as an information quality event and with the ascendancy of big data the CDO emerged and really took center stage here. And it's interesting to know that it's kind of come full circle back to information quality. People are realizing all this data we have, you know the old saying, garbage in, garbage out. So the information quality worlds and this chief data officer world have really come colliding together. Robert Abate is here, he's the Vice President and CDO of Global IDS and also the co-chair of next year's, the 14th annual MIT CDOIQ. Robert, thanks for coming on. >> Oh, well thank you. >> Now you're a CDO by background, give us a little history of your career. >> Sure, sure. Well I started out with an Electrical Engineering degree and went into applications development. By 2000, I was leading the Ralph Lauren's IT, and I realized when Ralph Lauren hired me, he was getting ready to go public. And his problem was he had hired eight different accounting firms to do eight different divisions. And each of those eight divisions were reporting a number, but the big number didn't add up, so he couldn't go public. So he searched the industry to find somebody who could figure out the problem. Now I was, at the time, working in applications and had built this system called Service Oriented Architectures, a way of integrating applications. And I said, "Well I don't know if I could solve the problem, "but I'll give it a shot." And what I did was, just by taking each silo as it's own problem, which was what EID Accounting Firm had done, I was able to figure out that one of Ralph Lauren's policies was if you buy a garment, you can return it anytime, anywhere, forever, however long you own it. And he didn't think about that, but what that meant is somebody could go to a Bloomingdale's, buy a garment and then go to his outlet store and return it. Well, the cross channels were different systems. So the outlet stores were his own business, retail was a different business, there was a completely different, each one had their own AS/400, their own data. So what I quickly learned was, the problem wasn't the systems, the problem was the data. And it took me about two months to figure it out and he offered me a job, he said well, I was a consultant at the time, he says, "I'm offering you a job, you're going to run my IT." >> Great user experience but hard to count. >> (laughs) Hard to count. So that's when I, probably 1999 was when that happened. I went into data and started researching-- >> Sorry, so how long did it take you to figure that out? You said a couple of months? >> A couple of months, I think it was about two months. >> 'Cause jeez, it took Oracle what, 10 years to build Fusion with SOA? That's pretty good. (laughs) >> This was a little bit of luck. When we started integrating the applications we learned that the messages that we were sending back and forth didn't match, and we said, "Well that's impossible, it can't not match." But what didn't match was it was coming from one channel and being returned in another channel, and the returns showed here didn't balance with the returns on this side. So it was a data problem. >> So a forensics showdown. So what did you do after? >> After that I went into ICICI Bank which was a large bank in India who was trying to integrate their systems, and again, this was a data problem. But they heard me giving a talk at a conference on how SOA had solved the data challenge, and they said, "We're a bank with a wholesale, a retail, "and other divisions, "and we can't integrate the systems, can you?" I said, "Well yeah, I'd build a website "and make them web services and now what'll happen is "each of those'll kind of communicate." And I was at ICICI Bank for about six months in Mumbai, and finished that which was a success, came back and started consulting because now a lot of companies were really interested in this concept of Service Oriented Architectures. Back then when we first published on it, myself, Peter Aiken, and a gentleman named Joseph Burke published on it in 1996. The publisher didn't accept the book, it was a really interesting thing. We wrote the book called, "Services Based Architectures: A Way to Integrate Systems." And the way Wiley & Sons, or most publishers work is, they'll have three industry experts read your book and if they don't think what you're saying has any value, they, forget about it. So one guy said this is brilliant, one guy says, "These guys don't know what they're talking about," and the third guy says, "I don't even think what they're talking about is feasible." So they decided not to publish. Four years later it came back and said, "We want to publish the book," and Peter said, "You know what, they lost their chance." We were ahead of them by four years, they didn't understand the technology. So that was kind of cool. So from there I went into consulting, eventually took a position as the Head of Enterprise and Director of Enterprise Information Architecture with Walmart. And Walmart, as you know, is a huge entity, almost the size of the federal government. So to build an architecture that integrates Walmart would've been a challenge, a behemoth challenge, and I took it on with a phenomenal team. >> And when was this, like what timeframe? >> This was 2010, and by the end of 2010 we had presented an architecture to the CIO and the rest of the organization, and they came back to me about a week later and said, "Look, everybody agrees what you did was brilliant, "but nobody knows how to implement it. "So we're taking you away, "you're no longer Director of Information Architecture, "you're now Director of Enterprise Information Management. "Build it. "Prove that what you say you could do, you could do." So we built something called the Data CAFE, and CAFE was an acronym, it stood for: Collaborative Analytics Facility for the Enterprise. What we did was we took data from one of the divisions, because you didn't want to take on the whole beast, boil the ocean. We picked Sam's Club and we worked with their CFO, and because we had information about customers we were able to build a room with seven 80 inch monitors that surrounded anyone in the room. And in the center was the Cisco telecommunications so you could be a part of a meeting. >> The TelePresence. >> TelePresence. And we built one room in one facility, and one room in another facility, and we labeled the monitors, one red, one blue, one green, and we said, "There's got to be a way where we can build "data science so it's interactive, so somebody, "an executive could walk into the room, "touch the screen, and drill into features. "And in another room "the features would be changing simultaneously." And that's what we built. The room was brought up on Black Friday of 2013, and we were able to see the trends of sales on the East Coast that we quickly, the executives in the room, and these are the CEO of Walmart and the heads of Sam's Club and the like, they were able to change the distribution in the Mountain Time Zone and west time zones because of the sales on the East Coast gave them the idea, well these things are going to sell, and these things aren't. And they saw a tremendous increase in productivity. We received the 2014, my team received the 2014 Walmart Innovation Project of the Year. >> And that's no slouch. Walmart has always been heavily data-oriented. I don't know if it's urban legend or not, but the famous story in the '80s of the beer and the diapers, right? Walmart would position beer next to diapers, why would they do that? Well the father goes in to buy the diapers for the baby, picks up a six pack while he's on the way, so they just move those proximate to each other. (laughs) >> In terms of data, Walmart really learned that there's an advantage to understanding how to place items in places that, a path that you might take in a store, and knowing that path, they actually have a term for it, I believe it's called, I'm sorry, I forgot the name but it's-- >> Selling more stuff. (laughs) >> Yeah, it's selling more stuff. It's the way you position items on a shelf. And Walmart had the brilliance, or at least I thought it was brilliant, that they would make their vendors the data champion. So the vendor, let's say Procter & Gamble's a vendor, and they sell this one product the most. They would then be the champion for that aisle. Oh, it's called planogramming. So the planogramming, the way the shelves were organized, would be set up by Procter & Gamble for that entire area, working with all their other vendors. And so Walmart would give the data to them and say, "You do it." And what I was purporting was, well, we shouldn't just be giving the data away, we should be using that data. And that was the advent of that. From there I moved to Kimberly-Clark, I became Global Director of Enterprise Data Management and Analytics. Their challenge was they had different teams, there were four different instances of SAP around the globe. One for Latin America, one for North America called the Enterprise Edition, one for EMEA, Europe, Middle East, and Africa, and one for Asia-Pacific. Well when you have four different instances of SAP, that means your master data doesn't exist because the same thing that happens in this facility is different here. And every company faces this challenge. If they implement more than one of a system the specialty fields get used by different companies in different ways. >> The gold standard, the gold version. >> The golden version. So I built a team by bringing together all the different international teams, and created one team that was able to integrate best practices and standards around data governance, data quality. Built BI teams for each of the regions, and then a data science and advanced analytics team. >> Wow, so okay, so that makes you uniquely qualified to coach here at the conference. >> Oh, I don't know about that. (laughs) There are some real, there are some geniuses here. >> No but, I say that because these are your peeps. >> Yes, they are, they are. >> And so, you're a practitioner, this conference is all about practitioners talking to practitioners, it's content-heavy, There's not a lot of fluff. Lunches aren't sponsored, there's no lanyard sponsor and it's not like, you know, there's very subtle sponsor desks, you have to have sponsors 'cause otherwise the conference's not enabled, and you've got costs associated with it. But it's a very intimate event and I think you guys want to keep it that way. >> And I really believe you're dead-on. When you go to most industry conferences, the industry conferences, the sponsors, you know, change the format or are heavily into the format. Here you have industry thought leaders from all over the globe. CDOs of major Fortune 500 companies who are working with their peers and exchanging ideas. I've had conversations with a number of CDOs and the thought leadership at this conference, I've never seen this type of thought leadership in any conference. >> Yeah, I mean the percentage of presentations by practitioners, even when there's a vendor name, they have a practitioner, you know, internal practitioner presenting so it's 99.9% which is why people attend. We're moving venues next year, I understand. Just did a little tour of the new venue, so, going to be able to accommodate more attendees, so that's great. >> Yeah it is. >> So what are your objectives in thinking ahead a year from now? >> Well, you know, I'm taking over from my current peer, Dr. Arka Mukherjee, who just did a phenomenal job of finding speakers. People who are in the industry, who are presenting challenges, and allowing others to interact. So I hope could do a similar thing which is, find with my peers people who have real world challenges, bring them to the forum so they can be debated. On top of that, there are some amazing, you know, technology change is just so fast. One of the areas like big data I remember only five years ago the chart of big data vendors maybe had 50 people on it, now you would need the table to put all the vendors. >> Who's not a data vendor, you know? >> Who's not a data vendor? (laughs) So I would think the best thing we could do is, is find, just get all the CDOs and CDO-types into a room, and let us debate and talk about these points and issues. I've seen just some tremendous interactions, great questions, people giving advice to others. I've learned a lot here. >> And how about long term, where do you see this going? How many CDOs are there in the world, do you know? Is that a number that's known? >> That's a really interesting point because, you know, only five years ago there weren't that many CDOs to be called. And then Gartner four years ago or so put out an article saying, "Every company really should have a CDO." Not just for the purpose of advancing your data, and to Doug Laney's point that data is being monetized, there's a need to have someone responsible for information 'cause we're in the Information Age. And a CIO really is focused on infrastructure, making sure I've got my PCs, making sure I've got a LAN, I've got websites. The focus on data has really, because of the Information Age, has turned data into an asset. So organizations realize, if you utilize that asset, let me reverse this, if you don't use data as an asset, you will be out of business. I heard a quote, I don't know if it's true, "Only 10 years ago, 250 of the Fortune 10 no longer exists." >> Yeah, something like that, the turnover's amazing. >> Many of those companies were companies that decided not to make the change to be data-enabled, to make data decision processing. Companies still use data warehouses, they're always going to use them, and a warehouse is a rear-view mirror, it tells you what happened last week, last month, last year. But today's businesses work forward-looking. And just like driving a car, it'd be really hard to drive your car through a rear-view mirror. So what companies are doing today are saying, "Okay, let's start looking at this as forward-looking, "a prescriptive and predictive analytics, "rather than just what happened in the past." I'll give you an example. In a major company that is a supplier of consumer products, they were leading in the industry and their sales started to drop, and they didn't know why. Well, with a data science team, we were able to determine by pulling in data from the CDC, now these are sources that only 20 years ago nobody ever used to bring in data in the enterprise, now 60% of your data is external. So we brought in data from the CDC, we brought in data on maternal births from the national government, we brought in data from the Census Bureau, we brought in data from sources of advertising and targeted marketing towards mothers. Pulled all that data together and said, "Why are diaper sales down?" Well they were targeting the large regions of the country and putting ads in TV stations in New York and California, big population centers. Birth rates in population centers have declined. Birth rates in certain other regions, like the south, and the Bible Belt, if I can call it that, have increased. So by changing the marketing, their product sales went up. >> Advertising to Texas. >> Well, you know, and that brings to one of the points, I heard a lecture today about ethics. We made it a point at Walmart that if you ran a query that reduced a result to less than five people, we wouldn't allow you to see the result. Because, think about it, I could say, "What is my neighbor buying? "What are you buying?" So there's an ethical component to this as well. But that, you know, data is not political. Data is not chauvinistic. It doesn't discriminate, it just gives you facts. It's the interpretation of that that is hard CDOs, because we have to say to someone, "Look, this is the fact, and your 25 years "of experience in the business, "granted, is tremendous and it's needed, "but the facts are saying this, "and that would mean that the business "would have to change its direction." And it's hard for people to do, so it requires that. >> So whether it's called the chief data officer, whatever the data czar rubric is, the head of analytics, there's obviously the data quality component there whatever that is, this is the conference for, as I called them, your peeps, for that role in the organization. People often ask, "Will that role be around?" I think it's clear, it's solidifying. Yes, you see the chief digital officer emerging and there's a lot of tailwinds there, but the information quality component, the data architecture component, it's here to stay. And this is the premiere conference, the premiere event, that I know of anyway. There are a couple of others, perhaps, but it's great to see all the success. When I first came here in 2013 there were probably about 130 folks here. Today, I think there were 500 people registered almost. Next year, I think 600 is kind of the target, and I think it's very reasonable with the new space. So congratulations on all the success, and thank you for stepping up to the co-chair role, I really appreciate it. >> Well, let me tell you I thank you guys. You provide a voice at these IT conferences that we really need, and that is the ability to get the message out. That people do think and care, the industry is not thoughtless and heartless. With all the data breaches and everything going on there's a lot of fear, fear, loathing, and anticipation. But having your voice, kind of like ESPN and a sports show, gives the technology community, which is getting larger and larger by the day, a voice and we need that so, thank you. >> Well thank you, Robert. We appreciate that, it was great to have you on. Appreciate the time. >> Great to be here, thank you. >> All right, and thank you for watching. We'll be right back with out next guest as we wrap up day two of MIT CDOIQ. You're watching theCUBE. (futuristic music)

>> From Cambridge, Massachusetts, it's theCUBE covering MIT Chief Data Officer and Information Quality Symposium 2019 brought to you by SiliconANGLE Media. (upbeat techno music) >> Hi everybody, welcome back to Cambridge, Massachusetts. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in tech coverage. We go out to the events. We extract the signal from the noise, and we're here at the MIT CDOIQ Conference, Chief Data Officer Information Quality Conference. It is the 13th year here at the Tang building. We've outgrown this building and have to move next year. It's fire marshal full. Gokula Mishra is here. He is the Senior Director of Global Data and Analytics and Supply Chain-- >> Formerly. Former, former Senior Director. >> Former! I'm sorry. It's former Senior Director of Global Data Analytics and Supply Chain at McDonald's. Oh, I didn't know that. I apologize my friend. Well, welcome back to theCUBE. We met when you were at Oracle doing data. So you've left that, you're on to your next big thing. >> Yes, thinking through it. >> Fantastic, now let's start with your career. You've had, so you just recently left McDonald's. I met you when you were at Oracle, so you cut over to the dark side for a while, and then before that, I mean, you've been a practitioner all your life, so take us through sort of your background. >> Yeah, I mean my beginning was really with a company called Tata Burroughs. Those days we did not have a lot of work getting done in India. We used to send people to U.S. so I was one of the pioneers of the whole industry, coming here and working on very interesting projects. But I was lucky to be working on mostly data analytics related work, joined a great company called CS Associates. I did my Master's at Northwestern. In fact, my thesis was intelligent databases. So, building AI into the databases and from there on I have been with Booz Allen, Oracle, HP, TransUnion, I also run my own company, and Sierra Atlantic, which is part of Hitachi, and McDonald's. >> Awesome, so let's talk about use of data. It's evolved dramatically as we know. One of the themes in this conference over the years has been sort of, I said yesterday, the Chief Data Officer role emerged from the ashes of sort of governance, kind of back office information quality compliance, and then ascended with the tailwind of the Big Data meme, and it's kind of come full circle. People are realizing actually to get value out of data, you have to have information quality. So those two worlds have collided together, and you've also seen the ascendancy of the Chief Digital Officer who has really taken a front and center role in some of the more strategic and revenue generating initiatives, and in some ways the Chief Data Officer has been a supporting role to that, providing the quality, providing the compliance, the governance, and the data modeling and analytics, and a component of it. First of all, is that a fair assessment? How do you see the way in which the use of data has evolved over the last 10 years? >> So to me, primarily, the use of data was, in my mind, mostly around financial reporting. So, anything that companies needed to run their company, any metrics they needed, any data they needed. So, if you look at all the reporting that used to happen it's primarily around metrics that are financials, whether it's around finances around operations, finances around marketing effort, finances around reporting if it's a public company reporting to the market. That's where the focus was, and so therefore a lot of the data that was not needed for financial reporting was what we call nowadays dark data. This is data we collect but don't do anything with it. Then, as the capability of the computing, and the storage, and new technologies, and new techniques evolve, and are able to handle more variety and more volume of data, then people quickly realize how much potential they have in the other data outside of the financial reporting data that they can utilize too. So, some of the pioneers leverage that and actually improved a lot in their efficiency of operations, came out with innovation. You know, GE comes to mind as one of the companies that actually leverage data early on, and number of other companies. Obviously, you look at today data has been, it's defining some of the multi-billion dollar company and all they have is data. >> Well, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft. >> Exactly. >> Apple, I mean Apple obviously makes stuff, but those other companies, they're data companies. I mean largely, and those five companies have the highest market value on the U.S. stock exchange. They've surpassed all the other big leaders, even Berkshire Hathaway. >> So now, what is happening is because the market changes, the forces that are changing the behavior of our consumers and customers, which I talked about which is everyone now is digitally engaging with each other. What that does is all the experiences now are being captured digitally, all the services are being captured digitally, all the products are creating a lot of digital exhaust of data and so now companies have to pay attention to engage with their customers and partners digitally. Therefore, they have to make sure that they're leveraging data and analytics in doing so. The other thing that has changed is the time to decision to the time to act on the data inside that you get is shrinking, and shrinking, and shrinking, so a lot more decision-making is now going real time. Therefore, you have a situation now, you have the capability, you have the technology, you have the data now, you have to make sure that you convert that in what I call programmatic kind of data decision-making. Obviously, there are people involved in more strategic decision-making. So, that's more manual, but at the operational level, it's going more programmatic decision-making. >> Okay, I want to talk, By the way, I've seen a stat, I don't know if you can confirm this, that 80% of the data that's out there today is dark data or it's data that's behind a firewall or not searchable, not open to Google's crawlers. So, there's a lot of value there-- >> So, I would say that percent is declining over time as companies have realized the value of data. So, more and more companies are removing the silos, bringing those dark data out. I think the key to that is companies being able to value their data, and as soon as they are able to value their data, they are able to leverage a lot of the data. I still believe there's a large percent still not used or accessed in companies. >> Well, and of course you talked a lot about data monetization. Doug Laney, who's an expert in that topic, we had Doug on a couple years ago when he, just after, he wrote Infonomics. He was on yesterday. He's got a very detailed prescription as to, he makes strong cases as to why data should be valued like an asset. I don't think anybody really disagrees with that, but then he gave kind of a how-to-do-it, which will, somewhat, make your eyes bleed, but it was really well thought out, as you know. But you talked a lot about data monetization, you talked about a number of ways in which data can contribute to monetization. Revenue, cost reduction, efficiency, risk, and innovation. Revenue and cost is obvious. I mean, that's where the starting point is. Efficiency is interesting. I look at efficiency as kind of a doing more with less but it's sort of a cost reduction, but explain why it's not in the cost bucket, it's different. >> So, it is first starts with doing what we do today cheaper, better, faster, and doing more comes after that because if you don't understand, and data is the way to understand how your current processes work, you will not take the first step. So, to take the first step is to understand how can I do this process faster, and then you focus on cheaper, and then you focus on better. Of course, faster is because of some of the market forces and customer behavior that's driving you to do that process faster. >> Okay, and then the other one was risk reduction. I think that makes a lot of sense here. Actually, let me go back. So, one of the key pieces of it, of efficiency is time to value. So, if you can compress the time, or accelerate the time and you get the value that means more cash in house faster, whether it's cost reduction or-- >> And the other aspect you look at is, can you automate more of the processes, and in that way it can be faster. >> And that hits the income statement as well because you're reducing headcount cost of your, maybe not reducing headcount cost, but you're getting more out of different, out ahead you're reallocating them to more strategic initiatives. Everybody says that but the reality is you hire less people because you just automated. And then, risk reduction, so the degree to which you can lower your expected loss. That's just instead thinking in insurance terms, that's tangible value so certainly to large corporations, but even midsize and small corporations. Innovation, I thought was a good one, but maybe you could use an example of, give us an example of how in your career you've seen data contribute to innovation. >> So, I'll give an example of oil and gas industry. If you look at speed of innovation in the oil and gas industry, they were all paper-based. I don't know how much you know about drilling. A lot of the assets that goes into figuring out where to drill, how to drill, and actually drilling and then taking the oil or gas out, and of course selling it to make money. All of those processes were paper based. So, if you can imagine trying to optimize a paper-based innovation, it's very hard. Not only that, it's very, very by itself because it's on paper, it's in someone's drawer or file. So, it's siloed by design and so one thing that the industry has gone through, they recognize that they have to optimize the processes to be better, to innovate, to find, for example, shale gas was a result output of digitizing the processes because otherwise you can't drill faster, cheaper, better to leverage the shale gas drilling that they did. So, the industry went through actually digitizing a lot of the paper assets. So, they went from not having data to knowingly creating the data that they can use to optimize the process and then in the process they're innovating new ways to drill the oil well cheaper, better, faster. >> In the early days of oil exploration in the U.S. go back to the Osage Indian tribe in northern Oklahoma, and they brilliantly, when they got shuttled around, they pushed him out of Kansas and they negotiated with the U.S. government that they maintain the mineral rights and so they became very, very wealthy. In fact, at one point they were the wealthiest per capita individuals in the entire world, and they used to hold auctions for various drilling rights. So, it was all gut feel, all the oil barons would train in, and they would have an auction, and it was, again, it was gut feel as to which areas were the best, and then of course they evolved, you remember it used to be you drill a little hole, no oil, drill a hole, no oil, drill a hole. >> You know how much that cost? >> Yeah, the expense is enormous right? >> It can vary from 10 to 20 million dollars. >> Just a giant expense. So, now today fast-forward to this century, and you're seeing much more sophisticated-- >> Yeah, I can give you another example in pharmaceutical. They develop new drugs, it's a long process. So, one of the initial process is to figure out what molecules this would be exploring in the next step, and you could have thousand different combination of molecules that could treat a particular condition, and now they with digitization and data analytics, they're able to do this in a virtual world, kind of creating a virtual lab where they can test out thousands of molecules. And then, once they can bring it down to a fewer, then the physical aspect of that starts. Think about innovation really shrinking their processes. >> All right, well I want to say this about clouds. You made the statement in your keynote that how many people out there think cloud is cheaper, or maybe you even said cheap, but cheaper I inferred cheaper than an on-prem, and so it was a loaded question so nobody put their hand up they're afraid, but I put my hand up because we don't have any IT. We used to have IT. It was a nightmare. So, for us it's better but in your experience, I think I'm inferring correctly that you had meant cheaper than on-prem, and certainly we talked to many practitioners who have large systems that when they lift and shift to the cloud, they don't change their operating model, they don't really change anything, they get a bill at the end of the month, and they go "What did this really do for us?" And I think that's what you mean-- >> So what I mean, let me make it clear, is that there are certain use cases that cloud is and, as you saw, that people did raise their hand saying "Yeah, I have use cases where cloud is cheaper." I think you need to look at the whole thing. Cost is one aspect. The flexibility and agility of being able to do things is another aspect. For example, if you have a situation where your stakeholder want to do something for three weeks, and they need five times the computing power, and the data that they are buying from outside to do that experiment. Now, imagine doing that in a physical war. It's going to take a long time just to procure and get the physical boxes, and then you'll be able to do it. In cloud, you can enable that, you can get GPUs depending on what problem we are trying to solve. That's another benefit. You can get the fit for purpose computing environment to that and so there are a lot of flexibility, agility all of that. It's a new way of managing it so people need to pay attention to the cost because it will add to the cost. The other thing I will point out is that if you go to the public cloud, because they make it cheaper, because they have hundreds and thousands of this canned CPU. This much computing power, this much memory, this much disk, this much connectivity, and they build thousands of them, and that's why it's cheaper. Well, if your need is something that's very unique and they don't have it, that's when it becomes a problem. Either you need more of those and the cost will be higher. So, now we are getting to the IOT war. The volume of data is growing so much, and the type of processing that you need to do is becoming more real-time, and you can't just move all this bulk of data, and then bring it back, and move the data back and forth. You need a special type of computing, which is at the, what Amazon calls it, adds computing. And the industry is kind of trying to design it. So, that is an example of hybrid computing evolving out of a cloud or out of the necessity that you need special purpose computing environment to deal with new situations, and all of it can't be in the cloud. >> I mean, I would argue, well I guess Microsoft with Azure Stack was kind of the first, although not really. Now, they're there but I would say Oracle, your former company, was the first one to say "Okay, we're going to put the exact same infrastructure on prem as we have in the public cloud." Oracle, I would say, was the first to truly do that-- >> They were doing hybrid computing. >> You now see Amazon with outposts has done the same, Google kind of has similar approach as Azure, and so it's clear that hybrid is here to stay, at least for some period of time. I think the cloud guys probably believe that ultimately it's all going to go to the cloud. We'll see it's going to be a long, long time before that happens. Okay! I'll give you last thoughts on this conference. You've been here before? Or is this your first one? >> This is my first one. >> Okay, so your takeaways, your thoughts, things you might-- >> I am very impressed. I'm a practitioner and finding so many practitioners coming from so many different backgrounds and industries. It's very, very enlightening to listen to their journey, their story, their learnings in terms of what works and what doesn't work. It is really invaluable. >> Yeah, I tell you this, it's always a highlight of our season and Gokula, thank you very much for coming on theCUBE. It was great to see you. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. All right, keep it right there everybody. We'll be back with our next guest, Dave Vellante. Paul Gillin is in the house. You're watching theCUBE from MIT. Be right back! (upbeat techno music)

>> live from San Francisco, California. It's the Q covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome back to Fisherman's Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco. Everybody, my name is David wanted. You're watching the Cube, the leader in live tech coverage, you ought to events. We extract the signal from the noise. We're here. The IBM CDO event. This is the 10th anniversary of this event. Caitlin Hallford is here. She's the director of a I Accelerator and client success at IBM. Caitlin, great to see you again. Wow. 10 years. Amazing. They and Carlo Apple Apple Glace e is here. Who is the program director for data and a I at IBM. Because you again, my friend. Thanks for coming on to Cuba. Lums. Wow, this is 10 years, and I think the Cube is covered. Probably eight of these now. Yeah, kind of. We bounce between San Francisco and Boston to great places for CEOs. Good places to have intimate events, but and you're taking it global. I understand. Congratulations. Congratulations on the promotion. Thank you. Going. Thank you so much. >> So we, as you know well are well, no. We started our chief date officer summits in San Francisco here, and it's gone 2014. So this is our 10th 1 We do two a year. We found we really have a unique cohort of clients. The join us about 100 40 in San Francisco on the spring 140 in Boston in the fall, and we're here celebrating the 10th 10 Summit. >> So, Carlo, talk about your role and then let's get into how you guys, you know, work together. How you hand the baton way we'll get to the client piece. >> So I lead the Data Center League team, which is a group within our product development, working side by side with clients really to understand their needs as well developed, use cases on our platform and tools and make sure we are able to deliver on those. And then we work closely with the CDO team, the global CEO team on best practices, what patterns they're seeing from an architecture perspective. Make sure that our platforms really incorporating that stuff. >> And if I recall the data science that lead team is its presales correct and could >> be posted that it could, it really depends on the client, so it could be prior to them buying software or after they bought the software. If they need the help, we can also come in. >> Okay, so? So it can be a for pay service. Is that correct or Yeah, we can >> before pay. Or sometimes we do it based on just our relation with >> It's kind of a mixed then. Right? Okay, so you're learning the client's learning, so they're obviously good, good customers. And so you want to treat him right >> now? How do you guys work >> together? Maybe Caitlin, you can explain. The two organizations >> were often the early testers, early adopters of some of the capabilities. And so what we'll do is we'll test will literally will prove it out of skill internally using IBM itself as an example. And then, as we build out the capability, work with Carlo and his team to really drive that in a product and drive that into market, and we share a lot of client relationships where CEOs come to us, they're want advice and counsel on best practices across the organization. And they're looking for latest applications to deploy deploy known environments and so we can capture a lot of that feedback in some of the market user testing proved that out. Using IBM is an example and then work with you to really commercialized and bring it to market in the most efficient manner. >> You were talking this morning. You had a picture up of the first CDO event. No Internet, no wife in the basement. I love it. So how is this evolved from a theme standpoint? What do you What are the patterns? Sure. So when >> we started this, it was really a response. Thio primarily financial service is sector regulatory requirements, trying to get data right to meet those regulatory compliance initiatives. Defensive posture certainly weren't driving transformation within their enterprises. And what I've seen is a couple of those core elements are still key for us or data governance and data management. And some of those security access controls are always going to be important. But we're finding his videos more and more, have expanded scope of responsibilities with the enterprise they're looked at as a leader. They're no longer sitting within a c i o function there either appear or, you know, working in partnership with, and they're driving enterprise wide, you know, initiatives for the for their enterprises and organizations, which has been great to see. >> So we all remember when you know how very and declared data science was gonna be the number one job, and it actually kind of has become. I think I saw somewhere, maybe in Glass door was anointed that the top job, which is >> kind of cool to see. So what are you seeing >> with customers, Carlo? You guys, you have these these blueprints, you're now applying them, accelerating different industries. You mentioned health care this morning. >> What are some >> of those industry accelerators And how is that actually coming to fruition? Yes. >> So some of the things we're seeing is speaking of financial clients way go into a lot of them. We do these one on one engagements, we build them from custom. We co create these engineering solutions, our platform, and we're seeing patterns, patterns around different use cases that are coming up over and over again. And the one thing about data science Aye, aye. It's difficult to develop a solution because everybody's date is different. Everybody's business is different. So what we're trying to do is build these. We can't just build a widget that's going to solve the problem, because then you have to force your data into that, and we're seeing that that doesn't really work. So building a platform for these clients. But these accelerators, which are a set of core code source code notebooks, industry models in terms a CZ wells dashboards that allow them to quickly build out these use cases around a turn or segmentation on dhe. You know some other models we can grab the box provide the models, provide the know how with the source code, as well as a way for them to train them, deploy them and operationalize them in an organization. That's kind of what we're doing. >> You prime the pump >> prime minute pump, we call them there right now, we're doing client in eights for wealth management, and we're doing that, ref SS. And they come right on the box of our cloudpack for data platform. You could quickly click and install button, and in there you'll get the sample data files. You get no books. You get industry terms, your governance capability, as well as deployed dashboards and models. >> So talk more about >> cloudpack for data. What's inside of that brought back the >> data is a collection of micro Service's Andi. It includes a lot of things that we bring to market to help customers with their journey things from like data ingestion collection to all the way Thio, eh? I model development from building your models to deploying them to actually infusing them in your business process with bias detection or integration way have a lot of capability. Part >> of it's actually tooling. It's not just sort of so how to Pdf >> dualism entire platform eso. So the platform itself has everything you need an organization to kind of go from an idea to data ingestion and governance and management all the way to model training, development, deployment into integration into your business process. >> Now Caitlin, in the early days of the CDO, saw CDO emerging in healthcare, financialservices and government. And now it's kind of gone mainstream to the point where we had Mark Clare on who's the head of data neighborhood AstraZeneca. And he said, I'm not taking the CDO title, you know, because I'm all about data enablement and CDO. You know, title has sort of evolved. What have you seen? It's got clearly gone mainstream Yep. What are you seeing? In terms of adoption of that, that role and its impact on organizations, >> So couple of transit has been interesting both domestically and internationally as well. So we're seeing a lot of growth outside of the U. S. So we did our first inaugural summit in Tokyo. In Japan, there's a number of day leaders in Japan that are really eager to jump start their transformation initiatives. Also did our first Dubai summit. Middle East and Africa will be in South Africa next month at another studio summit. And what I'm seeing is outside of North America a lot of activity and interest in creating an enabling studio light capability. Data Leader, Like, um, and some of these guys, I think we're gonna leapfrog ahead. I think they're going to just absolutely jump jump ahead and in parallel, those traditional industries, you know, there's a new federal legislation coming down by year end for most federal agencies to appoint a chief data officer. So, you know, Washington, D. C. Is is hopping right now, we're getting a number of agencies requesting advice and counsel on how to set up the office how to be successful I think there's some great opportunity in those traditional industries and also seeing it, you know, outside the U. S. And cross nontraditional, >> you say >> Jump ahead. You mean jump ahead of where maybe some of the U. S. >> Absolute best? Absolutely. And I'm >> seeing a trend where you know, a lot of CEOs they're moving. They're really closer to the line of business, right? They're moving outside of technology, but they have to be technology savvy. They have a team of engineers and data scientists. So there is really an important role in every organization that I'm seeing for every client I go to. It's a little different, but you're right, it's it's definitely up and coming. Role is very important for especially for digital transformation. >> This is so good. I was gonna say one of the ways they are teens really, partner Well, together, I think is weaken source some of these in terms of enabling that you know, acceleration and leap frog. What are those pain points or use cases in traditional data management space? You know, the metadata. So I think you talk with Steven earlier about how we're doing some automated meditate a generation and really using a i t. O instead of manually having to label and tag that we're able to generate about 85% of our labels internally and drive that into existing product. Carlos using. And our clients are saying, Hey, we're spending, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars and we've got teams of massive teams of people manual work. And so we're able to recognize it, adopts something like that, press internally and then work with you guys >> actually think of every detail developer out there that has to go figure out what this date is. If you have a tool which we're trying to cooperate the platform based on the guidance from the CDO Global CEO team, we can automatically create that metadata are likely ingested and provide into platform so that data scientists can start to get value out >> of it quickly. So we heard Martin Schroeder talked about digital trade and public policy, and he said there were three things free flow of data. Unless it doesn't make sense like personal information prevent data localization mandates, yeah, and then protect algorithms and source code, which is an I P protection thing. So I'm interested in how your customers air Reacting to that framework, I presume the protect the algorithms and source code I p. That's near and dear right? They want to make sure that you're not taking models and then giving it to their competitors. >> Absolutely. And we talk about that every time we go in there and we work on projects. What's the I p? You know, how do we manage this? And you know, what we bring to the table with the accelerators is to help them jump start them right, even though that it's kind of our a p we created, but we give it to them and then what they derive from that when they incorporate their data, which is their i p, and create new models, that is then their i. P. So those air complicated questions and every company is a little different on what they're worried about with that, so but many banks, we give them all the I P to make sure that they're comfortable and especially in financial service is but some other spaces. It's very competitive. And then I was worried about it because it's, ah, known space. A lot of the algorithm for youse are all open source. They're known algorithms, so there's not a lot of problem there. >> It's how you apply them. That's >> exactly right how you apply them in that boundary of what >> is P, What's not. It's kind of >> fuzzy, >> and we encourage our clients a lot of times to drive that for >> the >> organisation, for us, internally, GDP, our readiness, it was occurring to the business unit level functional area. So it was, you know, we weren't where we needed to be in terms of achieving compliance. And we have the CEO office took ownership of that across the business and got it where we needed to be. And so we often encourage our clients to take ownership of something like that and use it as an opportunity to differentiate. >> And I talked about the whole time of clients. Their data is impor onto them. Them training models with that data for some new making new decisions is their unique value. Prop In there, I'd be so so we encourage them to make sure they're aware that don't just tore their data in any can, um, service out there model because they could be giving away their intellectual property, and it's important. Didn't understand that. >> So that's a complicated one. Write the piece and the other two seem to be even tougher. And some regards, like the free flow of data. I could see a lot of governments not wanting the free flow of data, but and the client is in the middle. OK, d'oh. Government is gonna adjudicate. What's that conversation like? The example that he gave was, maybe was interpolate. If it's if it's information about baggage claims, you can you can use the Blockchain and crypt it and then only see the data at the other end. So that was actually, I thought, a good example. Why do you want to restrict that flow of data? But if it's personal information, keep it in country. But how is that conversation going with clients? >> Leo. Those can involve depending on the country, right and where you're at in the industry. >> But some Western countries are strict about that. >> Absolutely. And this is why we've created a platform that allows for data virtualization. We use Cooper nannies and technologies under the covers so that you can manage that in different locations. You could manage it across. Ah, hybrid of data centers or hybrid of public cloud vendors. And it allows you to still have one business application, and you can kind of do some of the separation and even separation of data. So there's there's, there's, there's an approach there, you know. But you gotta do a balance. Balance it. You gotta balance between innovation, digital transformation and how much you wanna, you know, govern so governs important. And then, you know. But for some projects, we may want to just quickly prototype. So there's a balance there, too. >> Well, that data virtualization tech is interesting because it gets the other piece, which was prevent data localization mandates. But if there is a mandate and we know that some countries aren't going to relax that mandate, you have, ah, a technical solution for that >> architecture that will support that. And that's a big investment for us right now. And where we're doing a lot of work in that space. Obviously, with red hat, you saw partnership or acquisition. So that's been >> really Yeah, I heard something about that's important. That's that's that's a big part of Chapter two. Yeah, all right. We'll give you the final world Caitlyn on the spring. I guess it's not spring it. Secondly, this summer, right? CDO event? >> No, it's been agreed. First day. So we kicked off. Today. We've got a full set of client panel's tomorrow. We've got some announcements around our meta data that I mentioned. Risk insights is a really cool offering. We'll be talking more about. We also have cognitive support. This is another one. Our clients that I really wanted to help with some of their support back in systems. So a lot of exciting announcements, new thought leadership coming out. It's been a great event and looking forward to the next next day. >> Well, I love the fact >> that you guys have have tied data science into the sea. Sweet roll. You guys have done a great job, I think, better than anybody in terms of of, of really advocating for the chief data officer. And this is a great event because it's piers talking. Appears a lot of private conversations going on. So congratulations on all the success and continued success worldwide. >> Thank you so much. Thank you, Dave. >> You welcome. Keep it right there, everybody. We'll be back with our next guest. Ready for this short break. We have a panel coming up. This is David. Dante. You're >> watching the Cube from IBM CDO right back.

(electronica) >> Live, from San Francisco, California it's theCube. Covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. Brought to you by IBM. >> We're back at Fisherman's Wharf covering the IBM Chief Data Officer event, the 10th anniversary. You're watching theCube, the leader in live tech coverage. Just off the keynotes, Martin Schroeter is here as the Senior Vice President of IBM Global Markets responsible for revenue, profit, IBM's brand, just a few important things. Martin, welcome to theCube. >> They're important, they're important. >> Inderpal Bhandari, Cube alum, Global Chief Data Officer at IBM. Good to see you again. >> Good to see you Dave, >> So you guys, just off the keynotes, Martin, you talked a lot about disruption, things like digital trade that we're going to get into, digital transformation. What are you hearing when you talk to clients? You spent a lot of time as the CFO. >> I did. >> Now you're spending a lot of time with clients. What are they telling you about disruption and digital transformation? >> Yeah, you know the interesting thing Dave, is the first thing every CEO starts with now is that "I run a technology company." And it doesn't matter if they're writing code or manufacturing corrugated cardboard boxes, every CEO believes they are running a technology company. Now interestingly, maybe we could've predicted this already five or six years ago because we run a CEO survey, we run a CFO, we run surveys of the C-suite. And already about five years ago, technology was number one on the CEO's list of what's going to change their company in the next 3-5 years. It led. The CFO lagged, the CMO lagged, everyone else. Like, CEO saw it first. So CEOs now believe they are running technology businesses, and when you run a technology business, that means you have to fundamentally change the way you work, how you work, who does the work, and how you're finding and reaching and engaging with your clients. So when we talk, we shorthand of digitizing the enterprise. Or, what does it mean to become a digitally enable enterprise? It really is about how to use today's technology embedded into your workflows to make sure you don't get disintermediated from your clients? And you're bringing them value at every step, every touchpoint of their journey. >> So that brings up a point. Every CEO I talk to is trying to get "digital right." And that comes back to the data. Now you're of course, biased on that. But what are your thoughts on a digital business? Is digital businesses all about how they use data and leverage data? What does it mean to get "digital right" in your view? >> So data has to be the starting point. You actually do see examples of companies that'll start out on a digital transformation, or a technology transformation, and then eventually back into the data transformation. So in a sense, you've got to have the digital piece of it, which is really the experience that users have of the products of the company, as well as the technology, which is kind of the backend engines that are running. But also the workflow, and being able to infuse AI into workflows. And then data, because everything really rides on the data being in good enough shape to be able to pull all this off. So eventually people realize that really it's not just a digital transformation or technology transformation, but it is a data transformation to begin with. >> And you guys have talked a lot at this event, at least this pre-event, I've talked to people about operationalizing AI, that's a big part of your responsibilities. How do you feel about where you're at? I mean, it's a journey I know. You're never done. But feel like you're making some good progress there? Internally at IBM specifically. >> Yes, internally at IBM. Very good progress. Because our whole goal is to infuse AI into every major business process, and touch every IBM. So that's the whole goal of what we've been doing for the last few years. And we're already at the stage where our central AI and data platform for this year, over 100,000 active users will be making use of it on a regular basis. So we think we're pretty far along in terms of our transformation. And the whole goal behind this summit and the previous summits as you know, Dave, has been to use that as a showcase for our clients and customers so that they can replicate that journey as well. >> So we heard Ginni Rometty two IBM thinks ago talk about incumbent disruptors, which resonates, 'cause IBM's an incumbent disruptor. You talked about Chapter One being random acts of digital. and then Chapter Two is sort of how to take that mainstream. So what do you see as the next wave, Martin? >> Well as Inderpal said, and if I use us as an example. Now, we are using AI heavily. We have an advantage, right? We have this thing called IBM Research, one of the most prolific Inventors of Things still leads the world. You know we still lead the world in patents so have the benefit. For our our clients, however, we have to help them down that journey. And the clients today are on a journey of finding the right hybrid cloud solution that gives them bridges sort of "I have this data. "The incumbency advantage of having data," along with "Where are the tools and "where is the compute power that I need to take advantage of the data." So they're on that journey at the same time they're on the journey as Inderpal said, of embedding it into their workflows. So for IBM, the company that's always lived sort of at the intersection of technology and business, that's what we're helping our clients to do today. Helping them take their incumbent advantage of data, having data, helping them co-create. We're working with them to co-create solutions that they can deploy and then helping them to put that into work, into production, if you will, in their environments and in their workflows. >> So one of the things you stressed today, two of the things. You've talked about transparency, and open digital trade. I want to get into the latter, but talk about what's important in Chapter Two. Just, what are those ingredients of success? You've talked about things like free flow of data, prevent data localization, mandates, and protect algorithms and source codes. You also made another statement which is very powerful "IBM is never giving up its source code to our government, and we'd leave the country first." >> We wouldn't give up our source code. >> So what are some of those success factors that we need to be thinking about in that context? >> If we look at IBM. IBM today runs, you know 87% of the world's credit card transactions, right? IBM today runs the world's banking systems, we run the airline reservation systems, we run the supply chains of the world. Hearts and lungs, right? If I just shorthand all of that, hearts and lungs. The reason our clients allow us to do that is because they trust us at the very core. If they didn't trust us with our data they wouldn't give it to us. If they didn't trust us to run the process correctly, they wouldn't give it to us. So when we say trust, it happens at a very base level of "who do you really trust to run you're data?" And importantly, who is someone else going to trust with your data, with your systems? Any bank can maybe figure out, you know, how to run a little bit of a process. But you need scale, that's where we come in. So big banks need us. And secondly, you need someone you can trust that can get into the global banking system, because the system has to trust you as well. So they trust us at a very base level. That's why we still run the hearts and lungs of the enterprise world. >> Yeah, and you also made the point, you're not talking about necessarily personal data, that's not your business. But when you talked about the free flow of data, there are governments of many, western governments who are sort of putting in this mandate of not being able to persist data out of the country. But then you gave an example of "If you're trying to track a bag at baggage claim, you actually want that free flow of data." So what are those conversations like? >> So first I do think we have to distinguish between the kinds of data that should frow freely and the kinds of data that should absolutely, personal information is not what we're talking about, right? But the supply chains of the world work on data, the banking system works on data, right? So when we talk about the data that has to flow freely, it's all the data that doesn't have a good reason for it to stay local. Citizen's data, healthcare data, might have to stay, because they're protecting their citizen's privacy. That's the issue I think, that most governments are on. So we have disaggregate the data discussion, the free flow of data from the privacy issues, which are very important. >> Is there a gray area there between the personal information and the type of data that Martin's talking about? Or is it pretty clear cut in your view? >> No, I think this is obviously got to play itself out. But I'll give you one example. So, the whole use of a blockchain potentially helps you address and find the right balance between privacy of sensitive data, versus actually the free flow of data. >> Right. >> Right? So for instance, you could have an encryption or a hashtag. Or hash, sorry. Not a hashtag. A hash, say, off the person's name whose luggage is lost. And you could pass that information through, and then on the other side, it's decrypted, and then you're able to make sure that, you know, essentially you're able to satisfy the client, the customer. And so there's flow of data, there's no issue with regard to exposure. Because only the rightful parties are able to use it. So these things are, in a sense, the technologies that we're talking about, that Martin talked about with the blockchain, and so forth. They are in place to be able to really revolutionize and transform digital trade. But there are other factors as well. Martin touched on a bunch of those in the keynote with regard to, you know, the imbalances, some of the protectionism that comes in, and so on and so forth. Which all that stuff has to be played through. >> So much to talk about, so little time. So digital trade, let's get into that a little bit. What is that and why is it so important? >> So if you look at the economic throughput in the digital economy, the size of the GDP if you will, of what travels around the world in the way data flows, it's greater than the traded goods flow. So this is a very important discussion. Over the last 10 years, you know, out of the 100% of jobs that were created, 80% or so had a digital component to it. Which means that the next set of jobs that we're creating, they require digital skills. So we need a set of skills that will enable a workforce. And we need a regulatory environment that's cooperative, that's supportive. So in the regulatory environment, as we said before, we think data should flow freely unless there's a reason for it not to flow. And I think there will be some really good reasons why certain data should not flow.. But data should flow freely, except for certain reasons that are important. We need to make sure we don't create a series of mandates that force someone to store data here. If you want to be in business in a country, the country shouldn't say "Well if you want to business here "you have to store all your data here." It tends to be done on the auspice of a security concern, but we know enough about security that doesn't help. It's a false sense of security. So data has to flow freely. Don't make someone store it there just because it may be moving through or it's being processed in your country. And then thirdly, we have to protect the source code that companies are using. We cannot force, no country should force, a company to give up their source code. People will leave, they just won't do business there. >> That's just not about intellectual property issue there, right? >> It's huge intellectual property issue, that's exactly right. >> So the public policy framework then, is really free flow of data where it makes sense. No mandates unless it makes sense, and- >> And protection of IP. >> Protection of IP. >> That's right. >> Okay, good. >> It's a pretty simple structure. And based on my discussions I think most sort of aligned with that. And we're encouraged. I'm encouraged by what I see in TPP, it has that. What I see in Europe, it has that. What I see in USMCA it has that. So all three of those very good, but they're three separate things. We need to bring it all together to have one. >> So it was a good example. GDDPR maybe as a framework that seems to be seeping its way into other areas. >> So GDPR is an important discussion, but that's the privacy discussion wrapped around a broader trade issue. But privacy is important. GDPR does a good job on it, but we have a broader trade issue of data. >> Inderpal give me the final word, it's kind of your show. >> Well, you know. So I was just going to say Dave, I think one way to think about it is you have to have the free flow of data. And maybe the way to think about it is certain data you do need controls on. And it's more of the form in which the data flows that you restrict. As opposed to letting the data flow at all. >> What do you mean? >> So the hash example that I gave you. It's okay for the hash to go across, that way you're not exposing the data itself. So those technologies are all there. It's much more the regulatory frameworks that Martin's talking about, that they've got to be there in place so that we are not impeding the progress. That's going to be inevitable when you do have the free flow of data. >> So in that instance, the hash example that you gave. It's the parties that are adjudicating, the machines are adjudicating. Unless the parties want to expose that data it won't be exposed. >> It won't happen, they won't be exposed. >> All right. Inderpal, Martin, I know you got to run. Thanks so much for coming out. >> Thank you. Thanks for the talk. >> Thank you >> You're welcome. All right. Keep it right there everybody, we'll be back with our next guest from IBMCDO Summit in San Francisco. You're watching theCube. (electronica)

>> Live from San Francisco, California, it's theCUBE, covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. Brought to you by IBM. >> We're back at San Francisco. We're here at Fisherman's Wharf covering the IBM Chief Data Officer event #IBMCDO. This is the tenth year of this event. They tend to bookend them both in San Francisco and in Boston, and you're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. My name is Dave Valante. John Thomas is here, Cube alum and distinguished engineer, Director of Analytics at IBM, and somebody who provides technical direction to the data science elite team. John, good to see you again. Steve Aliouk is back. He is the Vice President of Deep Learning in the Global Chief Data Office, thanks for comin' on again. >> No problem. >> Let's get into it. So John, you and I have talked over the years at this event. What's new these days, what are you working on? >> So Dave, still working with clients on implementing data science and AI data use cases, mostly enterprise clients, and seeing a variety of different things developing in that space. Things have moved into broader discussions around AI and how to actually get value out of that. >> Okay, so I know one of the things that you've talked about is operationalizing machine intelligence and AI and cognitive and that's always a challenge, right. Sounds good, we see this potential but unless you change the operating model, you're not going to get the type of business value, so how do you operationalize AI? >> Yeah, this is a good question Dave. So, enterprises, many of them, are beginning to realize that it is not enough to focus on just the coding and development of the models, right. So they can hire super-talented Python TensorFlow programmers and get the model building done, but there's no value in it until these models actually are operationalized in the context of the business. So one aspect of this is, actually we know, we are thinking of this in a very systematic way and talking about this in a prescriptive way. So, you've got to scope your use cases out. You got to understand what is involved in implementing the use case. Then the steps are build, run, manage, and each of these have technical aspects and business aspects around, right. So most people jump right into the build aspect, which is writing the code. Yeah, that's great, but once you build the code, build the models by writing code, how do you actually deploy these models? Whether that is for online invocation or back storing or whatever, how do you manage the performance of these models over time, how do you retrain these models, and most importantly, when these models are in production, how do I actually understand the business metrics around them? 'Cause this goes back to that first step of scoping. What are the business KPI's that the line of business cares about? The data scientist talks about data science metrics, position and recall and Area Under the ROC Curve and accuracy and so on. But how do these relate to business KPI's. >> All right, so we're going to get into each of those steps in a moment, but Steve I want to ask you, so part of your charter, Inderpal, Global Chief Data Officer, you guys have to do this for IBM, right, drink your own champagne, dog footing, whatever you call it. But there's real business reasons for you to do that. So how is IBM operationalizing AI? What kind of learnings can you share? >> Well, the beauty is I got a wide portfolio of products that I can pull from, so that's nice. Like things like AI open to Watson, some of the hardware components, all that stuffs kind of being baked in. But part of the reason that John and I want to do this interview together, is because what he's producing, what his thoughts are kind of resonates very well for our own practices internally. We've got so many enterprise use cases, how are we deciding, you know, which ones to work on, which ones have the data, potentially which ones have the biggest business impact, all those KPI's etcetera, also, in addition to, for the practitioners, once we decide on a specific enterprise use case to work on, when have they reached the level where the enterprise is having a return on investment? They don't need to keep refining and refining and refining, or maybe they do, but they don't know these practitioners. So we have to clearly justify it, and scope it accordingly, or these practitioners are left in this kind of limbo, where they're producing things, but not able to iterate effectively for the business, right? So that process is a big problem I'm facing internally. We got hundreds of internal use cases, and we're trying to iterate through them. There's an immense amount of scoping, understanding, etcetera, but at the same time, we're building more and more technical debt, as the process evolves, being able to move from project to project, my team is ballooning, we can't do this, we can't keep growing, they're not going to give me another hundred head count, another hundred head count, so we're definitely need to manage it more appropriately. And that's where this mentality comes in there's-- >> All right, so I got a lot of questions. I want to start unpacking this stuff. So the scope piece, that's we're setting goals, identifying the metrics, success metrics, KPI's, and the like, okay, reasonable starting point. But then you go into this, I think you call it, the explore or understanding phase. What's that all about, is that where governance comes in? >> That's exactly where governance comes in. Right, so because it is, you know, we all know the expression, garbage in, garbage out, if you don't know what data you're working with for your machine learning and deep learning enterprise projects, you will not have the resource that you want. And you might think this is obvious, but in an enterprise setting, understanding where the data comes from, who owns the data, who work on the data, the lineage of that data, who is allowed access to the data, policies and rules around that, it's all important. Because without all of these things in place, the models will be questioned later on, and the value of the models will not realized, right? So that part of exploration or understanding, whatever you want to call it, is about understanding data that has to be used by the ML process, but then at a point in time, the models themselves need to be cataloged, need to be published, because the business as a whole needs to understand what models have been produced out of this data. So who built these models? Just as you have lineage of data, you need lineage of models. You need to understand what API's are associated with the models that are being produced. What are the business KPI's that are linked to model metrics? So all of that is part of this understand and explore path. >> Okay, and then you go to build. I think people understand that, everybody wants to start there, just start the dessert, and then you get into the sort of run and manage piece. Run, you want a time to value, and then when you get to the management phase, you really want to be efficient, cost-effective, and then iterative. Okay, so here's the hard question here is. What you just described, some of the folks, particularly the builders are going to say, "Aw, such a waterfall approach. Just start coding." Remember 15 years ago, it was like, "Okay, how do we "write better software, just start building! "Forget about the requirements, "Just start writing code." Okay, but then what happens, is you have to bolt on governance and security and everything else so, talk about how you are able to maintain agility in this model. >> Yeah, I was going to use the word agile, right? So even in each of these phases, it is an agile approach. So the mindset is about agile sprints and our two week long sprints, with very specific metrics at the end of each sprint that is validated against the line of business requirements. So although it might sound waterfall, you're actually taking an agile approach to each of these steps. And if you are going through this, you have also the option to course correct as it goes along, because think of this, the first step was scoping. The line of business gave you a bunch of business metrics or business KPI's they care about, but somewhere in the build phase, past sprint one or sprint 2, you realize, oh well, you know what, that business KPI is not directly achievable or it needs to be refined or tweaked. And there is that circle back with the line of business and a course correction as it was. So it's a very agile approach that you have to take. >> Are they, are they, That's I think right on, because again, if you go and bolt on compliance and governance and security after the fact, we know from years of experience, that it really doesn't work well. You build up technical debt faster. But are these quasi-parallel? I mean there's somethings that you can do in build as the scoping is going on. Is there collaboration so you can describe, can you describe that a little bit? >> Absolutely, so for example, if I know the domain of the problem, I can actually get started with templates that help me accelerate the build process. So I think in your group, for example, IBM internally, there are many, many templates these guys are using. Want to talk a little bit about that? >> Well, we can't just start building up every single time. You know, that's again, I'm going to use this word and really resonate it, you know it's not extensible. Each project, we have to get to the point of using templates, so we had to look at those initiatives and invest in those initiatives, 'cause initially it's harder. But at least once we have some of those cookie-cutter templates and some of them, they might have to have abstractions around certain parts of them, but that's the only way we're ever able to kind of tackle so many problems. So no, without a doubt, it's an important consideration, but at the same time, you have to appreciate there's a lot of projects that are fundamentally different. And that's when you have to have very senior people kind of looking at how to abstract those templates to make them reusable and consumable by others. >> But the team structure, it's not a single amoeba going through all these steps right? These are smaller teams that are, and then there's some threading between each step? >> This is important. >> Yeah, that's tough. We were just talking about that concept. >> Just talking about skills and >> The bind between those groups is something that we're trying to figure out how to break down. 'Cause that's something he recognizes, I recognize internally, but understanding that those peoples tasks, they're never going to be able to iterate through different enterprise problems, unless they break down those borders and really invest in the communication and building those tools. >> Exactly, you talk about full stack teams. So you, it is not enough to have coding skills obviously. >> Right. What is the skill needed to get this into a run environment, right? What is the skill needed to take metrics like not metrics, but explainability, fairness in the moderates, and map that to business metrics. That's a very different skill from Python coding skills. So full stack teams are important, and at the beginning of this process where someone, line of business throws 100 different ideas at you, and you have to go through the scoping exercise, that is a very specific skill that is needed, working together with your coders and runtime administrators. Because how do you define the business KPI's and how do you refine them later on in the life cycle? And how do you translate between line of business lingo and what the coders are going to call it? So it's a full stack team concept. It may not necessarily all be in one group, it may be, but they have to work together across these different side loads to make it successful. >> All right guys, we got to leave it there, the trains are backing up here at IBM CDO conference. Thanks so much for sharing the perspectives on this. All right, keep it right there everybody. You're watchin' "theCUBE" from San Francisco, we're here at Fisherman's Wharf. The IBM Chief Data Officer event. Right back. (bubbly electronic music)

>> Live from San Francisco, California, it's the Cube, covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit, brought to you by IBM. >> Hello, everyone. Welcome to historic Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco. We're covering the IBM Chief Data Officer event, #IBMCDO. This is the Cube's, I think, eighth time covering this event. This is the tenth year anniversary of the IBM CDO event, and it's a little different format today. We're here at day one. It's like a half day. They start at noon, and then the keynotes. We're starting a little bit early. We're going to go all day today. My name is Dave Volante. Steve Eliuk is here. He's a Cube alum and Vice President of Deep Learning and the Global Chief Data Officer at IBM. And Tim Humphrey, the VP at the Chief Data Office at IBM. Gents, welcome to the Cube. >> Welcome, glad to be here. >> So, couple years ago, Ginni Rometty, at a big conference, talked about incumbent disruptors, and the whole notion was that you've got established businesses that need to transform into data businesses. Well, that struck me, that well, if IBM's going to sell that to its customers, it has to go through its own transformation, Steve. So let's start there. What is IBM doing to transform into a data company? >> Well, I've been at IBM for, you know, two years now, and luckily I'm benefiting from a lot of that transformation that's taken place over the past three or four years. So, internally, getting (mumbling) in order, understanding it, going through various different foundation stones, building those building blocks so that we can gather new insights and traverse through the cognitive journey. One of the nice things though, is that we have such a wide, diverse set of data within the company. So for different types of enterprise use cases that have benefits from AI, we have a lot of data assets that we can pull from. Now, keeping those data assets in good order is a challenging task in itself. And I'm able to pull from a lot of different tools that IBM's building for our customers. I get to use them internally, look at them, evaluate them, give them real practitioner's point of view to ultimately get insight for our internal business practices, but also for our customers in turn. >> Okay, so, when you think about a data business, they've got data at the core. I'm going to draw a, like, simple conceptual picture, and you've got people around it, maybe you've got processes around it. IBM, hundred-plus-year-old company, you've got different things at the core. It's products. It's people. It's business process. So maybe you could talk, Tim, about how you guys have gone about putting data at the center of the universe. Is that the right way to think about it? >> It is the right way to think about it, and I like how you were describing it. Because when you think about IBM, we've been around over a hundred years, and we do business in roughly over 170 countries. And we have businesses that span hardware, software, services, financing. And along the way, we've also acquired and divested a lot of companies and a lot of businesses. So what that leaves you with is a very fragmented data landscape, right? You know, to support regulations in this country, taxes, tax rules in another country, and having all these different types of businesses. Some you inherit. Some are born from within your company. It just leaves a lot of data silos. And as we see transformations being so important, and data is at the heart of that transformation, it was important for us to really be able to organize ourselves such that access to data is not a problem. Such that being able to combine data across disciplines from finance to HR to sales to marketing to procurement. That was the big challenge, right? And to do this in a way that really unlocks the value of the data, right? It's very easy to use somebody like one of my good, smart friends here, Steven Eliuk to develop models within a domain. But when you talk about cross-functional, complex data coming together to enable models, that's like the Holy Grail of transformation. Then we can deliver real business value. Then you're not waiting to make decisions. Then you can actually be ahead of trends. And so that's what we've been trying to do And the thought and the journey that we have been on is build a enterprise data platform. So, take the concept of a data lake. Bring in all your data sources into one place, but on top of that, make it more than just a data lake. Bring the services and capabilities that allow you to deliver insights from data together with the data so we have a data platform. And our Cognitive Enterprise data platform sort of enables that transformation, and it makes people like my good friend here much more productive and much more valuable to the business. >> This sounds like just a massive challenge. It's not just a technology challenge, obviously. You've got cultural. I mean, people, "This is my data." >> Yes. >> (laughs) And I'm referring, Tim, you're talking like you're largely through this process, right? So it first of all is... Can you talk about-- >> Basically, I will say this. This is a journey. You're never done, right? And one of the reasons why it is a journey is, if you're going to have a successful business, your business is going to keep transforming. Things are going to keep changing. And even in our landscape today, regulations are going to come. So there's always going to be some type of challenge. So I like to say, we're in a journey. We're not finished. (laughing) We're well down the path, and we've learned a lot. And one of the things we have learned, you hit on it, is culture, right? And it's a little hard to say, okay, I'm opening things up. I don't own the data. The company owns the data. There is that sort of cultural change that has to go along with this transformation. >> And there are technology challenges. I mean, when I first started in this business, AI was a hot concept, but you needed, like, massive supercomputers to actually make them work. Today, you now see their sort of rebirth. You know, (mumbling) talks about the AI winter, and now it's like the AI spring. >> Yeah. >> So how are you guys applying machine intelligence to make IBM a better business? >> Well, ultimately, the technology is really, basically transitioned us from the Dark Ages forward. Previously in the supercomputer mentality, didn't fit well for a lot of AI tasks. Now with GPUs and accelerators and FBGAs and things like that, we're definitely able, along with the data and the curated data that we need, to just fast-track. You know, the practitioners would spend an amazing amount of time gathering, crowdsourcing data, getting it in good order, and then the computational challenges were tough. Now, IBM came to the market with a very interesting computer. The POWER8 and POWER9 architecture has NVLink, which is a proprietary Nvidia, interconnect directly to the CPU. So we can feed GPUs a lot quicker for certain types of tasks. And for certain types of tasks that could mean, you know, you get to market quicker, or we get insights for enterprise problems quicker. So technology's a big deal, but it doesn't just center around GPUs. If you're slow to get access to the data, then that's a big problem. So the governance (mumbling) aspects are just as important, in addition to that, security, privacy, et cetera, also important. The quality of the data, where the data is. So it's and end-to-end system, and if there's any sort of impedance on any of it, it slows down the entire process. But then you have very expensive practitioners who are trying to do their job that are waiting on data or waiting on results. So it's really an end-to-end process. >> Okay, so let's assume for a second the technology box is checked. And again, as you say, Tim, it's a journey, and technology's going to continue to evolve. But we're at a point in technology now where this stuff actually can work. But what about data quality? What about compliance and governance? How are you dealing with the natural data quality problem? Because I'm a PNL manager. I'm saying, well, we're making data decisions, but if I don't like the decision, I'm going to attack the quality of the data. (laughing) So who adjudicates all that, and how have you resolved those challenges? >> Well, I like to think of... I'm an engineer by study, and I just like to think of simple formulas. Garbage in, garbage out. It applies to everything, and it definitely applies to data. >> (laughs) >> Your insights, the models, anything that you build is only going to be as good as the data foundation you have. So one of the key things that we've embarked on a journey on is, how do we standardize all aspects of data across the company? Now, you might say, hey, that's not a hard challenge, but it's really easy to do standards in a silo. For this organization, this is how we're going to call terms like geography, and this is how we'll represent these other terms. But when you do that across functions, it becomes conflict, right? Because people want to do it their own way. So we're on the path of standardizing data across the enterprise. That's going to allow us to have good definitions. And then, as you mentioned earlier, we are trying to use AI to be able to improve our data quality. One of the most important things about data is the metadata, the data that describes the data. >> Mm-hm. >> And we're trying to use AI to enhance our metadata. I'd love for Steven to talk a little bit about this, 'cause this is sort of his brainchild. But it's fascinating to me that we can be on a AI transformation, data can be at the heart of it, and we can use AI (laughs) to help improve the quality of our data. >> Right. >> It's fascinating. >> So the metadata problem is (mumbling) because you've talked about data length before. Then in this day and age, you're talking schema lists. Throw it into a data lake and figure out because you have to be agile for your business. So you can't do that with just human categorization, and you know, it's got to-- >> It could take hours, maybe years. >> For a company the size of IBM, the market would shift so fast, right? So how do you deal with that problem? >> That's exactly it. We're not patient enough to do the normative kind of mentality where you just throw a whole bunch of bodies at it. We're definitely moving from that non-extensible man count, full-time-employee type situation, to looking for ways that we can utilize automation. So around the metadata, quality and understanding of that data was incredibly problematic, and we were just hiring people left, right, and center. And then it's a really tough job that they have dealing with so many different business islands, et cetera. So looking for ways that we could automate that process, we finally found away to do it. So there's a lot of curated data. Now we're looking at data quality in addition to looking at regulatory and governance issues, in addition to automating the labeling of business metadata. And the business metadata is the taxonomy that everything is linked together. We understand it under the same normative umbrella. So then when one of the enterprise use cases says, "Hey, we're looking for additional data assets," oh, it's (snaps) in the cloud here, or it's in a private instance here. But we know it's there, and you can grab it, right? So we're definitely at probably the tail end of that curve now, and it started off really hard, but it's getting easier. So that's-- >> Guys, we got to leave it there. Awesome discussion. I hope we can pick it up in the future when maybe we have more metadata than data. >> (laughs) >> And metadata's going to become more and more valuable. But thank you so much for sharing a little bit about IBM's transformation. It was great having you guys on. >> Thank you. >> Alright, keep it right there, everybody. We'll be back with our next guest right after this short break. You're watching the Cube at IBM CDO in San Francisco. Right back. (electronic music) >> Alright, long clear. Alright, thank you guys. Appreciate it, I wish we had more time.

(light music) >> Live from Boston. It's theCUBE. Covering IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. Brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome back everyone, to theCUBE's live coverage of the IBM CDO Summit here in Boston, Massachusetts. I'm your host, Rebecca Night. And I'm joined by my co-host, Paul Gillen. We have two guests for this segment. We have Steven Eliuk, who is the Vice President of Deep Learning Global Chief Data Officer at IBM. And Christopher Bannocks, Group Chief Data Officer at IMG. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE. >> My pleasure. >> Before we get started, Steve, I know you have some very important CUBE fans that you need-- >> I do. >> To give a shout out to. Please. >> For sure. So I missed them on the last three runs of CUBE, so I'd like to just shout out to Santiago, my son. Five years old. And the shortest one, which is Elana. Miss you guys tons and now you're on the air. (all laughing) >> Excellent. To get that important piece of business out. >> Absolutely. >> So, let's talk about Metadata. What's the problem with Metadata? >> The one problem, or the many (chuckles)? >> (laughing) There are a multitude of problems. >> How long ya got? The problem is, it's everywhere. And there's lots of it. And bringing context to that and understanding it from enterprise-wide perspective is a huge challenge. Just connecting to it finding it, or collecting centrally and then understanding the context and what it means. So, the standardization of it or the lack of standardization of it across the board. >> Yeah, it's incredibly challenging. Just the immense scale of metadata at the same time dealing with metadata as Chris mentioned. Just coming up with your own company's glossary of terms to describe your own data. It's kind of step one in the journey of making your data discoverable and governed. Alright, so it's challenging and it's not well understood and I think we're very early on in these stages of describing our data. >> Yeah. >> But we're getting there. Slowly but surely. >> And perhaps in that context it's not only the fact that it's everywhere but actually we've not created structural solutions in a consistent way across industries to be able to structure it and manage it in an appropriate way. >> So, help people do it better. What are some of the best practices for creating, managing metadata? >> Well you can look at diff, I mean, it's such a broad space you can look at different ones. Let's just take the work we do around describing our data and we do that for for the purposes of regulation. For the purposes of GDPR et cetera et cetera. It's really about discovering and providing context to the data that we have in the organization today. So, in that respect it's creating a catalog and making sure that we have the descriptions and the structures of the data that we manage and use in the organization and to give you perhaps a practical example when you have a data quality problem you need to know how to fix it. So, you store, so you create and structure metadata around well, where does it come from, first of all. So what's the journey it's taken to get to the point where you've identified that there's a problem. But also then, who do we go to to fix it? Where did it go wrong in the chain? And who's responsible for it? Those are very simple examples of the metadata around, the transformations the data might have come through to get to its heading point. The quality metrics associated with it. And then, the owner or the data steward that it has to be routed back to to get fixed. >> Now all of those are metadata elements >> All of those, yeah. >> Right? >> 'Cause we're not really talking about the data. The data might be a debit or a credit. Something very simple like that in banking terms. But actually it's got lots of other attributes associated with it which essentially describe that data. So, what is it? Who owns it? What are the data quality metrics? How do I know whether what it's quality is? >> So where do organizations make mistakes? Do they create too much metadata? Do they create poor, is it poorly labeled? Is it not federated? >> Yes. (all laughing) >> I think it's a mix of all of them. One of the things that you know Chris alluded to and you might of understood is that it's incredibly labor-intensive task. There's a lot of people involved. And when you get a lot of people involved in sadly a quite time-consuming, slightly boring job there's errors and there's problem. And that's data quality, that's GDPR, that's government owned entities, regulatory issues. Likewise, if you can't discover the data 'cause it's labeled wrong, that's potential insight that you've now lost. Because that data's not discoverable to a potential project that's looking for similar types of data. Alright, so, kind of step one is trying to scribe your metadata to the organization. Creating a taxonomy of metadata. And getting everybody on board to label that data whether it be short and long descriptions, having good tools et cetera. >> I mean look, the simple thing is... we struggle as... As a capability in any organization we struggle with these terms, right? Metadata, well ya know, if you're talking to the business they have no idea what you're talking about. You've already confused them the minute you mentioned meta. >> Hashtag. >> Yeah (laughs) >> It's a hashtag. >> That's basically what it is. >> Essentially what it is it's just data about data. It's the descriptive components that tell you what it is you're dealing with. If you just take a simple example from finance; An interest rate on it's own tells you nothing. It could be the interest rate on a savings account. It can the interest rate on a bond. But on its own you have no clue, what you're talking about. A maturity date, or a date in general. You have to provide the context. And that is it's relationships to other data and the contexts that it's in. But also the description of what it is you're looking at. And if that comes from two different systems in an organization, let's say one in Spain and one in France and you just receive a date. You don't know what you're looking at. You have not context of what you're looking at. And simply you have to have that context. So, you have to be able to label it there and then map it to a generic standard that you implement across the organization in order to create that control that you need in order to govern your data. >> Are there standards? I'm sorry Rebecca. >> Yes. >> Are there standards efforts underway industry standard why difference? >> There are open metadata standards that are underway and gaining great deal of traction. There are an internally use that you have to standardize anyway. Irrespective of what's happening across the industry. You don't have the time to wait for external standards to exist in order to make sure you standardize internally. >> Another difficult point is it can be region or country specific. >> Yeah. >> Right, so, it makes it incredibly challenging 'cause every region you might work in you might have to have a own sub-glossary of terms for that specific region. And you might have to control the export of certain data with certain terms between regions and between countries. It gets very very challenging. >> Yeah. And then somehow you have to connect to it all to be able to see what it all is because the usefulness of this is if one system calls exactly the same, maps to let's say date. And it's local definition of that is maturity date. Whereas someone else's map date to birthdate you know you've got a problem. You just know you've got a problem. And exposing the problem is part of the process. Understanding hey that mapping's wrong guys. >> So, where do you begin? If your mission is to transform your organization to be one that is data-centric and the business side is sort of eyes glazing over at the mention of metadata. What kind of communication needs to happen? What kind of teamwork, collaboration? >> So, I mean teamwork and collaboration are absolutely key. The communication takes time. Don't expect one blast of communication to solve the problem. It is going to take education and working with people to actually get 'em to realize the importance of things. And to do that you need to start something. Just the communication of the theory doesn't work. No one can ever connect to it. You have to have people who are working on the data for a reason that is business critical. And you need have them experience the problem to recognize that metadata is important. Until they experience the problem you don't get the right amount of traction. So you have to start small and grow. >> And you can use potentially the whip as well. Governance, the regulatory requirements that's a nice one to push things along. That's often helpful. >> It's helpful, but not necessarily popular. >> No, no. >> So you have to give-- >> Balance. >> We're always struggling with that balance. There's a lot of regulation that drives the need for this. But equally, that same regulation essentially drives all of the same needs that you need for analytics. For good measurement of the data. For growth of customers. For delivering better services to customers. All of these things are important. Just the web click information you have that's all essentially metadata. The way we interact with our clients online and through mobile. That's all metadata. So it's not all whip or stick. There's some real value that is in there as well. >> These would seem to be a domain that is ideal for automation. That through machine learning contextualization machines should be able to figure a lot of this stuff out. Am I wrong? >> No, absolutely right. And I think there's, we're working on proof of concepts to prove that case. And we have IBM AMG as well. The automatic metadata generation capability using machine learning and AI to be able to start to auto-generate some of this insight by using existing catalogs, et cetera et cetera. And we're starting to see real value through that. It's still very early days but I think we're really starting to see that one of the solutions can be machine learning and AI. For sure. >> I think there's various degrees of automation that will come in waves for the next, immediately right now we have certain degrees where we have a very small term set that is very high confidence predictions. But then you want to get specific to the specificity of a company which have 30,000 terms sometimes. Internally, we have 6,000 terms at IBM. And that level of specificity to have complete automation we're not there yet. But it's coming. It's a trial. >> It takes time because the machine is learning. And you have to give the machine enough inputs and gradually take time. Humans are involved as well. It's not about just throwing the machine at something and letting it churn. You have to have that human involvement. It takes time to have the machine continue to learn and grow and give it more terms. And give it more context. But over time I think we're going to see good results. >> I want to ask about that human-in-the-loop as IBM so often calls it. One of the things that Nander Paul Bendery was talking about is how the CDO needs to be a change engine in chief. So how are the rank and file interpreting this move to automation and increase in machine learning in their organizations? Is it accepted? It is (chuckles) it is a source of paranoia and worry? >> I think it's a mix. I think we're kind of blessed at least in the CDO at IBM, the global CDO. Is that everyone's kind of on board for that mission. That's what we're doing >> Right, right. >> There's team members 25, 30 years on IMBs roster and they're just as excited as I am and I've only been there for 16 months. But it kind of depends on the project too. Ones that have a high impact. Everyone's really gung ho because we've seen process times go from 90 days down to a couple of days. That's a huge reduction. And that's the governance regulatory aspects but more for us it's a little bit about we're looking for the linkage and availability of data. So that we can get more insights from that data and better outcomes for different types of enterprise use cases. >> And a more satisfying work day. >> Yeah it's fun. >> That's a key point. Much better to be involved in this than doing the job itself. The job of tagging and creating metadata associated with the vast number of data elements is very hard work. >> Yeah. >> It's very difficult. And it's much better to be working with machine learning to do it and dealing with the outliers or the exceptions than it is chugging through. Realistically it just doesn't scale. You can't do this across 30,000 elements in any meaningful way or a way that really makes sense from a financial perspective. So you really do need to be able to scale this quickly and machine learning is the way to do it. >> Have you found a way to make data governance fun? Can you gamify it? >> Are you suggesting that data governance isn't fun? (all laughing) Yes. >> But can you gamify it? Can you compete? >> We're using gamification in various in many ways. We haven't been using it in terms of data governance yet. Governance is just a horrible word, right? People have really negative connotations associated with it. But actually if you just step one degree away we're talking about quality. Quality means better decisions. And that's actually all governance is. Governance is knowing where your data is. Knowing who's responsible for fixing if it goes wrong. And being able to measure whether it's right or wrong in the first place. And it being better means we make better decisions. Our customers have better engagement with us. We please our customers more and therefore they hopefully engage with us more and buy more services. I think we should that your governance is something we invented through the need for regulation. And the need for control. And from that background. But realistically it's just, we should be proud about the data that we use in the organization. And we should want the best results from it. And it's not about governance. It's about us being proud about what we do. >> Yeah, a great note to end on. Thank you so much Christopher and Steven. >> Thank you. >> Cheers. >> I'm Rebecca Night for Paul Gillen we will have more from the IBM CDO Summit here in Boston coming up just after this. (electronic music)

>> Live from Boston, it's theCUBE. Covering IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. Brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome back, everyone, to theCUBE's live coverage of the IBM CDO Summit here in Boston, Massachusetts. I'm your host, Rebecca Knight, along with my co-host Paul Gillin. We have two guests for this session, we have Rebecca Shockley, she is executive consultant and IBM Global Business Services, and Alfred Essa, vice president analytics and R&D at McGraw-Hill Education. Rebecca and Alfred, thanks so much for coming on theCUBE. >> Thanks for having us. >> So I'm going to start with you, Rebecca. You're giving a speech tomorrow about the AI ladder, I know you haven't finished writing it-- >> Shh, don't tell. >> You're giving a speech about the AI ladder, what is the AI ladder? >> So, when we think about artificial intelligence, or augmented intelligence, it's very pervasive, we're starting to see it a lot more in organizations. But the AI ladder basically says that you need to build on a foundation of data, so that data and information architecture's your first rung, and with that data, then you can do analytics, next rung, move into machine learning once you're getting more comfortable, and that opens up the whole world of AI. And part of what we're seeing is organizations trying to jump to the top of the ladder or scramble up the ladder really quickly and then realize they need to come back down and do some foundational work with their data. I've been doing data and analytics with IBM for 21 years, and data governance is never fun. It's hard. And people would just as soon go do something else than do data governance, data security, data stewardship. Especially as we're seeing more business-side use of data. When I started my career, data was very much an IT thing, right. And part of my early career was basically just getting IT and business to communicate in a way that they were saying the same things. Well now you have a lot more self-service analytics, and business leaders, business executives, making software decisions and various decisions that impact the data, without necessarily understanding the ripples that their decisions can have throughout the data infrastructure, because that's not their forte. >> So what's the outcome, what's the result of this? >> Well, you start to see organizations, it's similar to what we saw when organizations first started making data lakes, right? The whole concept of a data lake, very exciting, interesting, getting all the data in together, whether it's virtual or physical. What ended up happening is without proper governance, without proper measures in place, you ended up with a data swamp instead of a data lake. Things got very messy very quickly, and instead of creating opportunities you were essentially creating problems. And so what we're advising clients, is you really have to make sure that you're focused on taking care of that first rung, right? Your data architecture, your information architecture, and treating the data with the respect as a strategic asset that it is, and making sure that you're dealing with that data in a proper manner, right? So, basically telling them, yes we understand that's fun up there, but come back down and deal with your foundation. And for a lot of organizations, they've never really stepped into data governance, because again, data isn't what they think makes the company run, right? So banks are bankers, not data people, but at the same time, how do you run a bank without data? >> Well exactly. And I want to bring you into this conversation, Alfred, as McGraw-Hill, a company that is climbing the ladder, in a more steady fashion. What's your approach? How do you think about bringing your teams of data scientists together to work to improve the company's bottom line, to enhance the customer experience? >> First I'd sort of like to start with laying some of the context of what we do. McGraw-Hill Education has been traditionally a textbook publisher, we've been around for over a hundred years, I started with the company over a hundred years ago. (all laughing) >> You've aged well. >> But we no longer think of ourselves as a textbook publisher. We're in the midst of a massive digital transformation. We started that journey over five years ago. So we think of ourselves as a software company. We're trying to create intelligent software based on smart data. But it's not just about software and AI and data, when it comes to education it's a tale of two cities. This is not just the U.S., but internationally. Used to be, we were born, went to school, got a job, raised a family, retired, and then we die. Well now, education is not episodic. People need to be educated, it's life-long learning. It's survival, but also flourishing. So that's created a massive problem and a challenge. It's a tale of two cities, by that I mean there's an incredible opportunity to apply technology, AI, we see a lot of potential in the new technologies. In that sense, it's the best of times. The worst of times is, we're faced with massive problems. There's a lot of inequity, we need to educate a people who have largely been neglected. That's the context. So I think in now answering your question about data science teams, first and foremost, we like to get people on the teams excited about the mission. It's like, what are we trying to achieve? What's the problem that we're trying to achieve? And I think the best employees, including data scientists, they like solving hard problems. And so, first thing that we try to do is, it's not what skills you have, but do you like solving really, really hard problems. And then taking it next step, I think the exciting thing about data science is it's an interdisciplinary field. It's not one skill, but you need to bring together a combination of skills. And then you also have to excel and have the ability to work in teams. >> You said that the AI has potential to improve the education process. Now, people have only so much capacity to learn, how can AI accelerate that process? >> Yeah, so if we stand back a little bit and look at the traditional model of education, there's nothing wrong with it but it was successful for a certain period of years, and it works for some people. But now the need for education is universal, and life long. So what our basic model, current model of education is lecture mode and testing. Now from a learning perspective, learning science perspective, all the research indicates that that doesn't work. It might work for a small group of people, but it's not universally applicable. What we're trying to do, and this is the promise of AI, it's not AI alone, but I think this is a big part of AI. What we can do is begin to customize and tailor the education to each individual's specific needs. And just to give you one quick example of that, different students come in with different levels of prior knowledge. Not everyone comes into a class, or a learning experience, knowing the same things. So what we can do with AI is determine, very, very precisely, just think of it as a brain scan, of what is it each student need to know at every given point in time, and then based on that we can determine also, this is where the models and algorithms are, what are you ready to learn next. And what you might be ready to learn next and what I might be ready to learn next is going to be very different. So our algorithms also help route delivery of information and knowledge at the right time to the right person, and so on. >> I mean, you're talking about these massive social challenges. Education as solving global inequity, and not every company has maybe such a high-minded purpose. But does it take that kind of mission, that kind of purpose, to unite employees? Both of you, I'm interested in your perspectives here. >> I don't think it takes, you know, a mission of solving global education. I do firmly agree with what Al said about people need a mission, they need to understand the outcome, and helping organizations see that outcome as being possible, gives them that rally point. So I don't disagree, I think everybody needs a mission to work towards but it doesn't have to be solving-- >> You want to extract that mission to a higher level, then. >> Exactly. >> Making the world a better place. >> Exactly, or at least your little corner of the world. Again what we're seeing, the difficulty is helping business leaders or consumers or whomever understand how data plays into that. You may have a goal of, we want better relationship with our customer, right? And at least folks of my age think that's a personal one-on-one kind of thing. Understanding who you are, I can find that much more quickly by looking at all your past transactions, and all of your past behaviors, and whether you clicked this or that. And you should expect that I remember things from one conversation to the next. And helping people understand that, you know, helping the folks who are doing the work, understand that the outcome will be that we can actually treat our customers the way that you want to be treated as a person, gives them that sense of purpose, and helps them connect the dots better. >> One of the big challenges that we hear CDOs face is getting buy-in, and what you're proposing about this new model really appending the old sage on the stage model, I mean, is there a lot of pushback? Is it difficult to get the buy-in and all stakeholders to be on the same page? >> Yeah, it is, I think it's doubly difficult. The way I think about it is, it's like a shift change in hockey, where you have one shift that's on the ice and another one that's about to come on the ice, that's a period of maximum vulnerability. That's where a lot of goals are scored, people get upset, start fighting. (all laughing) That's hockey. >> That's what you do. >> Organizations and companies are faced with the same challenge. It's not that they're resisting change. Many companies have been successful with one business model, while they're trying to bring in a new business model. Now you can't jettison the old business model because often that's paying the bills. That's the source of the revenue. So the real challenge is how are you going to balance out these two things at the same time? So that's doubly difficult, right. >> I want to ask you quickly, 'cause we have to end here, but there's a terrible shortage of cybersecurity professionals, data science professionals, the universities are simply not able to keep up with demand. Do you see the potential for AI to step in and fill that role? >> I don't think technology by itself will fill that role. I think there is a deficit of talented people. I think what's going to help fill that is getting people excited about really large problems that can be solved with this technology. I think, actually I think the talent is there, what I see is, I think we need to do a better job of bringing more women, other diverse groups, into the mix. There are a lot of barriers in diversity in bringing talented people. I think they're out there, I think we could do a much better job with that. >> Recruiting them, right. Alfred, Rebecca, thanks so much for coming on theCUBE, it was a pleasure. >> Thank you so much for having us. >> I'm Rebecca Knight, for Paul Gillin, we will have more from theCUBE's live coverage of the IBM CDO Summit here in Boston coming up in just a little bit.

>> Live from the MIT campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, it's theCUBE, covering the 12th Annual MIT Chief Data Officer and Information Quality Symposium. Brought to you by SiliconANGLE Media. >> Welcome back to theCUBE's coverage of MIT CDOIQ here in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I'm your host Rebecca Knight along with my cohost Peter Burris. We have two guests on this segment. We have Cortnie Abercrombie, she is the founder of the nonprofit AI Truth, and Carl Gerber, who is the managing partner at Global Data Analytics Leaders. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE Cortnie and Carl. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So I want to start by just having you introduce yourselves to our viewers, what you do. So tell us a little bit about AI Truth, Cortnie. >> So this was born out of a passion. As I, the last gig I had at IBM, everybody knows me for chief data officer and what I did with that, but the more recent role that I had was developing custom offerings for Fortune 500 in the AI solutions area, so as I would go meet and see different clients, and talk with them and start to look at different processes for how you implement AI solutions, it became very clear that not everybody is attuned, just because they're the ones funding the project or even initiating the purpose of the project, the business leaders don't necessarily know how these things work or run or what can go wrong with them. And on the flip side of that, we have very ambitious up-and-comer-type data scientists who are just trying to fulfill the mission, you know, the talent at hand, and they get really swept up in it. To the point where you can even see that data's getting bartered back and forth with any real governance over it or policies in place to say, "Hey, is that right? Should we have gotten that kind of information?" Which leads us into things like the creepy factor. Like, you know target (laughs) and some of these cases that are well-known. And so, as I saw some of these mistakes happening that were costing brand reputation, our return on investment, or possibly even creating opportunities for risk for the companies and for the business leaders, I felt like someone's got to take one for the team here and go out and start educating people on how this stuff actually works, what the issues can be and how to prevent those issues, and then also what do you do when things do go wrong, how do you fix it? So that's the mission of AI Truth and I have a book. Yes, power to the people, but you know really my main concern was concerned individuals, because I think we've all been affected when we've sent and email and all of a sudden we get a weird ad, and we're like, "Hey, what, they should not, is somebody reading my email?" You know, and we feel this, just, offense-- >> And the answer is yes. >> Yes, and they are, they are. So I mean, we, but we need to know because the only way we can empower ourselves to do something is to actually know how it works. So, that's what my missions is to try and do. So, for the concerned individuals out there, I am writing a book to kind of encapsulate all the experiences that I had so people know where to look and what they can actually do, because you'll be less fearful if you know, "Hey, I can download DuckDuckGo for my browser, or my search engine I mean, and Epic for my browser, and some private, you know, private offerings instead of the typical free offerings. There's not an answer for Facebook yet though. >> So, (laughs) we'll get there. Carl, tell us a little bit about Global Data Analytics Leaders. >> So, I launched Analytics Leaders and CDO Coach after a long career in corporate America. I started building an executive information system when I was in the military for a four-star commander, and I've really done a lot in data analytics throughout my career. Most recently, starting a CDO function at two large multinational companies in leading global transformation programs. And, what I've experienced is even though the industries may vary a little bit, the challenges are the same and the patterns of behavior are the same, both the good and bad behavior, bad habits around the data. And, through the course of my career, I've developed these frameworks and playbooks and just ways to get a repeatable outcome and bring these new technologies like machine learning to bear to really overcome the challenges that I've seen. And what I've seen is a lot of the current thinking is we're solving these data management problems manually. You know, we all hear the complaints about the people who are analysts and data scientists spending 70, 80% of their time being a data gatherer and not really generating insight from the data itself and making it actionable. Well, that's why we have computer systems, right? But that large-scale technology in automation hasn't really served us well, because we think in silos, right? We fund these projects based on departments and divisions. We acquire companies through mergers and acquisitions. And the CDO role has emerged because we need to think about this, all the data that an enterprise uses, horizontally. And with that, I bring a high degree of automation, things like machine learning, to solve those problems. So, I'm now bottling that and advising my clients. And at the same time, the CDO role is where the CIO role was 20 years ago. We're really in it's infancy, and so you see companies define it differently, have different expectations. People are filling the roles that may have not done this before, and so I provide the coaching services there. It's like a professional golfer who has a swing coach. So I come in and I help the data executives with upping their game. >> Well, it's interesting, I actually said the CIO role 40 years ago. But, here's why. If we look back in the 1970s, hardcore financial systems were made possible by the technology which allowed us to run businesses like a portfolio: Jack Welch, the GE model. That was not possible if you didn't have a common asset management system, if you didn't have a common cached management system, etc. And so, when we started creating those common systems, we needed someone that could describe how that shared asset was going to be used within the organization. And we went from the DP manager in HR, the DP manager within finance, to the CIO. And in many respects, we're doing the same thing, right? We're talking about data in a lot of different places and now the business is saying, "We can bring this data together in new and interesting ways into more a shared asset, and we need someone that can help administer that process, and you know, navigate between different groups and different needs and whatnot." Is that kind of what you guys are seeing? >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well you know once I get to talking (laughs). For me, I can going right back to the newer technologies like AI and IOT that are coming from externally into your organization, and then also the fact that we're seeing bartering at an unprec... of data at an unprecedented level before. And yet, what the chief data officer role originally did was look at data internally, and structured data mostly. But now, we're asking them to step out of their comfort zone and start looking at all these unknown, niche data broker firms that may or may not be ethical in how they're... I mean, I... look I tell people, "If you hear the word scrape, you run." No scraping, we don't want scraped data, no, no, no (laugh). But I mean, but that's what we're talking about-- >> Well, what do you mean by scraped data, 'cause that's important? >> Well, this is a well-known data science practice. And it's not that... nobody's being malicious here, nobody's trying to have a malintent, but I think it's just data scientists are just scruffy, they roll up their sleeves and they get data however they can. And so, the practice emerged. Look, they're built off of open-source software and everything's free, right, for them, for the most part? So they just start reading in screens and things that are available that you could see, they can optical character read it in, or they can do it however without having to have a subscription to any of that data, without having to have permission to any of that data. It's, "I can see it, so it's mine." But you know, that doesn't work in candy stores. We can't just go, or jewelry stores in my case, I mean, you can't just say, "I like that diamond earring, or whatever, I'm just going to take it because I can see it." (laughs) So, I mean, yeah we got to... that's scraping though. >> And the implications of that are suddenly now you've got a great new business initiative and somebody finds out that you used their private data in that initiative, and now they've got a claim on that asset. >> Right. And this is where things start to get super hairy, and you just want to make sure that you're being on the up-and-up with your data practices and you data ethics, because, in my opinion, 90% of what's gone wrong in AI or the fear factor of AI is that your privacy's getting violated and then you're labeled with data that you may or may not know even exists half the time. I mean. >> So, what's the answer? I mean as you were talking about these data scientists are scrappy, scruffy, roll-up-your-sleeves kind of people, and they are coming up with new ideas, new innovations that sometimes are good-- >> Oh yes, they are. >> So what, so what is the answer? Is this this code of ethics? Is it a... sort of similar to a Hippocratic Oath? I mean how would you, what do you think? >> So, it's a multidimensional problem. Cortnie and I were talking earlier that you have to have more transparency into the models you're creating, and that means a significant validation process. And that's where the chief data officer partners with folks in risk and other areas and the data science team around getting more transparency and visibility into what's the data that's feeding into it? Is it really the authoritative data of the company? And as Cortnie points out, do we even have the rights to that data that's feeding our models? And so, by bringing that transparency and a little more validation before you actually start making key, bet-the-business decisions on the outcomes of these models, you need to look at how you're vetting them. >> And the vetting process is part technology, part culture, part process, it goes back to that people process technology trying. >> Yeah, absolutely, know where your data came from. Why are you doing this model? What are you doing to do with the outcomes? Are you actually going to do something with it or are you going to ignore it? Under what conditions will you empower a decision-maker to use the information that is the output of the model? A lot of these things, you have to think through when you want to operationalize it. It's not just, "I'm going to go get a bunch of data wherever I can, I put a model together. Here, don't you like the results?" >> But this is Silicon Valley way, right? An MVP for everything and you just let it run until... you can't. >> That's a great point Cortnie (laughs) I've always believed, and I want to test this with you, we talk about people process technology about information, we never talk about people process technology and information of information. There's a manner of respects what we're talking about is making explicit the information about... information, the metadata, and how we manage that and how we treat that, and how we defuse that, and how we turn that, the metadata itself, into models to try to govern and guide utilization of this. That's especially important in AI world, isn't it? >> I start with this. For me, it's simple, I mean, but everything he said was true. But, I try to keep it to this: it's about free will. If I said you can do that with my data, to me it's always my data. I don't care if it's on Facebook, I don't care where it is and I don't care if it's free or not, it's still my data. Even if it's X23andMe, or 23andMe, sorry, and they've taken the swab, or whether it's Facebook or I did a google search, I don't care, it's still my data. So if you ask me if it's okay to do a certain type of thing, then maybe I will consent to that. But I should at least be given an option. And no, be given the transparency. So it's all about free will. So in my mind, as long as you're always providing some sort of free will (laughs), the ability for me to having a decision to say, "Yes, I want to participate in that," or, "Yes, you can label me as whatever label I'm getting, Trump or a pro-Hillary or Obam-whatever, name whatever issue of the day is," then I'm okay with that as long as I get a choice. >> Let's go back to it, I want to build on that if I can, because, and then I want to ask you a question about it Carl, the issue of free will presupposes that both sides know exactly what's going into the data. So for example, if I have a medical procedure, I can sit down on that form and I can say, "Whatever happens is my responsibility." But if bad things happen because of malfeasance, guess what? That piece of paper's worthless and I can sue. Because the doctor and the medical provider is supposed to know more about what's going on than I do. >> Right. >> Does the same thing exist? You talked earlier about governance and some of the culture imperatives and transparency, doesn't that same thing exist? And I'm going to ask you a question: is that part of your nonprofit is to try to raise the bar for everybody? But doesn't that same notion exist, that at the end of the day, you don't... You do have information asymmetries, both sides don't know how the data's being used because of the nature of data? >> Right. That's why you're seeing the emergence of all these data privacy laws. And so what I'm advising executives and the board and my clients is we need to step back and think bigger about this. We need to think about as not just GDPR, the European scope, it's global data privacy. And if we look at the motivation, why are we doing this? Are we doing it just because we have to be regulatory-compliant 'cause there's a law in the books, or should we reframe it and say, "This is really about the user experience, the customer experience." This is a touchpoint that my customers have with my company. How transparent should I be with what data I have about you, how I'm using it, how I'm sharing it, and is there a way that I can turn this into a positive instead of it's just, "I'm doing this because I have to for regulatory-compliance." And so, I believe if you really examine the motivation and look at it from more of the carrot and less of the stick, you're going to find that you're more motivated to do it, you're going to be more transparent with your customers, and you're going to share, and you're ultimately going to protect that data more closely because you want to build that trust with your customers. And then lastly, let's face it, this is the data we want to analyze, right? This is the authenticated data we want to give to the data scientists, so I just flip that whole thing on its head. We do for these reasons and we increase the transparency and trust. >> So Cortnie, let me bring it back to you. >> Okay. >> That presupposes, again, an up-leveling of knowledge about data privacy not just for the executive but also for the consumer. How are you going to do that? >> Personally, I'm going to come back to free will again, and I'm also going to add: harm impacts. We need to start thinking impact assessments instead of governance, quite frankly. We need to start looking at if I, you know, start using a FICO score as a proxy for another piece of information, like a crime record in a certain district of whatever, as a way to understand how responsible you are and whether or not your car is going to get broken into, and now you have to pay more. Well, you're... if you always use a FICO score, for example, as a proxy for responsibility which, let's face it, once a data scientist latches onto something, they share it with everybody 'cause that's how they are, right? They love that and I love that about them, quite frankly. But, what I don't like is it propagates, and then before you know it, the people who are of lesser financial means, it's getting propagated because now they're going to be... Every AI pricing model is going to use FICO score as a-- >> And they're priced out of the market. >> And they're priced out of the market and how is that fair? And there's a whole group, I think you know about the Fairness Accountability Transparency group that, you know, kind of watch dogs this stuff. But I think business leaders as a whole don't really think through to that level like, "If I do this, then this this and this could incur--" >> So what would be the one thing you could say if, corporate America's listening. >> Let's do impact. Let's do impact assessments. If you're going to cost someone their livelihood, or you're going to cost them thousands of dollars, then let's put more scrutiny, let's put more government validation. To your point, let's put some... 'cause not everything needs the nth level. Like, if I present you with a blue sweater instead of a red sweater on google or whatever, (laughs) You know, that's not going to harm you. But it will harm you if I give you a teacher assessment that's based on something that you have no control over, and now you're fired because you've been laid off 'cause your rating was bad. >> This is a great conversation. Let me... Let me add something different, 'cause... Or say it a different way, and tell me if you agree. In many respects, it's: Does this practice increase inclusion or does this practice decrease inclusion? This is not some goofy, social thing, this is: Are you making your market bigger or are you making your market smaller? Because the last thing you want is that the participation by people ends with: You can't play because of some algorithmic response we had. So maybe the question of inclusion becomes a key issue. Would you agree with that? >> I do agree with it, and I still think there's levels even to inclusion. >> Of course. >> Like, you know, being a part of the blue sweater club versus the (laughs) versus, "I don't want to be a convict," you know, suddenly because of some record you found, or association with someone else. And let's just face it, a lot of these algorithmic models do do these kinds of things where they... They use n+1, you know, a lot... you know what I'm saying. And so you're associated naturally with the next person closest to you, and that's not always the right thing to do, right? So, in some ways, and so I'm positing just little bit of a new idea here, you're creating some policies, whether you're being, and we were just talking about this, but whether you're being implicit about them or explicit, more likely you're being implicit because you're just you're summarily deciding. Well, okay, I have just decided in the credit score example, that if you don't have a good credit threshold... But where in your policies and your corporate policy did it ever say that people of lesser financial means should be excluded from being able to have good car insurance for... 'cause now, the same goes with like Facebook. Some people feel like they're going to have to opt of of life, I mean, if they don't-- >> (laughs) Opt out of life. >> I mean like, seriously, when you think about grandparents who are excluded, you know, out in whatever Timbuktu place they live, and all their families are somewhere else, and the only way that they get to see is, you know, on Facebook. >> Go back to the issue you raised earlier about "Somebody read my email," I can tell you, as a person with a couple of more elderly grandparents, they inadvertently shared some information with me on Facebook about a health condition that they had. You know how grotesque the response of Facebook was to that? And, it affected me to because they had my name in it. They didn't know any better. >> Sometimes there's a stigma. Sometimes things become a stigma as well. There's an emotional response. When I put the article out about why I left IBM to start this new AI Truth nonprofit, the responses I got back that were so immediate were emotional responses about how this stuff affects people. That they're scared of what this means. Can people come after my kids or my grandkids? And if you think about how genetic information can get used, you're not just hosing yourself. I mean, breast cancer genes, I believe, aren't they, like... They run through families, so, I-- >> And they're pretty well-understood. >> If someone swabs my, and uses it and swaps it with other data, you know, people, all of a sudden, not just me is affected, but my whole entire lineage, I mean... It's hard to think of that, but... it's true (laughs). >> These are real life and death... these are-- >> Not just today, but for the future. And in many respects, it's that notion of inclusion... Going back to it, now I'm making something up, but not entirely, but going back to some of the stuff that you were talking about, Carl, the decisions we make about data today, we want to ensure that we know that there's value in the options for how we use that data in the future. So, the issue of inclusion is not just about people, but it's also about other activities, or other things that we might be able to do with data because of the nature of data. I think we always have to have an options approach to thinking about... as we make data decisions. Would you agree with that? Yes, because you know, data's not absolute. So, you can measure something and you can look at the data quality, you can look at the inputs to a model, whatever, but you still have to have that human element of, "Are you we doing the right thing?" You know, the data should guide us in our decisions, but I don't think it's ever an absolute. It's a range of options, and we chose this options for this reason. >> Right, so are we doing the right thing and do no harm too? Carl, Cortnie, we could talk all day, this has been a really fun conversation. >> Oh yeah, and we have. (laughter) >> But we're out of time. I'm Rebecca Knight for Peter Burris, we will have more from MIT CDOIQ in just a little bit. (upbeat music)

(techno music) >> Announcer: Live, from downtown San Francisco, it's theCUBE. Covering IBM Chief Data Officer Strategy Summit 2018. Brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome back to San Francisco everybody, this is theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. We're here at the Parc 55 in San Francisco covering the IBM CDO Strategy Summit. I'm here with Joel Horwitz who's the Vice President of Digital Partnerships & Offerings at IBM. Good to see you again Joel. >> Thanks, great to be here, thanks for having me. >> So I was just, you're very welcome- It was just, let's see, was it last month, at Think? >> Yeah, it's hard to keep track, right. >> And we were talking about your new role- >> It's been a busy year. >> the importance of partnerships. One of the things I want to, well let's talk about your role, but I really want to get into, it's innovation. And we talked about this at Think, because it's so critical, in my opinion anyway, that you can attract partnerships, innovation partnerships, startups, established companies, et cetera. >> Joel: Yeah. >> To really help drive that innovation, it takes a team of people, IBM can't do it on its own. >> Yeah, I mean look, IBM is the leader in innovation, as we all know. We're the market leader for patents, that we put out each year, and how you get that technology in the hands of the real innovators, the developers, the longtail ISVs, our partners out there, that's the challenging part at times, and so what we've been up to is really looking at how we make it easier for partners to partner with IBM. How we make it easier for developers to work with IBM. So we have a number of areas that we've been adding, so for example, we've added a whole IBM Code portal, so if you go to developer.ibm.com/code you can actually see hundreds of code patterns that we've created to help really any client, any partner, get started using IBM's technology, and to innovate. >> Yeah, and that's critical, I mean you're right, because to me innovation is a combination of invention, which is what you guys do really, and then it's adoption, which is what your customers are all about. You come from the data science world. We're here at the Chief Data Officer Summit, what's the intersection between data science and CDOs? What are you seeing there? >> Yeah, so when I was here last, it was about two years ago in 2015, actually, maybe three years ago, man, time flies when you're having fun. >> Dave: Yeah, the Spark Summit- >> Yeah Spark Technology Center and the Spark Summit, and we were here, I was here at the Chief Data Officer Summit. And it was great, and at that time, I think a lot of the conversation was really not that different than what I'm seeing today. Which is, how do you manage all of your data assets? I think a big part of doing good data science, which is my kind of background, is really having a good understanding of what your data governance is, what your data catalog is, so, you know we introduced the Watson Studio at Think, and actually, what's nice about that, is it brings a lot of this together. So if you look in the market, in the data market, today, you know we used to segment it by a few things, like data gravity, data movement, data science, and data governance. And those are kind of the four themes that I continue to see. And so outside of IBM, I would contend that those are relatively separate kind of tools that are disconnected, in fact Dinesh Nirmal, who's our engineer on the analytic side, Head of Development there, he wrote a great blog just recently, about how you can have some great machine learning, you have some great data, but if you can't operationalize that, then really you can't put it to use. And so it's funny to me because we've been focused on this challenge, and IBM is making the right steps, in my, I'm obviously biased, but we're making some great strides toward unifying the, this tool chain. Which is data management, to data science, to operationalizing, you know, machine learning. So that's what we're starting to see with Watson Studio. >> Well, I always push Dinesh on this and like okay, you've got a collection of tools, but are you bringing those together? And he flat-out says no, we developed this, a lot of this from scratch. Yes, we bring in the best of the knowledge that we have there, but we're not trying to just cobble together a bunch of disparate tools with a UI layer. >> Right, right. >> It's really a fundamental foundation that you're trying to build. >> Well, what's really interesting about that, that piece, is that yeah, I think a lot of folks have cobbled together a UI layer, so we formed a partnership, coming back to the partnership view, with a company called Lightbend, who's based here in San Francisco, as well as in Europe, and the reason why we did that, wasn't just because of the fact that Reactive development, if you're not familiar with Reactive, it's essentially Scala, Akka, Play, this whole framework, that basically allows developers to write once, and it kind of scales up with demand. In fact, Verizon actually used our platform with Lightbend to launch the iPhone 10. And they show dramatic improvements. Now what's exciting about Lightbend, is the fact that application developers are developing with Reactive, but if you turn around, you'll also now be able to operationalize models with Reactive as well. Because it's basically a single platform to move between these two worlds. So what we've continued to see is data science kind of separate from the application world. Really kind of, AI and cloud as different universes. The reality is that for any enterprise, or any company, to really innovate, you have to find a way to bring those two worlds together, to get the most use out of it. >> Fourier always says "Data is the new development kit". He said this I think five or six years ago, and it's barely becoming true. You guys have tried to make an attempt, and have done a pretty good job, of trying to bring those worlds together in a single platform, what do you call it? The Watson Data Platform? >> Yeah, Watson Data Platform, now Watson Studio, and I think the other, so one side of it is, us trying to, not really trying, but us actually bringing together these disparate systems. I mean we are kind of a systems company, we're IT. But not only that, but bringing our trained algorithms, and our trained models to the developers. So for example, we also did a partnership with Unity, at the end of last year, that's now just reaching some pretty good growth, in terms of bringing the Watson SDK to game developers on the Unity platform. So again, it's this idea of bringing the game developer, the application developer, in closer contact with these trained models, and these trained algorithms. And that's where you're seeing incredible things happen. So for example, Star Trek Bridge Crew, which I don't know how many Trekkies we have here at the CDO Summit. >> A few over here probably. >> Yeah, a couple? They're using our SDK in Unity, to basically allow a gamer to use voice commands through the headset, through a VR headset, to talk to other players in the virtual game. So we're going to see more, I can't really disclose too much what we're doing there, but there's some cool stuff coming out of that partnership. >> Real immersive experience driving a lot of data. Now you're part of the Digital Business Group. I like the term digital business, because we talk about it all the time. Digital business, what's the difference between a digital business and a business? What's the, how they use data. >> Joel: Yeah. >> You're a data person, what does that mean? That you're part of the Digital Business Group? Is that an internal facing thing? An external facing thing? Both? >> It's really both. So our Chief Digital Officer, Bob Lord, he has a presentation that he'll give, where he starts out, and he goes, when I tell people I'm the Chief Digital Officer they usually think I just manage the website. You know, if I tell people I'm a Chief Data Officer, it means I manage our data, in governance over here. The reality is that I think these Chief Digital Officer, Chief Data Officer, they're really responsible for business transformation. And so, if you actually look at what we're doing, I think on both sides is we're using data, we're using marketing technology, martech, like Optimizely, like Segment, like some of these great partners of ours, to really look at how we can quickly A/B test, get user feedback, to look at how we actually test different offerings and market. And so really what we're doing is we're setting up a testing platform, to bring not only our traditional offers to market, like DB2, Mainframe, et cetera, but also bring new offers to market, like blockchain, and quantum, and others, and actually figure out how we get better product-market fit. What actually, one thing, one story that comes to mind, is if you've seen the movie Hidden Figures- >> Oh yeah. >> There's this scene where Kevin Costner, I know this is going to look not great for IBM, but I'm going to say it anyways, which is Kevin Costner has like a sledgehammer, and he's like trying to break down the wall to get the mainframe in the room. That's what it feels like sometimes, 'cause we create the best technology, but we forget sometimes about the last mile. You know like, we got to break down the wall. >> Where am I going to put it? >> You know, to get it in the room! So, honestly I think that's a lot of what we're doing. We're bridging that last mile, between these different audiences. So between developers, between ISVs, between commercial buyers. Like how do we actually make this technology, not just accessible to large enterprise, which are our main clients, but also to the other ecosystems, and other audiences out there. >> Well so that's interesting Joel, because as a potential partner of IBM, they want, obviously your go-to-market, your massive company, and great distribution channel. But at the same time, you want more than that. You know you want to have a closer, IBM always focuses on partnerships that have intrinsic value. So you talked about offerings, you talked about quantum, blockchain, off-camera talking about cloud containers. >> Joel: Yeah. >> I'd say cloud and containers may be a little closer than those others, but those others are going to take a lot of market development. So what are the offerings that you guys are bringing? How do they get into the hands of your partners? >> I mean, the commonality with all of these, all the emerging offerings, if you ask me, is the distributed nature of the offering. So if you look at blockchain, it's a distributed ledger. It's a distributed transaction chain that's secure. If you look at data, really and we can hark back to say, Hadoop, right before object storage, it's distributed storage, so it's not just storing on your hard drive locally, it's storing on a distributed network of servers that are all over the world and data centers. If you look at cloud, and containers, what you're really doing is not running your application on an individual server that can go down. You're using containers because you want to distribute that application over a large network of servers, so that if one server goes down, you're not going to be hosed. And so I think the fundamental shift that you're seeing is this distributed nature, which in essence is cloud. So I think cloud is just kind of a synonym, in my opinion, for distributed nature of our business. >> That's interesting and that brings up, you're right, cloud and Big Data/Hadoop, we don't talk about Hadoop much anymore, but it kind of got it all started, with that notion of leave the data where it is. And it's the same thing with cloud. You can't just stuff your business into the public cloud. You got to bring the cloud to your data. >> Joel: That's right. >> But that brings up a whole new set of challenges, which obviously, you're in a position just to help solve. Performance, latency, physics come into play. >> Physics is a rough one. It's kind of hard to avoid that one. >> I hear your best people are working on it though. Some other partnerships that you want to sort of, elucidate. >> Yeah, no, I mean we have some really great, so I think the key kind of partnership, I would say area, that I would allude to is, one of the things, and you kind of referenced this, is a lot of our partners, big or small, want to work with our top clients. So they want to work with our top banking clients. They want, 'cause these are, if you look at for example, MaRisk and what we're doing with them around blockchain, and frankly, talk about innovation, they're innovating containers for real, not virtual containers- >> And that's a joint venture right? >> Yeah, it is, and so it's exciting because, what we're bringing to market is, I also lead our startup programs, called the Global Entrepreneurship Program, and so what I'm focused on doing, and you'll probably see more to come this quarter, is how do we actually bridge that end-to-end? How do you, if you're startup or a small business, ultimately reach that kind of global business partner level? And so kind of bridging that, that end-to-end. So we're starting to bring out a number of different incentives for partners, like co-marketing, so I'll help startups when they're early, figure out product-market fit. We'll give you free credits to use our innovative technology, and we'll also bring you into a number of clients, to basically help you not burn all of your cash on creating your own marketing channel. God knows I did that when I was at a start-up. So I think we're doing a lot to kind of bridge that end-to-end, and help any partner kind of come in, and then grow with IBM. I think that's where we're headed. >> I think that's a critical part of your job. Because I mean, obviously IBM is known for its Global 2000, big enterprise presence, but startups, again, fuel that innovation fire. So being able to attract them, which you're proving you can, providing whatever it is, access, early access to cloud services, or like you say, these other offerings that you're producing, in addition to that go-to-market, 'cause it's funny, we always talk about how efficient, capital efficient, software is, but then you have these companies raising hundreds of millions of dollars, why? Because they got to do promotion, marketing, sales, you know, go-to-market. >> Yeah, it's really expensive. I mean, you look at most startups, like their biggest ticket item is usually marketing and sales. And building channels, and so yeah, if you're, you know we're talking to a number of partners who want to work with us because of the fact that, it's not just like, the direct kind of channel, it's also, as you kind of mentioned, there's other challenges that you have to overcome when you're working with a larger company. for example, security is a big one, GDPR compliance now, is a big one, and just making sure that things don't fall over, is a big one. And so a lot of partners work with us because ultimately, a number of the decision makers in these larger enterprises are going, well, I trust IBM, and if IBM says you're good, then I believe you. And so that's where we're kind of starting to pull partners in, and pull an ecosystem towards us. Because of the fact that we can take them through that level of certification. So we have a number of free online courses. So if you go to partners, excuse me, ibm.com/partners/learn there's a number of blockchain courses that you can learn today, and will actually give you a digital certificate, that's actually certified on our own blockchain, which we're actually a first of a kind to do that, which I think is pretty slick, and it's accredited at some of the universities. So I think that's where people are looking to IBM, and other leaders in this industry, is to help them become experts in their, in this technology, and especially in this emerging technology. >> I love that blockchain actually, because it's such a growing, and interesting, and innovative field. But it needs players like IBM, that can bring credibility, enterprise-grade, whether it's security, or just, as I say, credibility. 'Cause you know, this is, so much of negative connotations associated with blockchain and crypto, but companies like IBM coming to the table, enterprise companies, and building that ecosystem out is in my view, crucial. >> Yeah, no, it takes a village. I mean, there's a lot of folks, I mean that's a big reason why I came to IBM, three, four years ago, was because when I was in start-up land, I used to work for H20, I worked for Alpine Data Labs, Datameer, back in the Hadoop days, and what I realized was that, it's an opportunity cost. So you can't really drive true global innovation, transformation, in some of these bigger companies because there's only so much that you can really kind of bite off. And so you know at IBM it's been a really rewarding experience because we have done things like for example, we partnered with Girls Who Code, Treehouse, Udacity. So there's a number of early educators that we've partnered with, to bring code to, to bring technology to, that frankly, would never have access to some of this stuff. Some of this technology, if we didn't form these alliances, and if we didn't join these partnerships. So I'm very excited about the future of IBM, and I'm very excited about the future of what our partners are doing with IBM, because, geez, you know the cloud, and everything that we're doing to make this accessible, is bar none, I mean, it's great. >> I can tell you're excited. You know, spring in your step. Always a lot of energy Joel, really appreciate you coming onto theCUBE. >> Joel: My pleasure. >> Great to see you again. >> Yeah, thanks Dave. >> You're welcome. Alright keep it right there, everybody. We'll be back. We're at the IBM CDO Strategy Summit in San Francisco. You're watching theCUBE. (techno music) (touch-tone phone beeps)

(music playing) >> Narrator: Live, from downtown San Francisco It's the Cube. Covering IBM Chief Data Officer Startegy Summit 2018. Brought to you by: IBM >> Welcome back to San Francisco everybody we're at the Parc 55 in Union Square. My name is Dave Vellante, and you're watching the Cube. The leader in live tech coverage and this is our exclusive coverage of IBM's Chief Data Officer Strategy Summit. They hold these both in San Francisco and in Boston. It's an intimate event, about 150 Chief Data Officers really absorbing what IBM has done internally and IBM transferring knowledge to its clients. Steven Eluk is here. He is one of those internal practitioners at IBM. He's the Vice President of Deep Learning and the Global Chief Data Office at IBM. We just heard from him and some of his strategies and used cases. He's joined by Sumit Gupta, a Cube alum. Who is the Vice President of Machine Learning and deep learning within IBM's cognitive systems group. Sumit. >> Thank you. >> Good to see you, welcome back Steven, lets get into it. So, I was um paying close attention when Bob Picciano took over the cognitive systems group. I said, "Hmm, that's interesting". Recently a software guy, of course I know he's got some hardware expertise. But bringing in someone who's deep into software and machine learning, and deep learning, and AI, and cognitive systems into a systems organization. So you guys specifically set out to develop solutions to solve problems like Steven's trying to solve. Right, explain that. >> Yeah, so I think ugh there's a revolution going on in the market the computing market where we have all these new machine learning, and deep learning technologies that are having meaningful impact or promise of having meaningful impact. But these new technologies, are actually significantly I would say complex and they require very complex and high performance computing systems. You know I think Bob and I think in particular IBM saw the opportunity and realized that we really need to architect a new class of infrastructure. Both software and hardware to address what data scientist like Steve are trying to do in the space, right? The open source software that's out there: Denzoflo, Cafe, Torch - These things are truly game changing. But they also require GPU accelerators. They also require multiple systems like... In fact interestingly enough you know some of the super computers that we've been building for the scientific computing world, those same technologies are now coming into the AI world and the enterprise. >> So, the infrastructure for AI, if I can use that term? It's got to be flexible, Steven we were sort of talking about that elastic versus I'm even extending it to plastic. As Sumit you just said, it's got to have that tooling, got to have that modern tooling, you've got to accommodate alternative processor capabilities um, and so, that forms what you've used Steven to sort of create new capabilities new business capabilities within IBM. I wanted to, we didn't touch upon this before, but we touched upon your data strategy before but tie it back to the line of business. You essentially are a presume a liaison between the line of business and the chief data office >> Steven: Yeah. >> Officer office. How did that all work out, and shake out? Did you defining the business outcomes, the requirements, how did you go about that? >> Well, actually, surprisingly, we have very little new use cases that we're generating internally from my organization. Because there's so many to pick from already throughout the organization, right? There's all these business units coming to us and saying, "Hey, now the data is in the data lake and now we know there's more data, now we want to do this. How do we do it?" You know, so that's where we come in, that's where we start touching and massaging and enabling them. And that's the main efforts that we have. We do have some derivative works that have come out, that have been like new offerings that you'll see here. But mostly we already have so many use cases that from those businesses units that we're really trying to heighten and bring extra value to those domains first. >> So, a lot of organizations sounds like IBM was similar you created the data lake you know, things like "a doop" made a lower cost to just put stuff in the data lake. But then, it's like "okay, now what?" >> Steven: Yeah. >> So is that right? So you've got the data and this bog of data and you're trying to make more sense out of it but get more value out of it? >> Steven: Absolutely. >> That's what they were pushing you to do? >> Yeah, absolutely. And with that, with more data you need more computational power. And actually Sumit and I go pretty far back and I can tell you from my previous roles I heightened to him many years ago some of the deficiencies in the current architecture in X86 etc and I said, "If you hit these points, I will buy these products." And what they went back and they did is they, they addressed all of the issues that I had. Like there's certain issues... >> That's when you were, sorry to interrupt, that's when you were a customer, right? >> Steven: That's when I was... >> An external customer >> Outside. I'm still an internal customer, so I've always been a customer I guess in that role right? >> Yep, yep. >> But, I need to get data to the computational device as quickly as possible. And with certain older gen technologies, like PTI Gen3 and certain issues around um x86. I couldn't get that data there for like high fidelity imaging for autonomous vehicles for ya know, high fidelity image analysis. But, with certain technologies in power we have like envy link and directly to the CPU. And we also have PTI Gen4, right? So, so these are big enablers for me so that I can really keep the utilization of those very expensive compute devices higher. Because they're not starved for data. >> And you've also put a lot of emphasis on IO, right? I mean that's... >> Yeah, you know if I may break it down right there's actually I would say three different pieces to the puzzle here right? The highest level from Steve's perspective, from Steven's teams perspective or any data scientist perspective is they need to just do their data science and not worry about the infrastructure, right? They actually don't want to know that there's an infrastructure. They want to say, "launch job" - right? That's the level of grand clarity we want, right? In the background, they want our schedulers, our software, our hardware to just seamlessly use either one system or scale to 100 systems, right? To use one GPU or to use 1,000 GPUs, right? So that's where our offerings come in, right. We went and built this offering called Powder and Powder essentially is open source software like TensorFlow, like Efi, like Torch. But performace and capabilities add it to make it much easier to use. So for example, we have an extremely terrific scheduling software that manages jobs called Spectrum Conductor for Spark. So as the name suggests, it uses Apache Spark. But again the data scientist doesn't know that. They say, "launch job". And the software actually goes and scales that job across tens of servers or hundreds of servers. The IT team can determine how many servers their going to allocate for data scientist. They can have all kinds of user management, data management, model management software. We take the open source software, we package it. You know surprisingly ugh most people don't realize this, the open source software like TensorFlow has primarily been built on a (mumbles). And most of our enterprise clients, including Steven, are on Redhat. So we, we engineered Redhat to be able to manage TensorFlow. And you know I chose those words carefully, there was a little bit of engineering both on Redhat and on TensorFlow to make that whole thing work together. Sounds trivial, took several months and huge value proposition to the enterprise clients. And then the last piece I think that Steven was referencing too, is we also trying to go and make the eye more accessible for non data scientist or I would say even data engineers. So we for example, have a software called Powder Vision. This takes images and videos, and automatically creates a trained deep learning model for them, right. So we analyze the images, you of course have to tell us in these images, for these hundred images here are the most important things. For example, you've identified: here are people, here are cars, here are traffic signs. But if you give us some of that labeled data, we automatically do the work that a data scientist would have done, and create this pre trained AI model for you. This really enables many rapid prototyping for a lot of clients who either kind of fought to have data scientists or don't want to have data scientists. >> So just to summarize that, the three pieces: It's making it simpler for the data scientists, just run the job - Um, the backend piece which is the schedulers, the hardware, the software doing its thing - and then its making that data science capability more accessible. >> Right, right, right. >> Those are the three layers. >> So you know, I'll resay it in my words maybe >> Yeah please. >> Ease of use right, hardware software optimized for performance and capability, and point and click AI, right. AI for non data scientists, right. It's like the three levels that I think of when I'm engaging with data scientists and clients. >> And essentially it's embedded AI right? I've been making the point today that a lot of the AI is going to be purchased from companies like IBM, and I'm just going to apply it. I'm not going to try to go build my own, own AI right? I mean, is that... >> No absolutely. >> Is that the right way to think about it as a practitioner >> I think, I think we talked about it a little bit about it on the panel earlier but if we can, if we can leverage these pre built models and just apply a little bit of training data it makes it so much easier for the organizations and so much cheaper. They don't have to invest in a crazy amount of infrastructure, all the labeling of data, they don't have to do that. So, I think it's definitely steering that way. It's going to take a little bit of time, we have some of them there. But as we as we iterate, we are going to get more and more of these types of you know, commodity type models that people could utilize. >> I'll give you an example, so we have a software called Intelligent Analytics at IBM. It's very good at taking any surveillance data and for example recognizing anomalies or you know if people aren't suppose to be in a zone. Ugh and we had a client who wanted to do worker safety compliance. So they want to make sure workers are wearing their safety jackets and their helmets when they're in a construction site. So we use surveillance data created a new AI model using Powder AI vision. We were then able to plug into this IVA - Intelligence Analytic Software. So they have the nice gooey base software for the dashboards and the alerts, yet we were able to do incremental training on their specific use case, which by the way, with their specific you know equipment and jackets and stuff like that. And create a new AI model, very quickly. For them to be able to apply and make sure their workers are actually complaint to all of the safety requirements they have on the construction site. >> Hmm interesting. So when I, Sometimes it's like a new form of capture says identify "all the pictures with bridges", right that's the kind of thing you're capable to do with these video analytics. >> That's exactly right. You, every, clients will have all kinds of uses I was at a, talking to a client, who's a major car manufacturer in the world and he was saying it would be great if I could identify the make and model of what cars people are driving into my dealership. Because I bet I can draw a ugh corelation between what they drive into and what they going to drive out of, right. Marketing insights, right. And, ugh, so there's a lot of things that people want to do with which would really be spoke in their use cases. And build on top of existing AI models that we have already. >> And you mentioned, X86 before. And not to start a food fight but um >> Steven: And we use both internally too, right. >> So lets talk about that a little bit, I mean where do you use X86 where do you use IBM Cognitive and Power Systems? >> I have a mix of both, >> Why, how do you decide? >> There's certain of work loads. I will delegate that over to Power, just because ya know they're data starved and we are noticing a complication is being impacted by it. Um, but because we deal with so many different organizations certain organizations optimize for X86 and some of them optimize for power and I can't pick, I have to have everything. Just like I mentioned earlier, I also have to support cloud on prim, I can't pick just to be on prim right, it so. >> I imagine the big cloud providers are in the same boat which I know some are your customers. You're betting on data, you're betting on digital and it's a good bet. >> Steven: Yeah, 100 percent. >> We're betting on data and AI, right. So I think data, you got to do something with the data, right? And analytics and AI is what people are doing with that data we have an advantage both at the hardware level and at the software level in these two I would say workloads or segments - which is data and AI, right. And we fundamentally have invested in the processor architecture to improve the performance and capabilities, right. You could offer a much larger AI models on a power system that you use than you can on an X86 system that you use. Right, that's one advantage. You can train and AI model four times faster on a power system than you can on an Intel Based System. So the clients who have a lot of data, who care about how fast their training runs, are the ones who are committing to power systems today. >> Mmm.Hmm. >> Latency requirements, things like that, really really big deal. >> So what that means for you as a practitioner is you can do more with less or is it I mean >> I can definitely do more with less, but the real value is that I'm able to get an outcome quicker. Everyone says, "Okay, you can just roll our more GPU's more GPU's, but run more experiments run more experiments". No no that's not actually it. I want to reduce the time for a an experiment Get it done as quickly as possible so I get that insight. 'Cause then what I can do I can get possibly cancel out a bunch of those jobs that are already running cause I already have the insight, knowing that that model is not doing anything. Alright, so it's very important to get the time down. Jeff Dean said it a few years ago, he uses the same slide often. But, you know, when things are taking months you know that's what happened basically from the 80's up until you know 2010. >> Right >> We didn't have the computation we didn't have the data. Once we were able to get that experimentation time down, we're able to iterate very very quickly on this. >> And throwing GPU's at the problem doesn't solve it because it's too much complexity or? >> It it helps the problem, there's no question. But when my GPU utilization goes from 95% down to 60% ya know I'm getting only a two-thirds return on investment there. It's a really really big deal, yeah. >> Sumit: I mean the key here I think Steven, and I'll draw it out again is this time to insight. Because time to insight actually is time to dollars, right. People are using AI either to make more money, right by providing better customer products, better products to the customers, giving better recommendations. Or they're saving on their operational costs right, they're improving their efficiencies. Maybe their routing their trucks in the right way, their routing their inventory in the right place, they're reducing the amount of inventory that they need. So in all cases you can actually coordinate AI to a revenue outcome or a dollar outcome. So the faster you can do that, you know, I tell most people that I engage with the hardware and software they get from us pays for itself very quickly. Because they make that much more money or they save that much more money, using power systems. >> We, we even see this internally I've heard stories and all that, Sumit kind of commented on this but - There's actually sales people that take this software & hardware out and they're able to get an outcome sometimes in certain situations where they just take the clients data and they're sales people they're not data scientists they train it it's so simple to use then they present the client with the outcomes the next day and the client is just like blown away. This isn't just a one time occurrence, like sales people are actually using this right. So it's getting to the area that it's so simple to use you're able to get those outcomes that we're even seeing it you know deals close quicker. >> Yeah, that's powerful. And Sumit to your point, the business case is actually really easy to make. You can say, "Okay, this initiative that you're driving what's your forecast for how much revenue?" Now lets make an assumption for how much faster we're going to be able to deliver it. And if I can show them a one day turn around, on a corpus of data, okay lets say two months times whatever, my time to break. I can run the business case very easily and communicate to the CFO or whomever the line of business head so. >> That's right. I mean just, I was at a retailer, at a grocery store a local grocery store in the bay area recently and he was telling me how In California we've passed legislation that does not allow plastic bags anymore. You have to pay for it. So people are bringing their own bags. But that's actually increased theft for them. Because people bring their own bag, put stuff in it and walk out. And he didn't want to have an analytic system that can detect if someone puts something in a bag and then did not buy it at purchase. So it's, in many ways they want to use the existing camera systems they have but automatically be able to detect fraudulent behavior or you know anomalies. And it's actually quite easy to do with a lot of the software we have around Power AI Vision, around video analytics from IBM right. And that's what we were talking about right? Take existing trained AI models on vision and enhance them for your specific use case and the scenarios you're looking for. >> Excellent. Guys we got to go. Thanks Steven, thanks Sumit for coming back on and appreciate the insights. >> Thank you >> Glad to be here >> You're welcome. Alright, keep it right there buddy we'll be back with our next guest. You're watching "The Cube" at IBM's CDO Strategy Summit from San Francisco. We'll be right back. (music playing)

>> Announcer: Live from downtown San Francisco, it's theCUBE covering IBM Chief Data Officer Strategy Summit 2018, brought to you by IBM. (upbeat music) >> Welcome back to San Francisco, everybody. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. We're covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Strategy Summit #ibmcdo. Ed Walsh is here. He's the General Manager of IBM Storage, and Steven Eliuk who's the Vice President of Deep Learning in the Global Chief Data Office at IBM, Steven. >> Yes, sir. >> Good to see you again. Welcome to The CUBE. >> Pleasure to be here. So there's a great story. We heard Inderpal Bhandari this morning talk about the enterprise data blueprint and laying out to the practitioners how to get started, how to implement, and we're going to have a little case study as to actually how you're doing this. But Ed, set it up for us. >> Okay, so we're at this Chief Data Officer Summit in the Spring, we do it twice a year and really get just Chief Data Officers together to think through their different challenges and actually share. So that's where we're at the Summit. And what we've, as IBM, as kind of try to be a foot forward, be that cognitive enterprise and showing very transparently what we're doing at our organization be more data-driven. And we've talked a bunch of different times. Everyone needs to be data-driven. Everyone wants to be data-driven, but it's really challenging for organizations. So what we're doing is with this blueprint which we're showing as a showcase, in fact you can actually physically come in and see our environment. But more importantly we're being very transparent on all the different components, high-level processes, what we did in governance, but also down to the Lilly Technology level and sharing that with our... Not because they want to do all of it, but maybe they want to do some of it or half of it, but it would be a blueprint that's worked. And then we're being transparent about what we're getting internally for our own transformation as IBM. Because really if we looked at this as a platform, it's really an enterprise cognitive data platform that all of IBM uses on all our transformation work. So our client, in fact, is Steven, and I think you can give what are we doing. By the way, it also, same type of infrastructure allows you to do what we did in the national labs, the largest supercomputers in the world, same infrastructure and the same thing we're trying to do, is make it easier for people to get insights from the data at scale in the enterprise. So that's why I want to bring Steven on. >> I joked with Inderpal. I said, "Well, if you can do it at IBM, "if you can do it there you can do it anywhere," (Ed laughing) because he's point oh. We're at a highly complex organization. So Steven, take us through how you got started and what you're doing. >> For sure, so I'm what's referred to probably as a difficult customer. So because we're so multifaceted we have so many different use cases internally in the orders of hundreds, it doesn't mean that I can just say, "Hey, this is a specific pattern that I need, Ed. "You need to make sure your hardware is sufficient in this area," because the next day I'm going to be hitting him and say, "Hey Ed, I need you to make sure "that it's also efficient in terms of bandwidth as well." And that's the beauty of working in this domain, is that I have those hundreds of use cases and it means that I'm hitting low latency requirements, bandwidth requirements, extensibility requirements because I have a huge number of headcount that I'm bringing on as well. And if I'm good now I don't have to worry about in six months to be stating, "Hey, I need to roll out new infrastructure "so I can support these new data scientists "and effectively so that they can get outcomes quicker." And I'd need to make sure that all the infrastructure behind the scenes is extensible and supports my users. And what I don't want them to have to worry about specifically is how that infrastructure works. I want them to focus on those use cases, those enterprise use cases, and I want them to touch as many of those use cases as possible. >> So Inderpal laid out sort of his five things that a CDO should do. He starts with develop a clear data strategy. So as the doer in the organization, how'd you go about doing that? Presumably you participated in that data strategy, but you're representing the lines of business presumably to make sure that it's of value to them. You can accelerate business value, but how did you start? I mean that's a big challenge, chewy. >> For sure, yeah, it's a huge challenge. And I think effectively curating, locating, governing, and quality aspects of that data is one of the first aspects. And where does that data reside, though, and how do we access it quickly? How does it support structured and unstructured data effectively? Those are all really important questions that had to come to light. And that's some of the approaches that we took. We look at the various business units and we look at are they curating the data correctly? Is it the data that we need? Maybe we have to augment that curation process before we actually are able to kind of apply new techniques, new machine-learning techniques, to that use case. There's a number of different aspects that kind of get rolled into that, and bringing effective storage and effective compute to the table really accelerates us in that journey. >> So Ed, what are the fundamental aspects of the infrastructure that supports this sort of emerging workload? >> Yeah, no, good question. And some of it is what we're going to talk about, what's a storage layer and what's a compute layer, but also what are the tools we're putting in place to use a lot of these open-source toolsets and make it easier for people to use but also use that underlying infrastructure better. So if you look at the high level, we use a storage infrastructure that is built for these AI workloads which is closer to an HPC workload. So the same infrastructure we use, we use the term ESS or elastic storage server. It's a combination. It's a turnkey solution, half rack, full rack. But it can start very small and grow to the biggest supercomputers in the world like what we're doing in the national labs, like the largest top five supercomputers in the world. But what that is is a file system called Spectrum Scale. Allows you to scale up at the performance but also low latency, gets added to the metadata but also high throughput. So we can do layers on that either on flash being all the hot tiers'll be on flash because it's not just the throughput you need which is high. So our lowest end box's close to like what, 26 gigabytes a second. Our highest one like national labs is 4.9 terabytes a second throughput. But it's also the low latency quick access. So we have a storage infrastructure but then we also have high-performance compute. So what we have is our Power Systems, our POWER9 Systems with GPUs, and the idea is how do you, we use the term feed the beast? How do you have the right throughput or IOPS to get the data close to that CPU or the GPU? The Power Systems have a unique bandwidth, so it's not like what you just find from a Comodo, the Intel servers. It's a much faster throughput, so it allows us to actually get data between the GPU CPU in storage or memory very fast. So you can get these deep learning times, and maybe you can share some of that. The learning times go up dramatically, so you get the insight. And then we're also putting layers on top which are IBM Cloud Private, is basically how do you have a hybrid cloud container-based service that allows you to move things seamlessly across and not have to wrestle with how to put all these things together either so it works seamlessly between a public cloud and private cloud? Then we have these toolsets, and I talked about this last time. It might not seem like storage or what you have in APU but we use the term PowerAI, is taking all these machine-learning tools because everyone always used open source. But we make them one more scale but also to ease your use. So how do you use a bunch of great GPUs and CPUs, great throughput, and how do you scale that? A lot of these tools were basically to be run on one CPU. So to be distributed, key research from IBM allows you to actually with PowerAI take the same TensorFlow workflows or dot dot dot and run it across a grid dramatically changing what you're doing from learning times. But anyway you can probably give more, I think, but it's a multiple layer. It's not one thing but it's not what you use for digital storage infrastructure, compute infrastructure for normal workloads. It is custom so you can't... A lot of people try to deploy maybe their NAS storage box and maybe it's flash and try to deploy it. And you can get going that way but then you hit a wall real quick. This is purposely built for AI. >> So Beth Smith was on earlier. She threw out a stat. She said that 85% of their, based on some research, I'm not sure if it was IBM or Forrest or Gartner, said 85% of customers they talked to said AI will be a competitive advantage but only 20% can use it today at scale. So obviously scale is a big challenge, and I want to ask you to comment on another potential challenge. We always talk about elastic infrastructure. You scale up, scale down, or end of month, okay. We sometimes use this concept of plastic infrastructure. Basically plastic maintains its shape because these workloads are so diverse. I don't want to have to rip down my infrastructure and bring in a new one every time my workload changes. So I wonder if you can talk about the sort of requirements from your perspective both in terms of scale and in terms of adaptability to changing workloads. >> Well, I think one of the things that Ed brought up that's really, really important is these open-source frameworks assume that it's running on a single system. They assume that storage is actually local, and that's really the only way that you get really effective throughput from it, is if it's local. So extending it via PowerAI, via these appliances and so forth means that you can use petabytes of storage at a distance and still have good throughput and not have those GP utilization coming down because these are very expensive devices. So if the storage is the blocker, is their controller and he's limiting that flow of data then ultimately you're not making the most effective use of those very expensive computational mediums. But more importantly it means that your time from ideation to product is slowed down, so you're not able to get those business outcomes. That means your competitor could get those business outcomes if they don't have it. And for me what's really important is I mentioned this briefly earlier, is that I need those specialists to touch as much of the data or as much as those enterprise use cases as possible. At the end of the year it's not about touching three use cases. It's the touching three this year, five, ten, more and more and more. And with the infrastructure being storage and computation, all of that is key attributes to kind of seeing that goal. >> Without having to rip that down and then repurpose building it every time. >> Steven: Yeah. >> And just being able to deal with the grid as a grid and you can place workloads across a grid. >> 100%. >> That's our Spectrum compute products that we've been doing for all the major banks in the world to do that and take these workloads and place them across a grid is also a key piece of this. So we always talk about the infrastructures being hey, Ed, that's not storage or infrastructure. No, you need that. And that's why it's part of my portfolio to actually build out the overall infrastructure for people to build on prim but also talk about everything we did with you on prim is hybrid. It's goes to the Cloud natively because some workloads we believe will be on the Cloud for good reasons, and you need to have that part of it. So everything we're going with you is hybrid cloud today, not in the future, today. >> No, 100%, and that's one of the requirements in our organization that we call A-1 architecture. If we write it for our own prim we have to be able to run it on the Cloud and it has to have the same look and feel and painted glass and things like that as well. So it means we only have to write it once, so we're incredibly efficient because we don't have to write it multiple times for different types of infrastructure. Likewise we have expectations from the data scientists that the performance all still have to be up to par as well. We want to really be moving the computation directly to where the data resides and we know that it's not just on prim, it's not in the Cloud, it's a hybrid scenario. >> So don't hate me for asking you this, Ed, but you've only been here for a couple years. Did you just stumble into this? You got this vast portfolio, you got this tooling, you got cloud. You got a part of your organization saying we got to do on prim. The other part's saying we got to do public. Or was this designed to the workload? Was kind of a little bit of both? >> Well, I think luck is good, but it's a embarrassment of riches inside IBM between our primary research, some of the things we were just talking about. How do you run these frameworks in a distributed fashion and not designed that way and do it performing at scale? That's our primary, that's research. That's not even in my group. What we're doing is for workload management. That's in storage, but we have these toolsets. The key thing is work with the clients to figure out what they're trying to do. Everyone's trying to be data-driven, so as we looked at what you need to do to be truly data-driven, it's not just having faster storage although that's important. It's not about the throughput or having to scale up. It's not about having just the CPUs. It's not just about having the open frameworks, but it's how to put that all together that we're invisible. In fact you said it earlier. He doesn't want his users to know at all what's underneath. He just wants to run their workload. You have people from my organization because I'm one of your customers. You're my customer but we go to you and say, "We're trying to use your platform "for a 360 view of the client," and our not data scientists, not data engineers, but ops team can use his platform. So anyway, so I actually think it's because IBM has its broad portfolio that we can bring together. And when IBM shows up which we're showing up in AI together in the Cloud, that's when you see something that we can truly do that you can't get from other organizations. And it's because of the technology differentiation we have from the different groups, but also the industry contacts that we bring. >> 100%. >> And also when you're dealing with data it is the trust. We can engage the clients at a high level and help them because we're not a single-product company. We might be more complex, but when we show up and bring the solution set we can really differentiate. And I think that's when IBM shows up. It's pretty powerful. >> And I think it's moved from "trust me" as well to "show me," and we're able to show it now because we're eating what we're producing. So we're showing. They called it a blueprint. We're using that effectively inside the organization. >> So now that you've sort of built this out internally you spend a lot of time with clients kind of showing them or...? >> Probably 15% of my time. >> So not that much. >> No, no, because I'm in charge of internal transformation operations. They're expecting outcomes from us. But at the same time there's clients that are in the exact same boat. The realization that this is really interesting. There's a lot of noise, a lot of interesting stuff in AI out there from Google, from Facebook, from Amazon, from all, Microsoft, but image recognition isn't important to me. How do I do it for my own organization? I have legacy data from 50 years. This is totally different, and there's no Git repo that I can go to and download them all and use it. It's totally custom, and how do I handle that? So it's different for these guys. >> What's on your wishlist? What's on Ed's to do list? >> Oh geez, uh... I want it so simple for my data scientists that they don't have to worry about where the data's coming from. Whether it be a traditional relational database or an object store, I want it to feed that data effectively and I don't want to have to have them looking into where the data is to make sure the computation's there. I want it just to flow effortlessly. That's really the wishlist. Likewise, I think if we had new accelerators in general outside the box, not something from the traditional GPU viewpoint, maybe data flow or something in new avant-garde-type stuff, that would be interesting because I think it might open up a new train of thought in the area just like GPUs did for us. >> Great story. >> Yeah I know, I think it's... So we're talking about AI for business, and I think what you're seeing is we're trying to showcase what IBM's doing to be really an AI business. And what we've done in this platform is really a showcase. So we're trying to be as transparent as possible not because it's the only way to do it but it's a good example of how a very complex business is using AI to get dramatically better and everyone's using the same kind of platform. >> Well, we learned, we effectively learned being open is much better than being closed. Look at the AI community. Because of its openness that's where we're at right now. And following the same lead we're doing the same thing, and that's why we're making everything available. You can see it and we're doing it, and we're happy to talk to you about it. >> Awesome, all right, so Steven, you stay here. >> Yeah. >> We're going to bring Sumit on and we're going to drill down into the cognitive platform. >> That's good. This guy, thanks for setting it up. I really, really appreciate it. >> Thank you very much. >> All right, good having you guys. All right, keep it right there, everybody. We'll be back at the IBM CDO Strategy Summit. You're watching theCUBE. (upbeat music) (telephone dialing) (modem connecting)